Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
I’m not suggesting he needs to be more aggressive, I’m saying it is very likely a big factor in his decision making. And one that I agree with.
I see two issues with your argument. One is that you are putting the turnovers on Franks play calling. I definitely disagree. The sack / fumble maybe. I don’t really agree, but ok. Pascals fumble? Hines fumble? The first interception? No I don’t think there was anything wrong with those play calls. It was all execution.
The second issue is you are wrong on the offense putting the defense in holes in the TB game. I’ve posted it, but go look at the drive lengths in the TB touchdowns. There are no 30 yd TD drives. No 40 yarders. No 50 yarders. The shortest one was 65 yards - 10 yards less than a touchback. Against Baltimore the shortest TD drive was 68 yds. It’s just an inaccurate statement.
I just still find it strange that the Colts rank as one of the top offenses and a mediocre / bad defense (except takeaways), yet everyone wants to put the failures on the offensive play calling.
|
o
I am not putting the turnovers on Frank's play-calling. I don't know where you got that idea. I am putting the turnovers on the players (both on offense and the special teams.) My critique was of the turnovers themselves, not that of Reich's play-calling. You said that Frank needs to be aggressive on offense, and I pointed out that Reich was about as aggressive as he could be on offense ..... although, I admittedly misunderstood you when I thought that you were suggesting that he be more aggressive than he already was.
Regarding the turnovers, your point is taken as to where they turned the ball over on the field, but any kind of turnover almost always affects the position that the defense is put in. The first is the obvious ...... turning the ball over deep in your own territory immediately puts the opponent in chip-shot field goal range and/or touchdown range. But even if you turn the ball over while you are deep in your opponents' territory, that affects the defense too in that it takes sure points off of the board. It doesn't affect the defense as much as turning it over deep in your own territory, but the score of the game does affect not only the defense, but the team overall ...... the other side of that same coin would be in some of the years in which Peyton Manning played, when he and the Colts' offense would get an early lead that would allow Freeney, Mathis, and company to tee off on the opposing offenses. The cushion/lead that the team had allowed the defense to take more chances and be more aggressive. The defense needs to be judged on its play first and foremost, but the score of the game (including taking sure points off of the board by turning the ball over when you have at least a field goal in your pocket) affects the defense also, albeit to a lesser degree.
So perhaps we are more in agreement than I initially thought in the first place, or as you thought so in the second place.
o