Quick thoughts on Colts-Raiders

[GoBigBlue88]

1. One thing I love about this team that doesn't get talked about enough is that -- weird injury bug in early season aside -- guys tend to gut things out and play for the team. TY Hilton guts it out. Ryan Kelly gutted it out today. Jack Doyle actually took a pretty nasty hit to the head on his scoring drive and gutted it out. This roster doesn't have those kinda guys you hear about this time of year who half-ass it and want traded or paid before they try. I trust wherever this team comes up short is on talent, not effort.

2. Andrew Luck had to make a few challenging throws today, and you do have to consider the context of opponents, but I would say the last 2 weeks is the easiest 2-week stretch Luck has ever had playing QB.

3. I see a few people on Twitter saying anyone can succeed with this OL. It's true that this OL has multiplied the value of any RB (and is making a case for the team NOT to sign Bell in the offseason as a result...) But don't underestimate the individual talent on display at RB. Mack's second TD was a tough run wherein he made himself skinny and then lowered the shoulder at the right time to get in. Hines had an all-effort run in a critical situation. Yes, there are a few holes, but Tom Rathman is doing a GREAT job creating genuine talent out of this RB group.

I kinda wonder what this team has in mind for Robert Turbin when he returns. Presumably he'd have had the game's final TD were he healthy?

4. Dontrelle Inman will be overshadowed by the TEs today, but he had a monster hands day. The TD "drop" was asking a bit much of him. Dude caught some LASERS today.

5. I love this offense's use of TEs. Reich and Luck really were made for each other. They consistently use their TEs as good as or better than any other team in the NFL. One of those positions, in this offense, where they can just create talent in scheme.

6. As much as I love this offense, we can probably do without reverses to Zach Pascal and fades to TY Hilton. Don't get too cute. Feels like this team is bound and determined to make the fade to Hilton thing a thing. It's not. Ebron/Swoope/Cox on that route, please.

7. For all the great vibes on offense, I really do have some long-term concerns on defense. I think, on one hand, we saw a scheme without Hooker over top today, and there was a ton of miscommunication on the back end as a result. I think, on the other hand, this scheme still makes any game WAY too easy on QBs. It just seems like they're consistently doing the wrong thing. They're in soft zone when they should either be in tighter zone or man. They're in man when they should be in soft zone. They're blitzing seven when they should be dropping 7-8. They're rushing four but stunting them when they know there's going to be a quick release, so there's no chance of getting to the QB. Etc.

Honestly, yes, I know this team needs another 1-2 drafts on defense. I know they need a genuine pass rusher. I know it's early. But I am concerned about Eberflus' scheme. The completion allowed % is ungodly high, they're consistently giving up TDs where they just drop coverage, and their DBs are rarely in position to make a play.

8. Speaking of DBs not in position to make a play, that's 2 or 3 weeks Nate Hairston has been benched this season now, right? Woof. That kid is STRUGGLING with this scheme. Quincy Wilson started playing over him in the second half, and rightfully so.

9. Obviously, we all love Darius Leonard. And we're intrigued by Anthony Walker, Zaire Franklin etc. Leonard's talent is obvious. But this group as a whole is pretty awful in coverage. Even Leonard. Walker was particularly rough today. Some growing pains, but I think it's fair to mention given how much hype has been surrounding Leonard and Walker of late. Those guys are really rough in their zone drops and movement in the MOF in particular.

10. The DL was pretty awful today. Jabaal Sheard didn't look himself; I wonder how much that injury bothered him. Margus Hunt hasn't had any impact since he hurt his knee, quite honestly. Al Woods was really bad today. Kemoko Turay was quiet. I can't really pick out a ton of positives on the defensive line. If Tyquan Lewis really is as advertised, they need his skillset badly!

11. There's nothing necessarily wrong with Pascal fielding kickoffs, but I can't wait until this team has the luxury of drafting a kick return specialist. And I think Chris Ballard can pick 'em when he has the luxury...

12. Adam Vinatieri not only the GOAT, but the GOAT who will go into Canton as a Colt and not a Patriot. It's the small things...

[JAFF]

Ive had an abdominal injury. The first time i farted I thought I was going to die.

[YDFL Commish]

Depth and youth would be the biggest problems on defense...not xcheme.

I don't think the NFL designates what team you represent when being inducted into the HOF.

[omahacolt]

Ive had an abdominal injury. The first time i farted I thought I was going to die.

Nobody gives a shit

[omahacolt]

Depth and youth would be the biggest problems on defense...not xcheme.

I don't think the NFL designates what team you represent when being inducted into the HOF.

Running a zone scheme with no pass rushers is an issue and mistake

[Dam8610]

I think Walker and Leonard fit the scheme as SAM and WILL respectively long term, with the short and long term need being for a good coverage MIKE.

[omahacolt]

I think Walker and Leonard fit the scheme as SAM and WILL respectively long term, with the short and long term need being for a good coverage MIKE.

I would have no problem with this. Walker as Sam (who rarely plays) and backup Mlber and we draft a more dynamic player for mlber.

[omahacolt]

Good point gbb.

I especially agree about the dline. They got abused all game.

[Oldcolt]

We need more talent but the mindset of how to win is starting to develop. A win on the road. Nice

[DrSpaceman]

Its really no mystery with the D and not a surprise, something we all anticipated I think

If the DL can't get a pass rush, they get torn apart. The zone coverage and lack of talent in the secondary, especially the corners but then today safeties as well due to injuries, sets this team up to be picked apart by even a decent QB if you give them time.

We all knew this would be a problem. Now the that the OL is much better, its now the weakness of the team and the D in particular : pass rush and corners.

You can't fix a whole team in one or two drafts. I am sure Ballard will work on those areas next. But for the rest of this year, "it is what it is". Luck and the offense is going to need to be putting up 30+ points many weeks to win.

Particularly disappointing this week though was the run D.

[FatDT]

If Sheard and Hunt are only limited by injury then that is actually a good thing IMO. The bye week should do them some good. It’s a bit disheartening to see the DL playing like a bunch of nobodies again after such a good start to the season. Not surprising, but disappointing.

I kinda get the impression Eberflus is a front 7 guy and isn’t totally sure what to do about his DBs. Probably need a strong DB coach or maybe a consultant to shore that up. Even with players healthy this secondary is not impressive.

I love having a run game again. It’s the most fun thing I’ve seen in a football game in years. Love it.

[VeveJones007]

Good point gbb.

I especially agree about the dline. They got abused all game.

Yeah, as much as the secondary was lost at times, it’s hard to play well as a unit when the DL is terrible.

[omahacolt]

If Sheard and Hunt are only limited by injury then that is actually a good thing IMO. The bye week should do them some good. It’s a bit disheartening to see the DL playing like a bunch of nobodies again after such a good start to the season. Not surprising, but disappointing.

I kinda get the impression Eberflus is a front 7 guy and isn’t totally sure what to do about his DBs. Probably need a strong DB coach or maybe a consultant to shore that up. Even with players healthy this secondary is not impressive.

I love having a run game again. It’s the most fun thing I’ve seen in a football game in years. Love it.

I am guessing sheard and hunt are playing like their norm. Neither are as good as they started this year.

[JAFF]

Nobody gives a shit

Taking a shit was completely out of the question.

[GoBigBlue88]

I am guessing sheard and hunt are playing like their norm. Neither are as good as they started this year.

I think Sheard is closer to what we saw last few weeks than yesterday. But I wouldn't be surprised if Hunt is mostly going to be what we saw yesterday, and Tyquan Lewis starts to eat into his reps post-bye (maybe 2-3 weeks post-bye though).

[Dam8610]

I think Sheard is closer to what we saw last few weeks than yesterday. But I wouldn't be surprised if Hunt is mostly going to be what we saw yesterday, and Tyquan Lewis starts to eat into his reps post-bye (maybe 2-3 weeks post-bye though).

Hunt was very close to having a 2 sack game. Was he otherwise a non-factor? Because pressure on the QB is a big part of what's expected from the 3 tech in this defense.

[Chaka]

3. I see a few people on Twitter saying anyone can succeed with this OL. It's true that this OL has multiplied the value of any RB (and is making a case for the team NOT to sign Bell in the offseason as a result...)

Excellent analysis GBB, thank you. The above comment struck me as particularly notable. Would anyone have imagined that people would be saying “anyone can succeed with this OL” even a year ago? The transformation of the OL is just staggering.

[FatDT]

Excellent analysis GBB, thank you. The above comment struck me as particularly notable. Would anyone have imagined that people would be saying “anyone can succeed with this OL” even a year ago? The transformation of the OL is just staggering.

It still sounds absurd to me. When I think Colts OL I still think Satele, McGlynn, Olsen, Cherilus, Thornton, Shipley, etc.

Credit to Ballard for (finally) bringing in players that can do it. But also credit to Reich, Sirianni, and OL coach Dave DeGuglielmo. He said early on that the OL weren't confident, were down on themselves, they still had loser stink on them. That seems gone, especially with Castonzo back and playing well on the left side.

[rm1369]

It still sounds absurd to me. When I think Colts OL I still think Satele, McGlynn, Olsen, Cherilus, Thornton, Shipley, etc.

Credit to Ballard for (finally) bringing in players that can do it. But also credit to Reich, Sirianni, and OL coach Dave DeGuglielmo. He said early on that the OL weren't confident, were down on themselves, they still had loser stink on them. That seems gone, especially with Castonzo back and playing well on the left side.

I can’t really comment much on individual technique, but play design and the overall offensive concepts have certainly helped the OL tremendously. With the last regime they had the worst of both worlds - lack of talent and schemes that didn’t compensate or acknowledge that weakness. Addressing one without the other would have improved the situation, but addressing both has turned a weakness into a strength. Good to see the GM and coach appear to be on the same page.

[Oldcolt]

Whatever we spent to develop this line was more than worth it. Thing is teams with offensive lines that can do this (I understand it was against two lousy teams, but we have played plenty of lousy teams the past 10 year and never have we run over them like we are now) win in January. It's beyond incredible to watch us no longer be a finesse team. I never thought I'd live to see this. Love it.

[GoBigBlue88]

Hunt was very close to having a 2 sack game. Was he otherwise a non-factor? Because pressure on the QB is a big part of what's expected from the 3 tech in this defense.

He was pushed off the line pretty easily (Colts run defense wasn't exactly encouraging yesterday), and "he had a hand on his shoulder pad twice" isn't any endorsement of good play. It's the same thing we slaughtered Tarrell Basham for. Not putting Hunt in that same category, to be clear, but whereas he spent the CIN/WAS/PHI games living in the backfield and bullying the OL, he's been consistently stymied or pushed off the line ever since his knee injury.

[1965southpaw]

I can’t really comment much on individual technique, but play design and the overall offensive concepts have certainly helped the OL tremendously. With the last regime they had the worst of both worlds - lack of talent and schemes that didn’t compensate or acknowledge that weakness. Addressing one without the other would have improved the situation, but addressing both has turned a weakness into a strength. Good to see the GM and coach appear to be on the same page.

Yes, agree x 1000....I didn't see the post game presser but heard that Gruden said the colts oline were "imposing their will on us".

[FatDT]

He was pushed off the line pretty easily (Colts run defense wasn't exactly encouraging yesterday), and "he had a hand on his shoulder pad twice" isn't any endorsement of good play. It's the same thing we slaughtered Tarrell Basham for. Not putting Hunt in that same category, to be clear, but whereas he spent the CIN/WAS/PHI games living in the backfield and bullying the OL, he's been consistently stymied or pushed off the line ever since his knee injury.

Hunt and Sheard have to play at their talent ceiling for this DL to be good. Both are good players that should be parts of a rotation, not featured. We need a #1 pass rusher, a better NT, and another Sheard/Hunt-level player. Lewis might be that, hopefully he is.

This line would be better if Hankins, Anderson, and Simon were still on it.

[omahacolt]

Excellent analysis GBB, thank you. The above comment struck me as particularly notable. Would anyone have imagined that people would be saying “anyone can succeed with this OL” even a year ago? The transformation of the OL is just staggering.

And partly accidental considering the right side

[FatDT]

And partly accidental considering the right side

Yeah I've thought about that. Everyone's going on about how Ballard fixed the OL. Reich figured out the OL. Etc. I've said it too. But the intended RG and RT were Slauson and Good, right? It would've been better if they'd figured out the best combo in camp. But whatever, it's working now and it's fun to watch.

[rm1369]

Yeah I've thought about that. Everyone's going on about how Ballard fixed the OL. Reich figured out the OL. Etc. I've said it too. But the intended RG and RT were Slauson and Good, right? It would've been better if they'd figured out the best combo in camp. But whatever, it's working now and it's fun to watch.

I’d agree, but considering the injuries it’s hard to knock them. To me it actually makes it more impressive.

[Chaka]

And partly accidental considering the right side

I’ll only agree with you to a limited extent on this statement. There’s no denying that Ballard selected Smith and signed Glowinski, so there’s no accident there. Someone posted a quote a few days ago, however, that he feels he got “lucky” with regard to Smith because he didn’t really view him as RT. So you’re right to this extent.

On this last point, did anything during the Raiders game change your view at all that Good or Clark would be a better fit at RT?

[sherck]

Hunt and Sheard have to play at their talent ceiling for this DL to be good. Both are good players that should be parts of a rotation, not featured. We need a #1 pass rusher, a better NT, and another Sheard/Hunt-level player. Lewis might be that, hopefully he is.

This line would be better if Hankins, Anderson, and Simon were still on it.
Hankins was abusing our O-Line on a couple of running plays yesterday. Just crushing gaps or getting off blocks to make the play.

You cannot tell me that he would not have fit in our 4 - 3. If Woods and Hunt fit, Hankins would have too.

Spilled milk but I agree that our D-line roation would be better with all three those guys.

Walk Worthy,

[rcubed]

These are nice numbers

-Marlon Mack: 5.3 YPC (25 carries for 132 yards)
-Nyheim Hines: 7.1 YPC (11 carries for 78 yards)
-Jordan Wilkins: 7.0 YPC (2 carries for 14 yards)

[GoBigBlue88]

Hankins was abusing our O-Line on a couple of running plays yesterday. Just crushing gaps or getting off blocks to make the play.

You cannot tell me that he would not have fit in our 4 - 3. If Woods and Hunt fit, Hankins would have too.

Spilled milk but I agree that our D-line roation would be better with all three those guys.

Walk Worthy,

I'm going to have a hard time giving any Raiders defender (ESPECIALLY defensive linemen) props for that performance.

[FatDT]

Hankins was abusing our O-Line on a couple of running plays yesterday. Just crushing gaps or getting off blocks to make the play.

You cannot tell me that he would not have fit in our 4 - 3. If Woods and Hunt fit, Hankins would have too.

Spilled milk but I agree that our D-line roation would be better with all three those guys.

Walk Worthy,
What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

[Chaka]

4. Dontrelle Inman will be overshadowed by the TEs today, but he had a monster hands day. The TD "drop" was asking a bit much of him. Dude caught some LASERS today.

By the way, it occurs to me that Ballard has been very effective obtaining street free agents that can be significant contributors to this team – Glowinski, Mitchell and now (potentially) Inman come immediately to mind.

[Puck]

Hankins was abusing our O-Line on a couple of running plays yesterday. Just crushing gaps or getting off blocks to make the play.

You cannot tell me that he would not have fit in our 4 - 3. If Woods and Hunt fit, Hankins would have too.

Spilled milk but I agree that our D-line roation would be better with all three those guys.

Walk Worthy,


HE DIDNT WANT TO PLAY IN A 4-3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I hope all the other teams "abuse" us for 200 + rushing yards the rest of the way!

[Chaka]

This line would be better if Hankins, Anderson, and Simon were still on it.

Why do you say this? Hankins’ name was mentioned a few times during yesterday’s game, but it doesn't seem to me that he’s a standout by any stretch of the imagination. His stat line looks unimpressive, and the Raiders defense as a team is giving up over 31 points a game (2nd worst), nearly 5 yards a carry (4.9 YPC, 4th worst in the league) and 6.7 yards a play (the worst). I’ll admit that these stats don’t reflect upon him uniquely, but what do you see that makes you think Hankins is anything better that what we currently have? And remember that he would have cost us nearly $9 million to keep, and he only got $2 million on the open market.

Simon is a backup for New England.

Anderson is playing fairly well I suppose for the Jets, but historically he had been injury prone with the Colts and hadn’t really been a standout since his rookie year.

[FatDT]

It doesn't matter what they're doing for their new teams. How did they fit here? How did they play here? How is THIS team doing on the DL without them?

Hankins played well here. He is better than any NT on the roster. Better than Woods. Better than Stewart. You are right he was due some money. But we are drowning in cap space.

Anderson is better than anything Autry has shown so far. Autry is not young and was a FA acquisition, and is making more money than Anderson. I guess not everything is about saving money is it.

Simon proved he was better AND was a harder worker than Tarrell "Healthy Scratch" Basham.

Right now the DL needs Hunt and Sheard to play at their highest level to be any good. Autry is not a difference-maker, Turay is young and still learning, Ward is on IR, the rest of them are JAGs.

Chaka, for fucks sake. Every comment about a potential roster mistake is not a personal attack against you. Ballard is not your dad.

[JAFF]

Chaka, for fucks sake. Every comment about a potential roster mistake is not a personal attack against you. Ballard is not your dad.

Are you sure. Look at both their pictures. It COULD be his dad. Just saying....... not impossible.

[Spike]

Why do you say this? Hankins’ name was mentioned a few times during yesterday’s game, but it doesn't seem to me that he’s a standout by any stretch of the imagination. His stat line looks unimpressive, and the Raiders defense as a team is giving up over 31 points a game (2nd worst), nearly 5 yards a carry (4.9 YPC, 4th worst in the league) and 6.7 yards a play (the worst). I’ll admit that these stats don’t reflect upon him uniquely, but what do you see that makes you think Hankins is anything better that what we currently have? And remember that he would have cost us nearly $9 million to keep, and he only got $2 million on the open market.

Simon is a backup for New England.

Anderson is playing fairly well I suppose for the Jets, but historically he had been injury prone with the Colts and hadn’t really been a standout since his rookie year.

Because he is right! I understand that Hankins did not want to play in a 4-3 defense. But Anderson for a 7th round pick really pissed me off. What the hell are we going to get with a 7th rounder who is better than Anderson? Simon did play well for us.

[VeveJones007]

I see people are still debating moves strictly in the context of "would it have made the 2018 team better?"

[Chaka]

It doesn't matter what they're doing for their new teams. How did they fit here? How did they play here? How is THIS team doing on the DL without them?

Hankins played well here. He is better than any NT on the roster. Better than Woods. Better than Stewart. You are right he was due some money. But we are drowning in cap space.

Anderson is better than anything Autry has shown so far. Autry is not young and was a FA acquisition, and is making more money than Anderson. I guess not everything is about saving money is it.

Simon proved he was better AND was a harder worker than Tarrell "Healthy Scratch" Basham.

Right now the DL needs Hunt and Sheard to play at their highest level to be any good. Autry is not a difference-maker, Turay is young and still learning, Ward is on IR, the rest of them are JAGs.

Chaka, for fucks sake. Every comment about a potential roster mistake is not a personal attack against you. Ballard is not your dad.

To clarify for everyone, Ballard is not my dad. Seriously, though, if my comments come off as though I have been offended by yours or anyone else’s comments, then I’m not expressing myself well at all. I am genuinely interested in your responses to my questions because I genuinely want to understand your position. I agree that I’ve ended up defending Ballard quite a bit, but that’s because you’ll have to admit that until recently the prevailing opinion seemed to be that he was throwing away multiple seasons, and was making poor draft and personnel decisions. I happen to strongly disagree with that line of thinking, and the strict businesslike approach he’s taking to running the team really appeals to me. I think it literally gives us a competitive advantage, and that advantage will become more and more apparent as time goes on.

As a result, I’ll usually challenge opinions to the contrary if they’re not explained in a way that makes sense to me. There’s a lot of smart people on this board, and lots who know WAY more than me about the X’s and O’s, so I’m interested in what all of you have to say – particularly when it sounds way out of line to me. But I’m certainly open to the idea that the guy makes mistakes, and the concept (however remote) that I might not be correct either.

In your comment, you simply said that we’d be better with Hankins, Simon and Anderson. Since there was no explanation for this statement, I asked for more detail, and in the process laid out my thinking on the issue so you could respond. You provided more info for me to consider in your response. Based upon that response, I can now decide whether I think your original comments have any merit or not (FYI the verdict is in - they do not as to Hankins and Simon, but maybe some as to Anderson/Autry).

Look, it wouldn’t be very fun if everyone just posted their gripes and complaints here, and then everyone else just agreed. If that’s all everyone hears then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone needs the perspective that comes from genuine, respectful disagreement (or even disrespectful agreement that has actual substance). As I think you mentioned in a prior post, responses consisting only of insults are not useful. I’ve tried to provide meaningful detail when I post - much to your dismay given the length of some of my admittedly long posts – but that’s only so that people will provide equally detailed responses and the discussion will have some useful substance.

[rm1369]

I see people are still debating moves strictly in the context of "would it have made the 2018 team better?"

I’ll happily sit this one out. I’ll save it for the debates that will occur if the team falls 1-2 games shy of a division title and playoff birth.

[omahacolt]

I’ll only agree with you to a limited extent on this statement. There’s no denying that Ballard selected Smith and signed Glowinski, so there’s no accident there. Someone posted a quote a few days ago, however, that he feels he got “lucky” with regard to Smith because he didn’t really view him as RT. So you’re right to this extent.

On this last point, did anything during the Raiders game change your view at all that Good or Clark would be a better fit at RT?

Smith struggled early but bounced back. Glowinski has been fantastic. The way Clark played at LT makes me wonder but it doesn’t matter now. We have no way of knowing what a right side of smith and Clark or Good would look like. The results are just fine.

And yes accidental because nobody thought glowinski would play this well and smith didn’t really look comfortable to me at rt in preseason. Nothing wrong with lucking into players.

[omahacolt]

What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

Absolutely nothing

[omahacolt]

I see people are still debating moves strictly in the context of "would it have made the 2018 team better?"

Every year is important with an elite qb. I will never believe otherwise

[rm1369]

HE DIDNT WANT TO PLAY IN A 4-3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I hope all the other teams "abuse" us for 200 + rushing yards the rest of the way!

Puck, this may have been asked and answered before, but where are you getting that from? Is it insider info? I’m not necessarily disputing it, but I’ve never found it anyway else.

He played in a 4-3 in NY and he’s playing in a 4-3 now in Oakland. So it seems strange.

[Puck]

Puck, this may have been asked and answered before, but where are you getting that from? Is it insider info? I’m not necessarily disputing it, but I’ve never found it anyway else.

He played in a 4-3 in NY and he’s playing in a 4-3 now in Oakland. So it seems strange.


I dont have the article but he wanted out of NY because of the switch to 4-3

I assume he changed his mind after no one was coming after him in FA and maybe Chuckie promised him something. It is strange that he ended up there.

My initial thought on why he left was that he had a clause in his contract with us that he could leave if we didn't stay in a 3-4. If you think about it it was kind of strange that he chose to come here to begin with.

[YDFL Commish]

To clarify for everyone, Ballard is not my dad. Seriously, though, if my comments come off as though I have been offended by yours or anyone else’s comments, then I’m not expressing myself well at all. I am genuinely interested in your responses to my questions because I genuinely want to understand your position. I agree that I’ve ended up defending Ballard quite a bit, but that’s because you’ll have to admit that until recently the prevailing opinion seemed to be that he was throwing away multiple seasons, and was making poor draft and personnel decisions. I happen to strongly disagree with that line of thinking, and the strict businesslike approach he’s taking to running the team really appeals to me. I think it literally gives us a competitive advantage, and that advantage will become more and more apparent as time goes on.

As a result, I’ll usually challenge opinions to the contrary if they’re not explained in a way that makes sense to me. There’s a lot of smart people on this board, and lots who know WAY more than me about the X’s and O’s, so I’m interested in what all of you have to say – particularly when it sounds way out of line to me. But I’m certainly open to the idea that the guy makes mistakes, and the concept (however remote) that I might not be correct either.

In your comment, you simply said that we’d be better with Hankins, Simon and Anderson. Since there was no explanation for this statement, I asked for more detail, and in the process laid out my thinking on the issue so you could respond. You provided more info for me to consider in your response. Based upon that response, I can now decide whether I think your original comments have any merit or not (FYI the verdict is in - they do not as to Hankins and Simon, but maybe some as to Anderson/Autry).

Look, it wouldn’t be very fun if everyone just posted their gripes and complaints here, and then everyone else just agreed. If that’s all everyone hears then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone needs the perspective that comes from genuine, respectful disagreement (or even disrespectful agreement that has actual substance). As I think you mentioned in a prior post, responses consisting only of insults are not useful. I’ve tried to provide meaningful detail when I post - much to your dismay given the length of some of my admittedly long posts – but that’s only so that people will provide equally detailed responses and the discussion will have some useful substance.

Thanks FatDT, you've got him going on 1000 word diatribe again. ;)

[rm1369]

I dont have the article but he wanted out of NY because of the switch to 4-3

I assume he changed his mind after no one was coming after him in FA and maybe Chuckie promised him something. It is strange that he ended up there.

My initial thought on why he left was that he had a clause in his contract with us that he could leave if we didn't stay in a 3-4. If you think about it it was kind of strange that he chose to come here to begin with.

Giants played a 4-3 when he was drafted. To my knowledge that’s all he played in on the Giants. My understanding was he was pissed when he was moved from 1-tech to 3-tech for Damon Harrison. And Harrison, JPP, and Tucker (?) all got paid leaving little money for Hankins and him not playing his more natural position. I’ve never seen anything to indicate he was against playing in a 4-3. His best years as a pro came in a 4-3. And I believe last year in Indy was his only year in a 3-4. Now he’s back in a 4-3 again. I don’t believe Hanskins was the driver for being released. For a guy driven by money to ask for his release AFTER the opening of free agency makes absolutely no sense. Especially considering he was a late signer with the Colts when everyone balked at his asking price. He had to know his market would be somewhat limited.

[Chaka]

Thanks FatDT, you've got him going on 1000 word diatribe again. ;)

https://i.imgflip.com/16dt9t.jpg (https://imgflip.com/i/16dt9t)

[Butter]

What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

Regardless of signing Autry I never understood why they saw Anderson as primarily a DE in a cover 2 4-3. I would have thought he would have played 3-tech/DE or something at least.

[JAFF]

Smith struggled early but bounced back. Glowinski has been fantastic. The way Clark played at LT makes me wonder but it doesn’t matter now. We have no way of knowing what a right side of smith and Clark or Good would look like. The results are just fine.

And yes accidental because nobody thought glowinski would play this well and smith didn’t really look comfortable to me at rt in preseason. Nothing wrong with lucking into players.

Good line coaching

[YDFL Commish]

https://i.imgflip.com/16dt9t.jpg (https://imgflip.com/i/16dt9t)

Anything less or more woulda been a disappointment

[VeveJones007]

Every year is important with an elite qb. I will never believe otherwise

This year is incredibly important in the context of the next title opportunity. We’ve already covered this and we agree that 2018 did not offer a shot.

Just stick to your assessment of the OL and how it affects the 2019 team. Anderson, Hankins, and Simon are irrelevant.

[Chromeburn]

The Raiders oline is decent, I wouldn’t look too deep into this matchup. Also they were clogging the middle, dragging guys down, tripping, really trying to eliminate those passing lanes. Not saying we don’t need an upgrade on the dline, we do, but this isn’t the game I would use to measure it.

Did Mack look a step slower to anyone when compared to last week? He did to me. I know he had the ankle issue, I think he scores on that long run if healthy. I saw a couple USF games a few years ago and Mack looks like he did then. Fast through the hole and into the second level lightning quick. But his patience for that hole to open seems better also. That shoulder must have really bothered him last year.

Good thing next year’s draft is a defensive one. We are going to need all those picks.

[sherck]

Just saw this analysis:
Just broke down Andrew Luck vs Oakland. He was knocked down 1 time. He was completely untouched on 24 of 31 pass attempts. The pass protection was incredible. Finally, he has a legit OL.

FINALLY, a legit O-Line!

Man, I have been wanting that since we drafted Andrew!

Walk Worthy,

[DrSpaceman]

So far this year :

10 sacks on about 340 pass attempts

Once every 34 attempts.

I didn't look specifically, but it may be the lowest rate in the league for a starting QB. Its at least among the lowest. Of the starters the lowest number of sacks for the year is 8 or 9 and he is passing more than them, more attempts

I did not look up prior years, but I am guessing that is much improved, since it seemed like before he was getting hit or pressure about every other attempt

[Puck]

Giants played a 4-3 when he was drafted. To my knowledge that’s all he played in on the Giants. My understanding was he was pissed when he was moved from 1-tech to 3-tech for Damon Harrison. And Harrison, JPP, and Tucker (?) all got paid leaving little money for Hankins and him not playing his more natural position. I’ve never seen anything to indicate he was against playing in a 4-3. His best years as a pro came in a 4-3. And I believe last year in Indy was his only year in a 3-4. Now he’s back in a 4-3 again. I don’t believe Hanskins was the driver for being released. For a guy driven by money to ask for his release AFTER the opening of free agency makes absolutely no sense. Especially considering he was a late signer with the Colts when everyone balked at his asking price. He had to know his market would be somewhat limited.


Smitty may have the article

[1965southpaw]

Just saw this analysis:


FINALLY, a legit O-Line!

Man, I have been wanting that since we drafted Andrew!

Walk Worthy,

I heard Big Joe say today that our oline coach told him this week that he thinks Ryan Kelly is the best center in the NFL.....I don't get the sense that this coach is one who tends to say positive things just because.....

[smitty46953]

Smitty may have the article

I remember when we signed him that he said he wanted a 3-4 and not a 4-3 but don't recall if was an article or a Twitter comment. :cool:

[Chromeburn]

I heard Big Joe say today that our oline coach told him this week that he thinks Ryan Kelly is the best center in the NFL.....I don't get the sense that this coach is one who tends to say positive things just because.....

That is some high praise. He does seem to have turned it up a notch this year. Hopefully these guys will get some pro bowl nods if they keep it up. From one of the worst olives to one of the best in about a year. Not too shabby.

[Chromeburn]

I remember when we signed him that he said he wanted a 3-4 and not a 4-3 but don't recall if was an article or a Twitter comment. :cool:

I remember hearing the same, but I thought it was more position than defense. He did not want to play NT, but he had some of his best seasons as a NT in 4-3.

[Chaka]

So far this year :

10 sacks on about 340 pass attempts

Once every 34 attempts.

I didn't look specifically, but it may be the lowest rate in the league for a starting QB. Its at least among the lowest. Of the starters the lowest number of sacks for the year is 8 or 9 and he is passing more than them, more attempts

I did not look up prior years, but I am guessing that is much improved, since it seemed like before he was getting hit or pressure about every other attempt

You are correct - our sack rate is lowest in the league (2.92%).
Second lowest is Pittsburg at 3.37% (10 sacks in 297 attempts)
For context, League average is 7.02%
Worst is San Fran at a whopping 12.02% (31 sacks in 258 attempts). When do we get to play them?

Last year, the Colts sack rate was - are you ready for this - 11.5% (56 sacks in 487 attempts). Crazy.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/passingAttempts

[VeveJones007]

You are correct - our sack rate is lowest in the league (2.92%).
Second lowest is Pittsburg at 3.37% (10 sacks in 297 attempts)
For context, League average is 7.02%
Worst is San Fran at a whopping 12.02% (31 sacks in 258 attempts). When do we get to play them?

Last year, the Colts sack rate was - are you ready for this - 11.5% (56 sacks in 487 attempts). Crazy.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/passingAttempts

That's absurd. Imagine if we see a similar type of improvement on defense next year.

[Chaka]

That's absurd. Imagine if we see a similar type of improvement on defense next year.

We have literally moved from worst to first on sack rate. It is pretty shocking.

[DrSpaceman]

You are correct - our sack rate is lowest in the league (2.92%).
Second lowest is Pittsburg at 3.37% (10 sacks in 297 attempts)
For context, League average is 7.02%
Worst is San Fran at a whopping 12.02% (31 sacks in 258 attempts). When do we get to play them?

Last year, the Colts sack rate was - are you ready for this - 11.5% (56 sacks in 487 attempts). Crazy.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/passingAttempts


What is surprising about that stat from last year is that it was ONLY 11.5%. I would have guessed higher.

The rate it is at now, through this half season, is about where it was when manning was at his peak. He would take about 20-25 sacks a year, 1-2 a game.

[Spike]

You are correct - our sack rate is lowest in the league (2.92%).
Second lowest is Pittsburg at 3.37% (10 sacks in 297 attempts)
For context, League average is 7.02%
Worst is San Fran at a whopping 12.02% (31 sacks in 258 attempts). When do we get to play them?

Last year, the Colts sack rate was - are you ready for this - 11.5% (56 sacks in 487 attempts). Crazy.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/passingAttempts

While some thought drafting Nelson was too high for a guard, this shows that he was well worth the pick. Kelly and Nelson were damn good picks in the 1st round. Finally have a running game to help Luck and it is great not seeing Luck getting the shit kicked out of him every game.

[JAFF]

The Raiders oline is decent, I wouldn’t look too deep into this matchup. Also they were clogging the middle, dragging guys down, tripping, really trying to eliminate those passing lanes. Not saying we don’t need an upgrade on the dline, we do, but this isn’t the game I would use to measure it.

Did Mack look a step slower to anyone when compared to last week? He did to me. I know he had the ankle issue, I think he scores on that long run if healthy. I saw a couple USF games a few years ago and Mack looks like he did then. Fast through the hole and into the second level lightning quick. But his patience for that hole to open seems better also. That shoulder must have really bothered him last year.

Good thing next year’s draft is a defensive one. We are going to need all those picks.

I thought Mack looked more decissive than last year. Maybe its the shoulder, but he has put his foot in the ground and goes to the open inside gap. He commits and sells out on his decision.

From where i sit, hes not the same guy as last year, in a good way.

[JAFF]

We have literally moved from worst to first on sack rate. It is pretty shocking.

Thats how bad the offensive plan the last two years.

1. They can run the ball. The D cant just pin their ears back knowing its all vertical , no play action no one in the backfield to block.

2. The Colts are less predictable. Its fun really. With pagano, I knew what was coming. If I can figure it out, so can 90% of the planet.

3. The offense has check downs. Holy sh*t, how long has it been.

4. Not every pass play is a 7 step drop.

Its a real offense. Its about time

[Racehorse]

That's absurd. Imagine if we see a similar type of improvement on defense next year.

One can hope

[Dam8610]

We have literally moved from worst to first on sack rate. It is pretty shocking.

I'd love to see that level of improvement from the defense next year.

[omahacolt]

We have literally moved from worst to first on sack rate. It is pretty shocking.

Not really. The offense was terrible last year. The play calling and Brissett was terrible. Had no idea what to do with the ball half the time

[JAFF]

Not really. The offense was terrible last year. The play calling and Brissett was terrible. Had no idea what to do with the ball half the time

I agree with your assessment. Brissett was very indecissive. From the story on his workwith the scout team, he’s been very good

[Chaka]

Not really. The offense was terrible last year. The play calling and Brissett was terrible. Had no idea what to do with the ball half the time

While the difference in QB is worthwhile to note, it only explains some of the difference. While we'll never know how many sacks Luck would have taken had he been our QB last year, we do know than in 2016 (when he played about half the season before injury) our sack rate was 7.53% - still well above the league average (6.11%) that season. In 2015, the last year when he served as the QB for an entire season, the sack rate was 5.98%, slightly lower than the league average that season (6.48%).

Obviously, there are variables between any season that won't allow a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, but the overall picture that gets painted is that we are markedly better at protecting the QB this season.

[rm1369]

While the difference in QB is worthwhile to note, it only explains some of the difference. While we'll never know how many sacks Luck would have taken had he been our QB last year, we do know than in 2016 (when he played about half the season before injury) our sack rate was 7.53% - still well above the league average (6.11%) that season. In 2015, the last year when he served as the QB for an entire season, the sack rate was 5.98%, slightly lower than the league average that season (6.48%).

Obviously, there are variables between any season that won't allow a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, but the overall picture that gets painted is that we are markedly better at protecting the QB this season.

Even those stats don’t take into account the change in play calling. The difference is huge. The Colts are 30th in yards per completion. For most of Lucks career they’ve been in the top 10. Shorter quicker passes and having a good check down option help the OLine tremendously. The previous coaching staff didn’t do the OLine any favors with their scheme or play calling.

[omahacolt]

While the difference in QB is worthwhile to note, it only explains some of the difference. While we'll never know how many sacks Luck would have taken had he been our QB last year, we do know than in 2016 (when he played about half the season before injury) our sack rate was 7.53% - still well above the league average (6.11%) that season. In 2015, the last year when he served as the QB for an entire season, the sack rate was 5.98%, slightly lower than the league average that season (6.48%).

Obviously, there are variables between any season that won't allow a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, but the overall picture that gets painted is that we are markedly better at protecting the QB this season.

Absolutely we are. And the offense is much more quick hitting

[Chaka]

Even those stats don’t take into account the change in play calling. The difference is huge. The Colts are 30th in yards per completion. For most of Lucks career they’ve been in the top 10. Shorter quicker passes and having a good check down option help the OLine tremendously. The previous coaching staff didn’t do the OLine any favors with their scheme or play calling.

That's a fair point as well. Here's what I'm seeing as to yards per completion:

2018 - 9.38 yards per completion (league average 10.91) - Rank 30th
2017 - 10.15 yards per completion (league average 10.58) - Rank 23rd
2016 - 11.36 yards per completion (league average 10.73) - Rank 8th
2015 - 10.43 yards per completion (league average 10.83) - Rank 20th

[rm1369]

That's a fair point as well. Here's what I'm seeing as to yards per completion:

2018 - 9.38 yards per completion (league average 10.91) - Rank 30th
2017 - 10.15 yards per completion (league average 10.58) - Rank 23rd
2016 - 11.36 yards per completion (league average 10.73) - Rank 8th
2015 - 10.43 yards per completion (league average 10.83) - Rank 20th

Let’s make sure we are showing the whole picture:

2014 - 11.8 ypc - rank 3rd
2013 - 11.2 ypc - rank 10th
2012 - 12.0 ypc - rank 3rd

The only two years out of the top 10 were the year Luck missed and the year he missed over half the season. The difference with a healthy and playing Luck is stark.

[JAFF]

That's a fair point as well. Here's what I'm seeing as to yards per completion:

2018 - 9.38 yards per completion (league average 10.91) - Rank 30th
2017 - 10.15 yards per completion (league average 10.58) - Rank 23rd
2016 - 11.36 yards per completion (league average 10.73) - Rank 8th
2015 - 10.43 yards per completion (league average 10.83) - Rank 20th

Compare the running game numbers. When you are behind, you throw more. When you can run at will, you take less chances in the air.

[Chaka]

Let’s make sure we are showing the whole picture:

2014 - 11.8 ypc - rank 3rd
2013 - 11.2 ypc - rank 10th
2012 - 12.0 ypc - rank 3rd

The only two years out of the top 10 were the year Luck missed and the year he missed over half the season. The difference with a healthy and playing Luck is stark.

Just so you know, I wasn't trying to prove you wrong - I said I thought you made a fair point. I only listed the last four years because that's all I had on my computer screen at the time, and those were the only years I had been discussing in my prior posts on the subject (though you did make me realize I had mixed up the timing of Luck's injury in 2015/2016)

That said, I looked at 2012-2014 after seeing your post, and found that the sack rates in those years (where we had a high YPC) were actually lower than the later years. Here's the sack rates along with the YPC average:

2014 - Sack rate 4.39% (4th best) / YPC 11.94 (3rd best)
2013 - Sack rate 5.50% (5th best) / YPC 10.64 (10th best)
2012 - Sack rate 6.53% (15th best) / YPC 12.18 (3rd best)

So I'm not seeing a great correlation, at least in these years, between higher YPC / higher sack rate.

[Chaka]

Compare the running game numbers. When you are behind, you throw more. When you can run at will, you take less chances in the air.

Maybe it's because it's late, but I'm not 100% sure what you're asking. Rm1369 was making the point that the current low sack rate may be a product, at least in part, of the fact that Luck has been making quicker, shorter throws (as evidenced by his career low YPC number this year) and thus the defensive players haven't had as much time to get to him for a sack.

You bring up the running numbers, but I guess I don't know what you want to compare - are you saying that there should be a correlation between a high sack rate and a poor rushing Yards Per Attempt (YPA) rate? If so, then please back it up with numbers so we can see if it makes sense.

[JAFF]

Maybe it's because it's late, but I'm not 100% sure what you're asking. Rm1369 was making the point that the current low sack rate may be a product, at least in part, of the fact that Luck has been making quicker, shorter throws (as evidenced by his career low YPC number this year) and thus the defensive players haven't had as much time to get to him for a sack.

You bring up the running numbers, but I guess I don't know what you want to compare - are you saying that there should be a correlation between a high sack rate and a poor rushing Yards Per Attempt (YPA) rate? If so, then please back it up with numbers so we can see if it makes sense.

Last two games, how many third and longs did the Colts face? When you can run, you throw on short second downs. You run less 7 step drops. The moment costanzo came back to play, the O line has controlled the line of scrimmage. When you can run the ball, you dictate why YOU throw. You cant run the D dictates when you throw

[rm1369]

Just so you know, I wasn't trying to prove you wrong - I said I thought you made a fair point. I only listed the last four years because that's all I had on my computer screen at the time, and those were the only years I had been discussing in my prior posts on the subject (though you did make me realize I had mixed up the timing of Luck's injury in 2015/2016)

That said, I looked at 2012-2014 after seeing your post, and found that the sack rates in those years (where we had a high YPC) were actually lower than the later years. Here's the sack rates along with the YPC average:

2014 - Sack rate 4.39% (4th best) / YPC 11.94 (3rd best)
2013 - Sack rate 5.50% (5th best) / YPC 10.64 (10th best)
2012 - Sack rate 6.53% (15th best) / YPC 12.18 (3rd best)

So I'm not seeing a great correlation, at least in these years, between higher YPC / higher sack rate.

That’s interesting and honestly surprising to me. Seems like the line has sucked pass blocking throughout Luck’s career. Is my memory wrong in Luck taking a lot of punishment even early in his career? I’ll have to look up QB hit stats when I get a chance. I also don’t remember the line being particularly talented.

Interesting that 2015 was the start of the Chud offense. You may be right that the YPC stats don’t show a great correlation, but maybe there is one for the coaching? I’ll have to look into it more. The offense appears much better designed to me. I’m not at all trying to knock the talent improvement on the line - it’s obvious. I’m just trying to highlight the improvements in the offensive scheme and philosophy. To me one of the best things a coach can do is highlight his teams strengths and minimize their weaknesses. I rarely felt like I saw that with the previous coaching staff. It never felt like they took their roster into account when designing schemes or calling plays. They coached for the team they wish they had.

It will be interesting to me to monitor the YPC stat as the season progresses. My guess is it increases as the line progresses and the run game allows more play action.

[DrSpaceman]

The sack rate does not take into account how much scrambling Luck had to do those years and the hurries. I think that is what is missing in those stats

Luck has hardly had to scramble at all this year. Not only is he not being sacked, he is not running for his life back there anymore either.

[FatDT]

Agree, Luck was famous his first years in the league for all the narrow escapes and great pocket movement.

[Chaka]

Last two games, how many third and longs did the Colts face? When you can run, you throw on short second downs. You run less 7 step drops. The moment costanzo came back to play, the O line has controlled the line of scrimmage. When you can run the ball, you dictate why YOU throw. You cant run the D dictates when you throw

I get the theory, but my question was whether the real world stats back it up. It sounds like you're saying what I thought - teams who run the ball poorly should have a higher sack rate, since defenses will be better able to predict when they pass. Sounds reasonable enough in theory, but is that how it plays out in real life?

[Chaka]

That’s interesting and honestly surprising to me. Seems like the line has sucked pass blocking throughout Luck’s career. Is my memory wrong in Luck taking a lot of punishment even early in his career? I’ll have to look up QB hit stats when I get a chance. I also don’t remember the line being particularly talented.

Interesting that 2015 was the start of the Chud offense. You may be right that the YPC stats don’t show a great correlation, but maybe there is one for the coaching? I’ll have to look into it more. The offense appears much better designed to me. I’m not at all trying to knock the talent improvement on the line - it’s obvious. I’m just trying to highlight the improvements in the offensive scheme and philosophy. To me one of the best things a coach can do is highlight his teams strengths and minimize their weaknesses. I rarely felt like I saw that with the previous coaching staff. It never felt like they took their roster into account when designing schemes or calling plays. They coached for the team they wish they had.

It will be interesting to me to monitor the YPC stat as the season progresses. My guess is it increases as the line progresses and the run game allows more play action.

Yep, I hope so. Stats are interesting and useful but, as you and others have pointed out, don't always tell the whole story. Sack rate by itself is one indicator of a good/bad offensive line, but other statistical info would also bear on the issue - QB hits as you've mentioned, average length of time the QB holds the ball, etc. And YPC is one indicator of the type of passes a QB has been throwing, but we'd also need to consider the skills of the WRs involved for example. So there's still plenty of room for debate regardless of the stats.

[VeveJones007]

The sack rate does not take into account how much scrambling Luck had to do those years and the hurries. I think that is what is missing in those stats

Luck has hardly had to scramble at all this year. Not only is he not being sacked, he is not running for his life back there anymore either.

It also doesn't factor in hits. The striking thing about the last few weeks isn't just the lack of sacks; it's the lack of pressure and QB hits.

[JAFF]

I get the theory, but my question was whether the real world stats back it up. It sounds like you're saying what I thought - teams who run the ball poorly should have a higher sack rate, since defenses will be better able to predict when they pass. Sounds reasonable enough in theory, but is that how it plays out in real life?

Look at last years team

[Puck]

I like Chaka. He’s bringing some shit to be discussed!

[Chaka]

I like Chaka. He’s bringing some shit to be discussed!

The lack of "thanks" for Puck's useful post is appalling

[JAFF]

The lack of "thanks" for Puck's useful post is appalling

I'm new, but wouldn't this earn a

"shut up fag"

???

[rcubed]

I'm new, but wouldn't this earn a

"shut up fag"

???
I actually thought that was one of chaka's better posts.

as in I read the whole thing.

[smitty46953]

I'm new, but wouldn't this earn a

"shut up fag"

???

Why yes you did earn one … "shut up fag" :cool:

[Chaka]

I actually thought that was one of chaka's better posts.

as in I read the whole thing.

Thanks - I made sure to use small words so you could.

[JAFF]

Why yes you did earn one … "shut up fag" :cool:

It comes under the Roger Rabbitt rule, you can only do it when it is funny

[JAFF]

I actually thought that was one of chaka's better posts.

as in I read the whole thing.

Because it had a lot of short words????

I'm sorry, really I am. I couldn't help myself.

[rcubed]

Because it had a lot of short words????

I'm sorry, really I am. I couldn't help myself.
Chaka already used that joke.

And don’t apologize you puss

[JAFF]

Chaka already used that joke.

And don’t apologize you puss

Bite me sweetheart

[Racehorse]

Chaka already used that joke.

And don’t apologize you puss

He probably figured it would have to be said twice for you to comprehend it.

[Pez]

I like Chaka. He’s bringing some shit to be discussed!Second that...

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk