To put the running game in context
 

First of all, I am a data guy so I completely understand that short-term trends do not mean long-term success nor do averages mean much because each activity is a unique event.

That said, I have greatly enjoyed our last three games in having a running game again. Watching our new Offensive Line configuration just maul folks and spring our RBs to actually be beyond the line of scrimmage before contact has been great. In the past three games, we have averaged 5.5, 5.9 and 5.6 yards per carry.

While we did rush for over 100 yards in each of our first two games (101 yards against CIN; 104 yards against WAS), those yards per carry were 3.4 and 3.7 yards respectively. There, we did it through repetition of effort (not fun watching) instead of because of success on most of the individual plays.

So, for the past three games, we are averaging 182.0 yards per game rushing. If that average were to continue for the second half of the season, we would reach 2,397 rush yards for the season. We would fall 17 yards short of the Rams who are currently rushing for an average of 150.9 yards per game and if they maintain that rate, will end with 2,414 yards for the season.

As 182.0 yards per game, there is only one team since 2002 that had a season per game rushing average higher than that and it was the 2006 Atlanta Falcons (both Warrick Dunn and Michael Vick had over 1,000 rushing with Jerious Norwell tossing in 633 yards) at 183.7 yards rushing per game.

I have no idea if we can continue running the ball at the same clip we have these past three games but if we can, it will be at a pretty historically high rate compared to the rest of the NFL.

Please, please, please let the O-Line stay healthy!!

Walk Worthy,

Anyone that wants to argue that drafting high for 2 guards didnt equal difference makers are nuts.

That all you got?

Seriously, his questions was "Anyone that wants to argue that drafting high for 2 guards didnt equal difference makers are nuts?"

Are you honestly saying that Nelson and Smith are not making a difference?

Your linking to a stat showing how bad our defense is keeping opposing offenses out of the endzone DOES NOT negate the fact that we have two Offensive Linemen making an IMPACT on our offense.

If we had drafted two more high defensive players, might our defense be better? Sure.

But, our offense would be worse than it is with two different starters in there other than Nelson and Smith.

You are still not providing a counter-argument to his question.

Which defender did you want at #6 who was still on the board? Hey, you get to cherry pick! Find the one with the most stats and say THAT guy! Go for it.

But, you best choice is probably Vander Esch whom NO ONE would have picked top ten.

But, you go ahead and throw a name up there and maintain that drafting HIM instead of Nelson would have put the team further ahead. Go on.....

So, instead, I will go with Puck and say that you are nuts since you don't appear to want to debate whether Nelson is making an impact or not. You just want to yell at the wind.

Peachy....



[Gets down off soapbox.....]

Walk Worthy,

Sherck, let me introduce you to Dammy … :rolleyes:

And for those of you who care,


The highest rookie OT PFF grade is Mike McGlinchey, SF, at 80.2 (7th highest OT grade overall).

Braden Smith has the 2nd highest rookie OT PFF grade at a 73.1 (#21 overall).

The next highest rookie OT PFF grade is Brian O'Neill, MIN, at a 62.7 (#49 overall).

--

The highest rookie OG PFF grade is Will Hernandez, NYG, with a 72.9 (#8 overall).

Quinton Nelson has the 2nd highest rookie OG PFF grade at 70.2 (#16 overall).

The next highest rookie OG PFF grade is James Daniels, CHI, at a 63.0 (#35 overall).

Colts Starting O-Linemen:

LT Anthony Castonzo, 64.5 (#45 OT overall)
LG Quinton Nelson, 70.2 (#16 OG overall)
OC Ryan Kelly, 76.5 (#6 OC overall)
RG Mark Glowinski, 78.2 (#4 OG overall)
RT Braden Smith, 73.1 (#21 OT overall)

6th man Le'Raven Clark, 68.8 (#31 OT overall)

Who would have thunk it?

Walk Worthy,

Trading down to 12 would've still been the better option IMO. The Bills were offering 12 and 22. And if you don't like what's at 12 (though Derwin James at the very least would've been a good option there), trade down again. I'm not actually upset about the Braden Smith pick, I just think Ballard missed a chance to get way more value out of the 6th pick than Nelson. Much like I can't argue Chubb over Nelson, Smith, Turay, and Wilkins, I don't think with the right maneuvering anyone would've been able to argue for Nelson over the haul that could've been had for the 6th pick.

Adding talent on the oline is definitely making a difference. I think people only argue how that talent is added, right?

Has that ever been confirmed?

Oh absolutely, BUt I disagree and I dont see another what we would have gotten to this level of production so fast without Nelson for sure. But adding Smith was a super plus. Add that to Kelly who doesnt get enough credit IMO and finally getting AC back makes the whole vision that Ballard/Reich had in mind explode into view.
Glowinski and Slaussen were also very good additions. The oline is fixed We can move on to other areas.

Coaches can say they are gonna protect #12.... these guys pulled it off in their first draft together.

Ballard has already said that next yrs draft is about defense... and said it will be a very top heavy defensive draft. I assume he means as a league and as a team.

In this defense we are probably only about 3 high draft picks/FA's from being a top 5-7 defense.

3Tech Hopefully Lewis
SS need a Bob Sanders
and an edge rush to go along with Lewis when/if he moves outside on passing downs (Ballard already said he would do this) or one of the young guys already on the team. The rest of the D needs upgraded but not all have to be superstars in this defense and it doesnt have to be next yr.. Also need one really good zone/man corner.

Offense.... only thing I see right now is a need at WR. I'm not putting my bets on Caine. Not sure why everyone thinks he will be the for sure #2 behind TY.... Find someone who can move the chains like Reggie did in the 3rd or 4th round and keep feeding the TE's

The Bills to move one spot later than the Colts at #6, traded the #12 and both of their 2018 second-round picks at 53 and 56, and they also got back No. 255 for the Bucs #7.

Just assuming they offered the Colts the same deal? I could be wrong, but doubt it... We did not need a QB nor did the Bucs, why would they offer Colts #12 and #22 and not the Bucs for one spot when the guy they wanted was still available? Talking heads were only ones along with forum participants who were suggesting this that I recall. :cool:

Yes, by the Bills.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/h...ey-chubb-fell/

I can't find the article where Beane specifically confirms he offered Ballard 12 and 22, but you tell me what the middle ground between what he offered the Broncos at 5 and what he gave the Bucs at 7 is.

Ballard trades back and gets a solid OL for probably the next decade, something sorely needed, plus more picks, gets another starting OL and a MLB who really is a difference maker for the D, another huge area of need for the team., in the second round.....

And people are complaining he didn't get more.

Tough crowd

Even if the Bills reported it, I still never know how real those stories are around draft picks. Polian made all sorts of claims about wanting this pick or that pick or just missing on someone or a trade offer, much of it I think was always him blowing smoke up our asses. Couldn't trust half of it

We have been trying to find a fix for this offensive line for what, 10 12 years. Even when we had a running game it was never like this. When Edge was at his peak he would make moves and plays that left me wondering how he possibly could do that. Now I wonder how we could possibly open up such huge holes. Considering all of the money and draft capital we have invested without anything to show for it fixing it, and fixing it like this, with (in addition to incredible coaching) a number 6 and number 37 draft pick is a steal for this particular club.

It might be just post-draft spin, but Brandon Beane said afterwards that he was looking for a "reasonable" deal and that DENVER was insisting on 12 and 22 but he didn't agree to that proposal. He also said that he checked in with the Colts and Bucs and both stated they had a guy they targeted and were going to pick unless their guy was off the board. Considering that the Bucs made the trade, I would assume their guy was off the board at 7.

https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...icks-in-trades

Middle ground was Ballard and the Colts wanted Q Nelson. Seems AlwaysSunnyinIndy found quote by Beane that pretty much says your wrong... :cool:

https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...icks-in-trades

but there were ways to improve the oline and get a good one without drafting nelson. it is really a pointless argument imo. we needed the oline fixed, and we seem to have it. with depth i might add. i like how Clark stepped up.

we need amost a whole dline. sheard is ok but very replaceable. the interior of the line needs almost completely redone. and turay has shown flashes but thats about it.

we have a huge need at cb. another safety is needed. also could use a replacement to walker. although i do like him.

we have a way to go before we get a top 5 d

That's how I would read that one source of information as well, but then there's something contradicting it directly from the horse's mouth per Beane's comments in April. I don't think it's fair to take it as fact based on available info.

Yep. The decision was made, so it's better just to look at the outcome. The offensive line is better, but the defense is still pretty terrible. Hopefully Ballard can do a similar overhaul of the defense in 2019 as he did for the OL in 2018.

"Time is a great thickener of things"

A. Lincoln

If those two guys are starters 8 years from now, Ballard will look like a genius.

The team needs more D. Absolutely

But there is 8 more games. A lot of young guys out there now, and the learning curve is brutal. At the end of the season, some of those guys will have grown, gotten better. It might not be that bad. 8 games is a lot of time in the NFL. You think Leonard is good now, wait until the last game. He's going to be scary

Didnt this basically happen in dallas a while back? Jerry's son convinced him to take a bunch of OL with high picks and they had a killer line for years

(and cue someone saying they didnt win anything with that...)

Wow, this sparked a lot of discussion. My only point here was if the Colts could've traded down for something like 12 and 22, that would've produced a more valuable group of players than Nelson by himself at 6. An example would be Derwin James and Isaiah Wynn. Yes, Wynn got injured, but he may not have here. Wynn was a very good guard, and James has been an impact defender thus far. In fact, Nelson hasn't been so good as to convince me that Wynn couldn't have been similarly productive if healthy.

That said, Ballard chose not to go that route, and thus far the 2018 draft class does look incredibly productive. Hopefully, he'll make good on his philosophy of building through the lines by drafting DL in this draft early and often.

Really interesting article on Stampede Blue about Hines running (located here).

Basic premise:
Cannot argue with the results of the past three weeks.

Walk Worthy,

I know I keep coming back to it more than I should, but I love seeing and hearing about the coaching staff making adjustments for players strengths. It seems to be a major part of Reich’s philosophy and to me it is a great indicator that he’s going to be a very good coach.

Not to start back up the old arguments, but this philosophy is the major reason I had issue with some of the personnel decisions that were made on the defensive side. I don’t see that same philosophy defensively. Certainly it lends itself a little more to the offensive side of the ball. Creating mismatches. However it is still applicable to the defensive side and I do hate the idea that we may be going back to “we do what we do”. I’ve never been a fan of that.

I don't disagree with your overall point. I've been clear that I think cutting Hankins, Anderson, and Simon were all mistakes.

That said, notice Hunt isn't playing that much on the edge. He's playing interior DL, where he fits best. When Quincy Wilson played so much against the Bills, they put him on Kelvin Benjamin and let him press. He wasn't forced into soft zone coverage. There's evidence of Eberflus and company tailoring the defense to specific strengths. I'd like to see more of it, but so far I don't think this D is as rigid as the Dungy defenses of the past.

Fair points. I was aware of the change with Hunt, but didn’t notice the adjustment with Wilson. Hopefully you are correct and they aren’t as rigid as Dungy was. I’ll have to watch for adjustments a little closer.

Agree with all of this, except Walker. We are getting virtually no production at SAM, where they have rotateing 3 players, Goode, Franklin and Adams. While Walker is playing pretty well at MIKE.

Now, if the plan is to replace Walker and move him to SAM, then I may be all for that.

That would be my plan. Get a more dynamic MIKE to put next to Leonard at WILL and move Walker to SAM. That would be after fixing the DL unless a Ray Lewis or Brian Urlacher falls into the team's lap.

We don’t use a Sam much. And yes he would be fine to play that role

Having a more talented player there could lead to using the position more.

We are in a nickel most of the time as are most teams in the NFL now. If you want to grab a good coverage backer like Mack Wilson in the draft. They can probably find a way for him to get on the field. Or if you think he is an upgrade to Walker. Perhaps trying to find a new hybrid defender that is part secondary part backer. But I don’t see them making a high investment in the SAM just to play more 4-3. The position is being phased out.

Offensive personnel will determine if we have 3 backers on the field imo

Exactly. Teams are in 11 personnel half the time, so you're already in Nickel 50%. Factor in 4 or 5 receivers sets and the use of SAM gets even smaller.

Hopefully Ballard can get good value on an undersized, athletic LB in round 2 again. A Deion Jones comp would be fantastic.

I know it's more complicated than this, but Ballard fixing the OL in two drafts really suggests to me that we were talking about fixing the OL for the last decade more than we were actually fixing it. Luck got his ass kicked for a 5 year span that nearly ended his career. Ballard fixes that in two years.

I guess Kelly was really a Grigson pick, but Grigs was pretty much toast at that point. And I have heard it argued that the Hooker / Mack / Walker draft was more of a Grigson team draft even thought Ballard was GM.

Then 2018 with three picks Ballard completely changed the landscape of this team .... Nelson, Leonard, Smith.

It's not just those three. Turay has contributed some on defense, and Hines and Wilkins have contributed quite a bit as well. I'm also excited to see what Lewis and Cain can offer when they return from injury.

Anyone arguing last years draft was a grigson team draft is either dishonest or an idiot. What gm gets hired after the season and shit cans the scouting department immediately? Maybe it happens but I don’t recall ever hearing it. Ballard dealt with what everyone deals with.

Yea, I agree, that was what I was trying to say. A Ballard draft with grigsons scouting team.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Two points in response:

1) Whether Ballard’s situation was unusual or not isn’t really the point. The fact remains that he had to utilize Grigson’s scouting staff to prepare for the 2017 draft, instead of his own preferred staff (which he put in place after the draft). While I’d agree that it’s not fair to totally excuse Ballard for any mistakes in the 2017 draft – obviously he was heavily involved in the player choices – but at least those mistakes deserve an asterisk.

2) Setting all of this aside, the 2017 draft was still pretty decent. We picked mid-round, and obtained several starters from that draft (Hooker, Mack and Walker), and several backups (Wilson, Hairston, Stewart). True, there have been a couple of flame-outs (Basham and Banner), but is that really all that unusual in any draft? Yes, they were gone quickly, but I personally think that’s a function of Ballard’s approach. Other teams may have kept those guys on their roster for another season or two to avoid admitting their mistakes.

No. It doesn’t get an asterisk. That is just how things work. Sure it is somewhat of a handicap but it is his draft.