The Colts' Defense, 2024 Season

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

Are you fine with a defense that gives up points on 60% of the opponents drives ???

o


Nowhere in my OP did I say, or even insinuate, that I was fine with that.

o

[YDFL Commish]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o


Nowhere in my OP did I say, or even insinuate, that I was fine with that.

o

Hence why I asked the question. Then, would you agree that the stat of giving up points on 60% of the opponents drives is worse than mediocre?

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

Hence why I asked the question. Then, would you agree that the stat of giving up points on 60% of the opponents drives is worse than mediocre?

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

[YDFL Commish]

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.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

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.

For a former HC and experienced DC, he sure looks like a rookie out of his league.

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

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.

o


Time-of-possession is not strictly the responsibility of the defense. A defense could force 5 consecutive punts in the first half, and if the team's offense is consistently going 3-and-out or 4-and-out, then that defense, which is consistently doing their job by forcing punts, is going to be on the field a lot more than if they have an offense that is at least reasonably doing a decent job on their part. And when the 4th quarter rolls around, being on the field that much because of an incompetent offense is very likely to be a factor in the defense's play ...... and in that particular case, a lopsided time-of-possession in favor of the opposition would be more the offense's fault than the defense's.

You may not want to hear that, but it's a fact of life in football. Whether a fan is judging a team's offense or a team's defense, there are very few across-the-board, blanket statements that can be made without scrutinizing the entire situation of the game that is played on the field, which is the point that I made in my previous post.

o

[YDFL Commish]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o


Time-of-possession is not strictly the responsibility of the defense. A defense could force 5 consecutive punts in the first half, and if the team's offense is consistently going 3-and-out or 4-and-out, then that defense, which is consistently doing their job by forcing punts, is going to be on the field a lot more than if they have an offense that is at least reasonably doing a decent job on their part. And when the 4th quarter rolls around, being on the field that much because of an incompetent offense is very likely to be a factor in the defense's play ...... and in that particular case, a lopsided time-of-possession in favor of the opposition would be more the offense's fault than the defense's.

You may not want to hear that, but it's a fact of life in football. Whether a fan is judging a team's offense or a team's defense, there are very few across-the-board, blanket statements that can be made without scrutinizing the entire situation of the game that is played on the field, which is the point that I made in my previous post.

o

Without going too deep down this rabbit hole, of course it's imperative that each unit do its part. At the same time, it's a team game, and when one unit is not doing it's part, then you would expect the other unit to pick up the slack.

For me this is more an indictment on Bradley than individual players. Although we still have some interior DL depth issues and I feel that Zaire Franklin is overrated in general by most Colts fans.

[ChaosTheory]

As far as TOP with the offense goes... we only had two drives the entire game that were more than 4 plays.

Only one real sustained drive. 11 plays, 5:50 that ended in an interception.
Beyond that, our first drive was 3:20 and everything else was 1:30-2:30.

Four of those really short drives were TDs. So it's not like it's always a negative, but certainly has an effect.

I said in the other thread, this was like the Dolphins game in '09.