Quote:
Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles
o
A) ) First of all, it would depend on what the scores were. 6 FG's ceded is a lot different than 6 TD's ceded. In this case of today's game, is was a mix of both (3 FG's, and 3 TD's.)
B) ) I would not use that stat solely to be based the overall defense's performance. For example, I stated specifically why I thought the the defense was lucky because of the Texans' clock mismanagement on the final drive of the first half, and why l thought that they were unlucky on the final drive of the game.
C) ) It would also depend on how many times the team's offense put the defense in a bad position to begin with ...... and today that only happened once, when the Colts' offense gave the ball to the Texans near midfield when they turned the ball over on downs on the opening drive of the game. And that drive ended with a field goal. Giving up a field goal when the other team starts the drive near midfield is not great, but it's also not horrible. If I recall correctly, we did this dance last year when you refused to budge after a game in which the Colts' offense put the defense in numerous bad situations, and you stubbornly put all of the blame on the defense for giving up points for drives that started deep in their own territory. You referenced Mike Curtis and the old Colts teams from the 1967, 1968, and 1971 seasons who set records for the least amount of points ceded in a 14-game season as a comparison, and said something along the lines of "good defenses don't give up points, no matter what" ...... and it appears that you are trying to do this again by narrowing down the criteria of a defense's performance to a single fact/statistic. If you want to do that fine, but anybody who is trying to use some objectivity takes into account all of the factors that occur during a game when judging a defense. I believe that the defense was mediocre today, and I partially explained why in my OP. Thorgrim, Omaha, and Hoopsdoc all thought that the defense was flat-out bad, and Racehorse leaned more towards my view. I think that an argument can be made for both (mediocre, and bad.)
Also, I never said that I was OK with mediocrity in the first place.....I'm not. Mediocrity will generally lead to an overall record of somewhere between 6-11 and 9-8, and I'm not OK with that. Today's game could have been won with a better performance by the Colts' defense, and it also could have been won with better run-blocking from the Colts' offensive line.
o
|
I appreciate your view. Also, I'm not insinuating that you are saying this, but I do not ever want to hear TOP as an excuse for poor defense. The defenses job, and especially the DC is to get off the fucking field ASAP and then there is no argument for a TOP discussion. Three and outs solve a lot of problems. How many of those did we have yesterday? Could not have been many, since the Texicans only punted once and had zero turnovers.
I understand there is such a thing as situational football and there are times that allowing the opponent to use long time consuming drives is a benefit. But, does Bradley understand how this works? I don't think so. If the defense suddenly is in a TOP deficit then IMO it's better to take some chances and get them off the field quickly, rather than let them die a slow death that they will never be able to fight back from.