I commend you for looking deeper than most people, but you still aren't completely accurate.
Indy's run defense (rank/ypc) by year
2002: 20/4.3
2003: 20/4.5
2004: 24/4.6
2005: 16/4,4
2006: 32/5.3
Injuries are a great explanation for why they veered from merely bad to historically awful, but not for how they became "elite," There is no trend during the season to explain this, either. Looking at ypc for the final stretch starting with the game Sanders returned for....
TN: 6.3
JX: 8.9
Cin: 4.4
Hou: 4.5
Miami: 5.8
KC: 2.6
Which of these numbers looks out of place? Did they just get healthy in one week? Did it click into place for every single youngster all at once?
You are building a false narrative by using points allowed instead of rushing defense and setting arbitrary end points. Despite improving greatly in points allowed, Indy was no better at stopping the run in 2005 than they had been earlier (which is critical, because that's where their defense improved in the playoffs) and they showed no upward trend at the end of the year due to health or experience. These are the facts.
I'll grant you that Indy did run through health issues and that they had a solid corps of youngsters coming along, but it doesn't explain the sudden improvement between Miami and KC at all. FWIW, ESPN doesn't have Klecko as playing any DL until the Miami game.
So, you claim I'm "building a false narrative by using points allowed instead of rushing defense." Hmm. I find this response to be entirely hypocritical.
No one is saying to 2005 or 07 Colts were "elite"
strictly vs the rush. No one even
implied that. You said the 2006 Colts D were awful...and you didn't just restrict it to their rush D either. You even compared them to the 2011 Pats....in a discussion about how well Tom Brady does (i.e.
passing) in the playoffs. So, we aren't
just talking vs the rush, here. If you want to cite the rush as one example? Great. But don't try and re-frame the
entire convo.
Because now you are mincing words in order to and trying to conveniently re-frame the discussion to
strictly run-defense. Except, no one is saying to 2005 or 07 Colts were "elite"
strictly vs the rush. No one even
implied that. So, you know full well it was in relation to
total defense. I cited those very points/yards stat from my very first post. This whole convo took place in a discussion about how well Tom Brady does (i.e.
passing) in the playoffs. So, we aren't
just talking vs the rush, here. Now, If you want to cite the rush as one example? Great. But don't try and re-frame the
entire convo. You yourself admitted that the 2005 Colts D were "elite" and the 2007 Colts D were "elite." You weren't just talking about run-D either, so don't fault me for doing the same. Cause if this whole convo were strictly about the rush, then why would I even bother to cite losing Mike Doss, or the emergence of Bethea or Marlin Jackson by years end? Those are DBs. They won't have such a huge impact against the run.
Your argument? Again, You are trying to make some vague argument that 2006 Colts playoff D were little more than an illusion. A truly bad D that simply got lucky in the playoffs ("
Any bad defense can play a good game. In fact, most do."). Well, if so, then explain how the
same personnel took the field in 2007 -- and by your own admission -- were
elite. For all year. That's not an illusion. Oh, and they weren't nearly as awful vs the run either. No, they were never "elite" vs the run. I never claimed otherwise. But they could hold a team to under 100 yards rushing in 2007. They didn't have the colossal breakdowns either. Oh, and that team had speed; especially if you ran off-tackle or tried to run a screen, they swarm all over it. So, what's the reason for that difference? It was the loss of personnel in regular season. And that's the gist of my argument; I'm citing personnel injuries/loss at every level; which got filled in by young guys who were there for 2007.
Because you were correct, injuries pushed them up into historically bad territory and they had some youth coming along. 2007 was a legitimately great defense across the board.
Great, then we agree.
I'm going to charitably call this statement "absurd" rather than the more accurate "willfully dishonest."
You said he didn't play at all after getting hurt. Not once, nada... the clear implication that his return was a big boost for the defense. I said he had already played for a month and the defense was as lousy at it had been all year.
It turns out, the truth is that he returned a month prior to the playoffs only to get hurt again, and in that game Indy allowed over 6 ypc and 200 yards. Yet somehow that makes your recall more accurate than mine? Had he played only a few snaps before getting hurt or if in that game the defense had performed well I'd gladly admit error. As is, there is no such justification for your assessment. He played, and they were terrible.
Yes, and me forgetting Bob Sanders playing for one standalone game within an 8 week stretch on the bench, wasn't nearly as "great of a disparity" as your initial claim that Sanders played for the weeks heading into the playoffs -- thus using it to claim that he had no impact on KC or Balt. But, see, he wasn't playing. So, there goes the logic behind your initial claim.
Lastly, you still need to address why Bill Belichick himself would do a film review the week before the game illustrating why the Colts' defense wasn't as improved as people were making them out to be. You'll forgive me if I take his word over yours.
Enjoy the last word.
Sorry, but if ones memory of Bill Belichick's Belistrator is akin to the memory of how Bob Sanders played in all the remaining weeks before the playoffs, then that's not saying much. Link? Also, because I've never heard Belichick say overtly negative things to put-down an opposing team, I have trouble with him expressing what you imply. Either way, it's a moot point cause that same personnel were "improved" for 2007, and it was with the same guys that came together for the 06 playoffs. And that's pretty much it. In the NFL, having bad personnel filling in key holes at literally every-level can make things far worse than they really are.
