Colts' ground game is toughest to stop

[SVN]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...g=coltsgroundgameistoughes&prov=tsn&type=lgns

good article. Greg cossell if iam not mistaken is one of the nfl film guys who breaks down a lot tape.

 

[ALP]

hard to stop eh? post the article again after they play JAC, so we might know if it should be trusted or not

 

[solman]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...g=coltsgroundgameistoughes&prov=tsn&type=lgns

good article. Greg cossell if iam not mistaken is one of the nfl film guys who breaks down a lot tape.

Unlike BB, who focuses heavily on what opponents have been doing recently, most teams focus on what opponents are supposed to be good at.

The Colts used to have the most feared passing attack in the NFL (and they still have an extremely good one), so teams have been focusing on that, and making themselves vulnerable to the run.

No coach wants to go to his post game press conference saying "I wanted to force Peyton to throw the ball"

 

[Zeus]

Can you really say the Colt running game is the best? An interesting test would be to see how Addai and the Colt OL would fare without Manning and his receivers. As it is, I'm pretty sure the Colts never see eight in the box.

The best offenses have balance -they can run and pass. They make you defend the entire field. NE and Indianapolis clearly fit this description. Most likely Dallas does as well.

 

[Deus Irae]

This, of course, was combined with a conservative run-based offensive approach that Denver executed well. The Broncos rushed for 160 yards in the first half. Yet they scored only one touchdown and trailed, 14-13.

Another way to translate this would be: "The Broncos used this approach and were completely successful with it. In fact, had they not settled for field goals instead of touchdowns, they'd have led the Colts 21-14 at the half."

I guess using that approach would undermine the writer's argument though.

 

[Bo0MeR]

Another way to translate this would be: "The Broncos used this approach and were completely successful with it. In fact, had they not settled for field goals instead of touchdowns, they'd have led the Colts 21-14 at the half."

I guess using that approach would undermine the writer's argument though.

Yeah, good thing this writer actually has the sense to count what actually happened and not ifs ands or buts like some other fans

 

[ALP]

Yeah, good thing this writer actually has the sense to count what actually happened and not ifs ands or buts like some other fans

incase, is actually supposed to be in two words...

i.e. "in case"...just thought i had mention it

 

[SVN]

the writer makes good points. Sure we dont like to give credit to their running game but when addai is hurt or james leaves the team we are the first to jump and say its going to hurt their team.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, good thing this writer actually has the sense to count what actually happened and not ifs ands or buts like some other fans

Are you struggling with that whole 'reading' thing again? He's saying that taking this approach doesn't work and using the Donkeys first half as evidence, yet the Donkeys only trailed by 1 point at the half and could have been up by 8 if they'd scored touchdowns instead of field goals.

I wasn't criticizing your beloved Colts, I was pointing out a horrible example being used by the author. He claims that Denver executed well, but doesn't note their failure in execution that resulted in 2 field goals when there were touchdowns to be had. Had Denver not been forced to take those field goals and, instead, gotten touchdowns, that game would have been completely different and his argument would have been in the hopper. Your Colts will suck or not suck, excel or not excel, and win games or lose games, regardless of what the author believes.

 

[He Ban Me]

Are you struggling with that whole 'reading' thing again? He's saying that taking this approach doesn't work and using the Donkeys first half as evidence, yet the Donkeys only trailed by 1 point at the half and could have been up by 8 if they'd scored touchdowns instead of field goals.

I wasn't criticizing your beloved Colts, I was pointing out a horrible example being used by the author. He claims that Denver executed well, but doesn't note their failure in execution that resulted in 2 field goals when there were touchdowns to be had. Had Denver not been forced to take those field goals and, instead, gotten touchdowns, that game would have been completely different and his argument would have been in the hopper. Your Colts will suck or not suck, excel or not excel, and win games or lose games, regardless of what the author believes.

That's kinda how I felt about the Boys and stopping your run. 3rd and 1, deep in Cowboy territory, Morris gets stopped behind the line, had the executed, and finished the play, my guess is you kick a FG on 4th and 3. As it turned, Morris made a great effort to get back to the LOS, then Brady sneaks for a 1st. TD instead of a FG. Coulda been a different ballgame from there.

 

[SVN]

That's kinda how I felt about the Boys and stopping your run. 3rd and 1, deep in Cowboy territory, Morris gets stopped behind the line, had the executed, and finished the play, my guess is you kick a FG on 4th and 3. As it turned, Morris made a great effort to get back to the LOS, then Brady sneaks for a 1st. TD instead of a FG. Coulda been a different ballgame from there.

every game is like that. Pats converted a zillion 3rd and longs in that game which is against the conventional numbers. Just worked out that way. If then else are all part of the game thats what makes it exciting.

If troy brown doesnt strip mcree in SD last yr we lose
If caldwell catches the ball on 3rd down with 3 mins and change to go, we hold on in the AFCCG