4th and 8 was my 62-7 moment for the Ballard/Steichen regime.
 

Generally, I am much slower than most of this fanbase to the "Fire (insert coach or GM here)!" sentiment if I think said coach or GM is good at their job, and I think replacing them carries substantial risk of downgrading. The only coach or GM I can ever remember being quicker than most to the fire them bandwagon is Ryan Grigson, and that is because I think most of the members of this message board could've done better as a GM than he did in his tenure. Back in 2011, sentiment quickly built to fire Jim Caldwell and Bill Polian. I was not on board with that, because I thought that losing the best QB to ever play the game had a lot more to do with the 2011 results than an inability to evaluate or improve talent.

Then 62-7 happened.

That game made it clear that the team quit on Caldwell. Yes, the Saints were good, but even an outmanned team that was trying or cared wouldn't have allowed that result. The fact that they did made me realize that Caldwell had lost the locker room, and even if he was a good coach (which I believe he went on to prove he was for the Lions), he wasn't the right coach for this team moving forward. I still didn't like the idea of firing Polian, but clean front office breaks are easier to make, especially after a 2 win season.

That brings me to today. I've generally thought that Chris Ballard is a good talent evaluator, and Shane Steichen has shown the ability to get more out of an offense than any coach should be able to get. I still believe those things.

But this? This is unacceptable. You are on the road, facing what will likely be one of the best teams in the league, with one of the best QBs of all-time, AND you just got bailed out of a horrible turnover in the redzone. It's 4th and 8 on the 18 yard line, and you're down by 3. You have 2 options; either kick the field goal and pray that one of the best QBs to ever do it won't lead a field goal drive in over 3 minutes when he's done that in 13 seconds in much higher pressure situations, or rely on the strength of your team, your offense, to convert a difficult down and distance on a short field and get you the game winning score, never allowing that QB to get another opportunity to beat you. The first option is cowardly and foolhardy, because the best result you get in most cases is a tie, but very likely since Mahones is on the other team, you lose. The second option is not a great option, but it gives you the best chance to win the game, and it is much more palatable to go down swinging than to kick a field goal and pray you won't die the inevitable death of a thousand cuts that follows.

Steichen chose the first option. The cowardly, foolhardy option is the one he chose. The result was more predictable than fireworks on the Fourth of July in America. Mahomes gets the ball back, promptly marches down the field, and the Chiefs kick a game winning field goal. That decision showed me that Shane is not ready to make the tough but right call in a pressure situation. So even though there is likely a substantial risk of downgrade in replacing him, I believe that if the Colts don't go deep into the playoffs this year, the regime should change, because while they might be good, they're not what the team needs right now. And I don't think this team is capable of that with a head coach who looks at that 4th and 8 from the opponent's 18 yard line in overtime and decides, "Let's let one of the 5 best QBs in NFL history on the opposing sideline determine the outcome of this game," instead of taking the outcome out of his hands entirely.

I kinda disagree. If he went for it on 4th and 8 and came up short, game over and the criticism would have been louder than the fans at Arrowhead were all night. To me, the mistake happened earlier just after NYC gave the Colts life after the long completion and near fumble. With the Chiefs selling out to stop the run, the Colts ran twice bringing up 3rd and 13. At 3rd and 13, the Chiefs were all about stopping the pass. 3 plays and the Colts ran the play the Chiefs were defending on each and every one. The Colts are not a juggernaut on offense that can ignore what the defense is doing and still dominate. Either first or second down should have been play action. That's where the defense was weakest at that time.

I feel bad for the players, they played well enough to win this game

The three plays before the 4 and 8 were more egregious to me than going for the FG....my only concern with replacing Steichen with a better coach are the people choosing his replacement.

Yeah, I disagree with that, especially since it was 4th and 8. If it’s 4th and 5 or less, that’s a different story.

At 4th and 8 while down 3, they had to kick the field goal.

I have to go with Dam on this, but i agree with others that the first two down calls sucked big time. I was on the fence about Stiechen, never liked that he appears to give control of the defense to another dude, but this convinced me he must go. Nobody is happy with this sequence except the Chiefs

It wasn’t 62-7 bad for me but I would’ve absolutely went for it there

Throw it up to Warren

How they got to 4th. & 8 bothered me more than the field goal. 4th. & 5 or less, sure I am going for it. Defense played well enough to stop them, but it is Mahomes and the game on the line. I liked his chances of scoring better than I liked ours to stop him. So far with the Gardner trade it is looking more and more like the Jets fleeced us.

Joel Erickson from the Indy Star was bitching about the fanbase being reactive to results and not having appreciation for context, and I get that to some extent. But we've been sensitive to context for years, upon years, upon years now. It's made no difference.

I give them 4-6 weeks personally. If there's not some huge turnaround I believe it'll be difficult not to fire them mid-season. People are done.

If you go for it on 4th and 8 and don’t make it, you’re going to be flayed for your monumental stupidity.

For everyone bitching about the run on 1st down, I pose the simple question…why didn’t Jones audible out of the play? I suppose that the crowd noise made calling an audible precarious, but you have 2 timeouts. Blow through one of them.

I agree there would have been second guessing if he went for it and failed. It still would have likely focused on the play calling of the first 3 downs. Because EVERYONE knew if they kicked a field goal they would lose. Every fan. The announcers. And I’m sure the players as well.

Your questions are valid and we don’t know the answers. At best the answers change the discussion from them being scared to them being unprepared for the moment. Either way is an indictment of team leadership. I could understand it more if they had a young QB in there but DJ is a vet. So is he not capable of changing the play, not allowed, or was it not even a thought for him or the staff? None of the answers will make me feel better about it.

After studying all the finger pointing this morning I am nearing the conclusion that neither Steichen or Jones are cerebral enough to sustain success in their respective roles.

If the Colts had gone for it and not converted on 4th and 8, that's a decision worth defending. You're taking a chance to win the game, and taking control of the outcome of the game completely away from the other team's best player. Whether you convert or fail on 4th and 8, Patrick Mahomes has zero influence on the game's outcome in that situation. How many teams would've killed for a situation like that against the Peyton Manning led Colts?

o


That may be true for Steichen ...... but I suspect that it may not be true for Jones.

I think Jones' problem is not so much a lack of brains, but rather a lack of courage to defy his head coach when said head coach orders a play-call that is highly flawed.

When Bill Walton was a senior at UCLA and his team had their 88-game win-streak snapped by a monumental and historic comeback by Notre Dame, he said that he thought that calling a timeout in the middle of Notre Dame's 10-0 run was needed ...... but he didn't do it, because John Wooden did not believe in calling time-outs when under duress ...... Wooden asserted that they were UCLA, and UCLA was the team that forced other teams to call time-outs under duress, not the other way around. Wooden felt that calling time out under duress was an admission of defeat.

When talking about that game many years later, Walton said that at that time he had not yet learned that it is better to be chastised for doing the right thing on the spot than to avoid criticism after the fact by obeying orders ...... Walton was plenty smart enough to know what to do, but the 21 year-old college senior was not experienced in life enough yet to summon up the courage to buck his head coach's orders.

The difference with Daniel Jones is that he is not a 21 year-old college senior like Bill Walton was back then, he is a 29 year-old veteran pro quarterback who needs to stop acting as though he is the former in certain crucial situations.

o

I don't agree with that premise. If they go for it on 4th and 8, the defense is built in. The defense is: that's Patrick Mahomes on the other sideline, we were 18 yards away from a score that wins us the game and doesn't give him any more chances to win it. That's not stupid, it's choosing to go down swinging rather than giving Mahomes any more chances. If anyone second guessed that decision, they don't understand football.

Colts defense was beyond gassed they were on the field majority of the 2nd half…

You gotta let your offense win or lose that game.

So weird it almost seems like they expected to score on the long pass and didn’t have a plan if they didn’t get a TD out of it

I would not have had a problem had he gone for the win on 4th and 8, in fact when they lined up my thoughts were respect for not playing for the tie. But had he gone and failed I would still have criticized the two runs on first and second down. I think once he squandered those two downs and then whatever that 3rd down call was....going for the FG seemed no more stupid than what he had done the 3 plays before.

I still think anyone super upset with kicking the FG is missing the forest (the previous plays in the series) for the trees (the FG).

ummm what?

on the 2 run plays, Jones has to be allowed to check out of the run. period. we weren't going anywhere against that front.

but yeah. all that said, still go for it on 4th and 8

It’s got to be tiring being run over and around all day.

Fair question. Let me rephrase it. They played well enough in spurts to stop them. As a whole they were inept. They did have a couple series where they looked ok, so they could, but they didn't.

Correct, Jones has to own the offense and get out of bad plays. If Steichen only had 1 play call, then shame on him.

Does anyone know of how often if ever, Jones audibles out of a play called by the Coach?

That was the Belichek defense when he went for it on fourth and 2. Everone agreed with him at the time.

I shied away from using that example because honestly in that situation I feel like Belichick actually would've had a better chance in that game had he punted.

There's a huge difference between going for it on 4th and 2 with the GOAT at QB and going for it on 4th and 8 with DJ. Here's a quick list

BB > Steichen
Brady > DJ
Patriots offense > Current Colts offense
4th and 2 easier to convert than 4th and 8

Add one more:

2009 Patriots D >> 2026 Colts D

Patriots had a much better shot of stopping the Colts than the Colts did of stopping Mahomes and KC.

Nothing you wrote is false. However, my point was that SS would have been given more of a pass for going for it and not getting it than he did for how it played out. Same as BB got a pass for not punting to the real GOAT, Peyton.

o


When Bill Belichick went for it on 4th-and-2, he was not going for it because of Tom Brady ...... he was going for it because of Peyton Manning.

If Matt Cassell had been the Patriots QB in the same exact situation, I would bet $100 that Belichick still would have went for it ...... he didn't want to give the ball back to Peyton Manning with the game on the line if he could avoid it.

And if Anthony Richardson or Daniel Jones had been the Colts' QB in that same exact situation, I believe that Belichick would have punted ...... regardless of whether or not Tom Brady was his quarterback.


I think that it was the right call, largely because it gave the Patriots 2 chances to win the game ...... either by getting the 1st down, or by stopping Manning on a short, compacted field. If he had punted the ball, the only chance that the Patriots would have had would have been to stop Manning on a long, open field with 2 minutes to play.

o

I believe there's a difference between crossing the goal line and where the line to gain is on the rest of the field. When the pass was caught, the receiver was in the air and probably past the line to gain. He was met there and pushed back and his progress when he landed was short of the first down. Had he been at the goal line, a TD would have been awarded because once the ball breaks the goal line, the play is over.
That was the explanation and I buy it.

o

Maybe he was short of the 1st down, but that was hardly the overall point of my post.

o

Belicheck didn't have Manning, he was facing Manning.

I don’t blame them for not going for 4th and 8. That’s a low percentage win rate when you have a tie score sitting in front of you to take. He goes for it a lot, many times it’s backfired and he should have been conservative. This is just the NFL now. Almost all games are close and decided by a few plays. Luck plays a big factor.

I’ll tell you what you can control and would have influenced the game. Turnovers. Stop the turnovers and you will see better outcomes. Take care of the ball, that’s something you can control.

Steichen said he was trying to run clock


which is absolutely retarded. so he was cool to run into a 9 man box

DJ should audible out of that. They were selling out to stop the run. But honestly even if they score they still have to stop Mahomes.

I ask again, does DJ ever audible?

I didn't say he had Manning, I said he had the GOAT. I love Manning, but when all is said and done, Brady not Manning is the GOAT.

What the fuck did you just say?

Puck, we, the most devout of Colts fans, demand you immediately remove this man from the forum! Ed, many many many years of admiring your posts, but dude...

I am old, I think we're pretty close in age from what I recall. Perhaps we can attribute this blasphemy to senility???? Perhaps a recent violent car accident? C'mon, give us something to hang this terrible take on!

No way in hell is Brady the GOAT. Pure passing ability he isn't in the same league as a slew of players, he wasn't a transformative player that changed how the position was played and if you're basing it on winning then lets talk us some Otto Graham-ten years in pro football, ten championships.

o


Graham was in 10 consecutive championships. His teams won 7, and lost 3.

Point taken, though.


Bart Starr was in 6 world championship games in 8 years between 1960 through 1967 ...... his teams won 5, and lost 1.

o