Pre-Game Thoughts: My Little Ponies Edition

[RelocatedPatFan]

I almost didn't read this because of the my little ponies reference, but my daughter used to like them so how bad can it be? (Atleast it wasn't teletubbies or hello kitty?)

As for the colts. I think Luck is fairly decent at seeing most of the field, but he doesn't adjust as well (compared to Brady) to the motions of the defenders aand can be tricked into some bad decisions. This is something the pats defense can really take advantage of, but he is a darn fine thrower.

TY Hilton is definitely one of the fastest guys out there, so it will be interesting to see how we defend him. It will definitely be a combo of personnel, but will Revis be with him 1:1 mostly? I see the Colts having a tough time with Brady and our tight ends (Gronk, Wright?) It comes down to our defense matches up better to their offense then their defense against our offense.

Unless BB/Brady have a bad day at the office (but they're only allowed 1 per year and they used it @KC)

 

[ausbacker]

His gunsligner thing helps our defense. His mobility has a potential to hurt us. For some reason our defense plays real passive vs mobile QBs.

That's one of the things I'll be interested to see; if the Patriots put a spy on Luck to take away his scrambles. He's very good when he gets moving.

 

[Jackson 2]

I assume this is pointed to me and my comments about Denver. I said the Broncos were a top team, but overrated (because people put them on some pedestal above every other team in the NFL).

This actually a test game for the Colts though. They have not done well against better teams in the NFL. They have already lost to the Broncos, Eagles, and Steelers. Their only win against a good team is Baltimore. If the Pats do crush the Colts, you can start to question exactly how good they are. They have mostly beat cream puffs.

I think they are a good team, but it is easy to make the argument that they are not that good if the Pats roll on them. I think even nationally people will start to question whether they are a team that can beat on the bad teams in the NFL but can't compete with the good teams.

The fact of the matter is that there really is no great team in the NFL this year and for the most part every team has some significant question marks.

Rob, it was not directed at you at all, and that's the truth. Rather, it was intended as an editorial comment on the very predictable reaction one can expect from idiots such as Tanguay, Felger, his #1 parrot Mazz and Shank Shaughnessy. Finally, it doesn't matter if it's the '14 Colts, '85 Bears or any other team; once any team loses to the Pats, that team automatically sucks. Sorry to disappoint you, but, honestly, I rarely, if ever spend much time absorbing your viewpoints. Typically when I do, I agree with your perspectives, but not always.

 

[Guts]

That's one of the things I'll be interested to see; if the Patriots put a spy on Luck to take away his scrambles. He's very good when he gets moving.

Perhaps Collins??

 

[ausbacker]

Perhaps Collins??

I'm not sure. Fleener is average at best but Dwayne Allen is developing nicely. Chung may be a candidate for Allen so that may make Collins a candidate. That said, I expect tight coverage and disruption at the line. Given Richardson's struggles, I'd try to force the Colts to run the football.

 

[SVN]

FWIW

 

[Rob0729]

FWIW

You know what? Brady's stats are more impressive. Why? Because during his first 41 games, defenses were allowed to play defense. The rules weren't stacked in the offense's favor back then.

 

[Rob0729]

Rob, it was not directed at you at all, and that's the truth. Rather, it was intended as an editorial comment on the very predictable reaction one can expect from idiots such as Tanguay, Felger, his #1 parrot Mazz and Shank Shaughnessy. Finally, it doesn't matter if it's the '14 Colts, '85 Bears or any other team; once any team loses to the Pats, that team automatically sucks. Sorry to disappoint you, but, honestly, I rarely, if ever spend much time absorbing your viewpoints. Typically when I do, I agree with your perspectives, but not always.

Sorry, but because of our previous interaction on the same subject with the Broncos and that you posted it in a thread I started, I figured you were directing it in part at me. I think it was a fair assumption based on those things.

 

[JMC00]

You know what? Brady's stats are more impressive. Why? Because during his first 41 games, defenses were allowed to play defense. The rules weren't stacked in the offense's favor back then.

Brady came into the league when defenses could still be defenses
Luck came into the NFL with it basically tailor made for him to put up big number right off the bat

If Luck came into the NFL in 2001. That 72 would be more like 40-45, that 36 would easily be 50+ and that 275 would be less than 220.

Peyton Manning had friggin 58 INT in his first 3 seasons and was a 60.4% passer.

 

[ausbacker]

You know what? Brady's stats are more impressive. Why? Because during his first 41 games, defenses were allowed to play defense. The rules weren't stacked in the offense's favor back then.

Yeah, I find it difficult to compare football now to then too @Rob0729. The game is far more conducive to personal statistics now than it ever was. Hell, in another thread I've been accused of talking down Andrew Luck even though I implicitly stated I believe he has a bright future.

The way I look at performance is to compare them to players of the time. Era vs. era is a difficult concept. The conditions vary far too much. Would the '85 Bears be as dominant today as they were then etc.?

 

[Jackson 2]

Sorry, but because of our previous interaction on the same subject with the Broncos and that you posted it in a thread I started, I figured you were directing it in part at me. I think it was a fair assumption based on those things.

No need to apologize.

 

[brownj12]

. So whoever puts up the most points wins, which means Brady must throw and our receivers must catch the ball we have LaFell, Edelman and Gronk. Our running game is an absolute must to allow for the passing game to succeed. So Vereen must be effective. We can beat them as Rapistberger did with Pittsburgh by putting up more points. Keep throwing and scoring. The team that score the most last, wins. This will be a run andgun

This makes a lot of sense. I did some research turns out it wasn't just the Pittsburgh game, Andrew Luck is in fact 0-13 in his career (0-4 at home) in games where the other team scores more points.

 

[Nikolai]

FWIW

Just as a fun exercise, I took TFB's 2003 season and Luck's 2013 season (his last full season) and adjusted Brady's 2003 stats according to this standard.

2003 vs. 2013 variance league wide in stats. In 2013, there was:

3.7% increase in completion percentage
6.8% increase in yards/attempt
17.9% increase in TD passes
13.1% decrease in INTs
10.3% increase in QB rating
15.5% increase in yards/game

Doing that, here is how TFB's 2003 season might have looked in 2013, compared to Luck:

Completion Percentage
Brady: 62.4%
Luck: 60.2%

Yards/Attempt
Brady: 7.3
Luck: 6.7

TD Passes
Brady: 27
Luck: 23

INTs
Brady: 10
Luck: 9

QB Rating
Brady: 94.7
Luck: 87

Yards/Game
Brady: 261
Luck: 239

Most importantly, I think winning Super Bowls defines true greatness, so through 41 games:

Super Bowls
Brady: 1
Luck: 0

Luck is a damned fine QB, but let's not put him in Canton just yet.

 

[IntentionalSafety]

Alternatively, we are undefeated when our defense allows less points than the opposing team's defense. So really the key will be our defense holding them to a score less than ours.

 

[Oswlek]

Alternatively, we are undefeated when our defense allows less points than the opposing team's defense. So really the key will be our defense holding them to a score less than ours.

Interesting. I've always thought the trick was the offense to score one more point than the other team, but you might be on to something...

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

6 TOs for Pats...15 for colts. Will be 17 for come monday

 

[Nikolai]

6 TOs for Pats...15 for colts. Will be 17 for come monday

That's either a pretty good game for us, or one hell of a tragic evening you're predicting there.

 

[Oswlek]

That's either a pretty good game for us, or one hell of a tragic evening you're predicting there.

I think that's season totals, but it took me a few reads to get it as well.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I think that's season totals, but it took me a few reads to get it as well.

It was...forgot to add it. Opps!

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I'm not sure. Fleener is average at best but Dwayne Allen is developing nicely. Chung may be a candidate for Allen so that may make Collins a candidate. That said, I expect tight coverage and disruption at the line. Given Richardson's struggles, I'd try to force the Colts to run the football.

Bradshaw isn't a great runner...richardson sucks IMO. Load up vs the pass and see if they can run. If they can run..then make a change but they will still most likely pass it 50 times IMO this game as i think the pats jump out early.

Becasue i posted earlier...colts are 14-2 when running or more then 100 yards since 2013 IIRC. If you give them 6-8 yards runs here or there..luck can kill you with PA just like manning. But we shut down Mannings run gave so it made them one dimensional.

Anyone have the breakdown of pass% vs run % this year for the colts?