Quick thoughts on Colts-Raiders
 

1. One thing I love about this team that doesn't get talked about enough is that -- weird injury bug in early season aside -- guys tend to gut things out and play for the team. TY Hilton guts it out. Ryan Kelly gutted it out today. Jack Doyle actually took a pretty nasty hit to the head on his scoring drive and gutted it out. This roster doesn't have those kinda guys you hear about this time of year who half-ass it and want traded or paid before they try. I trust wherever this team comes up short is on talent, not effort.

2. Andrew Luck had to make a few challenging throws today, and you do have to consider the context of opponents, but I would say the last 2 weeks is the easiest 2-week stretch Luck has ever had playing QB.

3. I see a few people on Twitter saying anyone can succeed with this OL. It's true that this OL has multiplied the value of any RB (and is making a case for the team NOT to sign Bell in the offseason as a result...) But don't underestimate the individual talent on display at RB. Mack's second TD was a tough run wherein he made himself skinny and then lowered the shoulder at the right time to get in. Hines had an all-effort run in a critical situation. Yes, there are a few holes, but Tom Rathman is doing a GREAT job creating genuine talent out of this RB group.

I kinda wonder what this team has in mind for Robert Turbin when he returns. Presumably he'd have had the game's final TD were he healthy?

4. Dontrelle Inman will be overshadowed by the TEs today, but he had a monster hands day. The TD "drop" was asking a bit much of him. Dude caught some LASERS today.

5. I love this offense's use of TEs. Reich and Luck really were made for each other. They consistently use their TEs as good as or better than any other team in the NFL. One of those positions, in this offense, where they can just create talent in scheme.

6. As much as I love this offense, we can probably do without reverses to Zach Pascal and fades to TY Hilton. Don't get too cute. Feels like this team is bound and determined to make the fade to Hilton thing a thing. It's not. Ebron/Swoope/Cox on that route, please.

7. For all the great vibes on offense, I really do have some long-term concerns on defense. I think, on one hand, we saw a scheme without Hooker over top today, and there was a ton of miscommunication on the back end as a result. I think, on the other hand, this scheme still makes any game WAY too easy on QBs. It just seems like they're consistently doing the wrong thing. They're in soft zone when they should either be in tighter zone or man. They're in man when they should be in soft zone. They're blitzing seven when they should be dropping 7-8. They're rushing four but stunting them when they know there's going to be a quick release, so there's no chance of getting to the QB. Etc.

Honestly, yes, I know this team needs another 1-2 drafts on defense. I know they need a genuine pass rusher. I know it's early. But I am concerned about Eberflus' scheme. The completion allowed % is ungodly high, they're consistently giving up TDs where they just drop coverage, and their DBs are rarely in position to make a play.

8. Speaking of DBs not in position to make a play, that's 2 or 3 weeks Nate Hairston has been benched this season now, right? Woof. That kid is STRUGGLING with this scheme. Quincy Wilson started playing over him in the second half, and rightfully so.

9. Obviously, we all love Darius Leonard. And we're intrigued by Anthony Walker, Zaire Franklin etc. Leonard's talent is obvious. But this group as a whole is pretty awful in coverage. Even Leonard. Walker was particularly rough today. Some growing pains, but I think it's fair to mention given how much hype has been surrounding Leonard and Walker of late. Those guys are really rough in their zone drops and movement in the MOF in particular.

10. The DL was pretty awful today. Jabaal Sheard didn't look himself; I wonder how much that injury bothered him. Margus Hunt hasn't had any impact since he hurt his knee, quite honestly. Al Woods was really bad today. Kemoko Turay was quiet. I can't really pick out a ton of positives on the defensive line. If Tyquan Lewis really is as advertised, they need his skillset badly!

11. There's nothing necessarily wrong with Pascal fielding kickoffs, but I can't wait until this team has the luxury of drafting a kick return specialist. And I think Chris Ballard can pick 'em when he has the luxury...

12. Adam Vinatieri not only the GOAT, but the GOAT who will go into Canton as a Colt and not a Patriot. It's the small things...

Ive had an abdominal injury. The first time i farted I thought I was going to die.

Depth and youth would be the biggest problems on defense...not xcheme.

I don't think the NFL designates what team you represent when being inducted into the HOF.

Nobody gives a shit

Running a zone scheme with no pass rushers is an issue and mistake

I think Walker and Leonard fit the scheme as SAM and WILL respectively long term, with the short and long term need being for a good coverage MIKE.

I would have no problem with this. Walker as Sam (who rarely plays) and backup Mlber and we draft a more dynamic player for mlber.

Good point gbb.

I especially agree about the dline. They got abused all game.

We need more talent but the mindset of how to win is starting to develop. A win on the road. Nice

Its really no mystery with the D and not a surprise, something we all anticipated I think

If the DL can't get a pass rush, they get torn apart. The zone coverage and lack of talent in the secondary, especially the corners but then today safeties as well due to injuries, sets this team up to be picked apart by even a decent QB if you give them time.

We all knew this would be a problem. Now the that the OL is much better, its now the weakness of the team and the D in particular : pass rush and corners.

You can't fix a whole team in one or two drafts. I am sure Ballard will work on those areas next. But for the rest of this year, "it is what it is". Luck and the offense is going to need to be putting up 30+ points many weeks to win.

Particularly disappointing this week though was the run D.

If Sheard and Hunt are only limited by injury then that is actually a good thing IMO. The bye week should do them some good. It’s a bit disheartening to see the DL playing like a bunch of nobodies again after such a good start to the season. Not surprising, but disappointing.

I kinda get the impression Eberflus is a front 7 guy and isn’t totally sure what to do about his DBs. Probably need a strong DB coach or maybe a consultant to shore that up. Even with players healthy this secondary is not impressive.

I love having a run game again. It’s the most fun thing I’ve seen in a football game in years. Love it.

Yeah, as much as the secondary was lost at times, it’s hard to play well as a unit when the DL is terrible.

I am guessing sheard and hunt are playing like their norm. Neither are as good as they started this year.

Taking a shit was completely out of the question.

I think Sheard is closer to what we saw last few weeks than yesterday. But I wouldn't be surprised if Hunt is mostly going to be what we saw yesterday, and Tyquan Lewis starts to eat into his reps post-bye (maybe 2-3 weeks post-bye though).

Hunt was very close to having a 2 sack game. Was he otherwise a non-factor? Because pressure on the QB is a big part of what's expected from the 3 tech in this defense.

Excellent analysis GBB, thank you. The above comment struck me as particularly notable. Would anyone have imagined that people would be saying “anyone can succeed with this OL” even a year ago? The transformation of the OL is just staggering.

It still sounds absurd to me. When I think Colts OL I still think Satele, McGlynn, Olsen, Cherilus, Thornton, Shipley, etc.

Credit to Ballard for (finally) bringing in players that can do it. But also credit to Reich, Sirianni, and OL coach Dave DeGuglielmo. He said early on that the OL weren't confident, were down on themselves, they still had loser stink on them. That seems gone, especially with Castonzo back and playing well on the left side.

I can’t really comment much on individual technique, but play design and the overall offensive concepts have certainly helped the OL tremendously. With the last regime they had the worst of both worlds - lack of talent and schemes that didn’t compensate or acknowledge that weakness. Addressing one without the other would have improved the situation, but addressing both has turned a weakness into a strength. Good to see the GM and coach appear to be on the same page.

Whatever we spent to develop this line was more than worth it. Thing is teams with offensive lines that can do this (I understand it was against two lousy teams, but we have played plenty of lousy teams the past 10 year and never have we run over them like we are now) win in January. It's beyond incredible to watch us no longer be a finesse team. I never thought I'd live to see this. Love it.

He was pushed off the line pretty easily (Colts run defense wasn't exactly encouraging yesterday), and "he had a hand on his shoulder pad twice" isn't any endorsement of good play. It's the same thing we slaughtered Tarrell Basham for. Not putting Hunt in that same category, to be clear, but whereas he spent the CIN/WAS/PHI games living in the backfield and bullying the OL, he's been consistently stymied or pushed off the line ever since his knee injury.

Yes, agree x 1000....I didn't see the post game presser but heard that Gruden said the colts oline were "imposing their will on us".

Hunt and Sheard have to play at their talent ceiling for this DL to be good. Both are good players that should be parts of a rotation, not featured. We need a #1 pass rusher, a better NT, and another Sheard/Hunt-level player. Lewis might be that, hopefully he is.

This line would be better if Hankins, Anderson, and Simon were still on it.

And partly accidental considering the right side

Yeah I've thought about that. Everyone's going on about how Ballard fixed the OL. Reich figured out the OL. Etc. I've said it too. But the intended RG and RT were Slauson and Good, right? It would've been better if they'd figured out the best combo in camp. But whatever, it's working now and it's fun to watch.

I’d agree, but considering the injuries it’s hard to knock them. To me it actually makes it more impressive.

I’ll only agree with you to a limited extent on this statement. There’s no denying that Ballard selected Smith and signed Glowinski, so there’s no accident there. Someone posted a quote a few days ago, however, that he feels he got “lucky” with regard to Smith because he didn’t really view him as RT. So you’re right to this extent.

On this last point, did anything during the Raiders game change your view at all that Good or Clark would be a better fit at RT?

Hankins was abusing our O-Line on a couple of running plays yesterday. Just crushing gaps or getting off blocks to make the play.

You cannot tell me that he would not have fit in our 4 - 3. If Woods and Hunt fit, Hankins would have too.

Spilled milk but I agree that our D-line roation would be better with all three those guys.

Walk Worthy,

These are nice numbers

-Marlon Mack: 5.3 YPC (25 carries for 132 yards)
-Nyheim Hines: 7.1 YPC (11 carries for 78 yards)
-Jordan Wilkins: 7.0 YPC (2 carries for 14 yards)

I'm going to have a hard time giving any Raiders defender (ESPECIALLY defensive linemen) props for that performance.

What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

By the way, it occurs to me that Ballard has been very effective obtaining street free agents that can be significant contributors to this team – Glowinski, Mitchell and now (potentially) Inman come immediately to mind.

HE DIDNT WANT TO PLAY IN A 4-3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I hope all the other teams "abuse" us for 200 + rushing yards the rest of the way!

Why do you say this? Hankins’ name was mentioned a few times during yesterday’s game, but it doesn't seem to me that he’s a standout by any stretch of the imagination. His stat line looks unimpressive, and the Raiders defense as a team is giving up over 31 points a game (2nd worst), nearly 5 yards a carry (4.9 YPC, 4th worst in the league) and 6.7 yards a play (the worst). I’ll admit that these stats don’t reflect upon him uniquely, but what do you see that makes you think Hankins is anything better that what we currently have? And remember that he would have cost us nearly $9 million to keep, and he only got $2 million on the open market.

Simon is a backup for New England.

Anderson is playing fairly well I suppose for the Jets, but historically he had been injury prone with the Colts and hadn’t really been a standout since his rookie year.

It doesn't matter what they're doing for their new teams. How did they fit here? How did they play here? How is THIS team doing on the DL without them?

Hankins played well here. He is better than any NT on the roster. Better than Woods. Better than Stewart. You are right he was due some money. But we are drowning in cap space.

Anderson is better than anything Autry has shown so far. Autry is not young and was a FA acquisition, and is making more money than Anderson. I guess not everything is about saving money is it.

Simon proved he was better AND was a harder worker than Tarrell "Healthy Scratch" Basham.

Right now the DL needs Hunt and Sheard to play at their highest level to be any good. Autry is not a difference-maker, Turay is young and still learning, Ward is on IR, the rest of them are JAGs.

Chaka, for fucks sake. Every comment about a potential roster mistake is not a personal attack against you. Ballard is not your dad.

Are you sure. Look at both their pictures. It COULD be his dad. Just saying....... not impossible.

Because he is right! I understand that Hankins did not want to play in a 4-3 defense. But Anderson for a 7th round pick really pissed me off. What the hell are we going to get with a 7th rounder who is better than Anderson? Simon did play well for us.

I see people are still debating moves strictly in the context of "would it have made the 2018 team better?"

To clarify for everyone, Ballard is not my dad. Seriously, though, if my comments come off as though I have been offended by yours or anyone else’s comments, then I’m not expressing myself well at all. I am genuinely interested in your responses to my questions because I genuinely want to understand your position. I agree that I’ve ended up defending Ballard quite a bit, but that’s because you’ll have to admit that until recently the prevailing opinion seemed to be that he was throwing away multiple seasons, and was making poor draft and personnel decisions. I happen to strongly disagree with that line of thinking, and the strict businesslike approach he’s taking to running the team really appeals to me. I think it literally gives us a competitive advantage, and that advantage will become more and more apparent as time goes on.

As a result, I’ll usually challenge opinions to the contrary if they’re not explained in a way that makes sense to me. There’s a lot of smart people on this board, and lots who know WAY more than me about the X’s and O’s, so I’m interested in what all of you have to say – particularly when it sounds way out of line to me. But I’m certainly open to the idea that the guy makes mistakes, and the concept (however remote) that I might not be correct either.

In your comment, you simply said that we’d be better with Hankins, Simon and Anderson. Since there was no explanation for this statement, I asked for more detail, and in the process laid out my thinking on the issue so you could respond. You provided more info for me to consider in your response. Based upon that response, I can now decide whether I think your original comments have any merit or not (FYI the verdict is in - they do not as to Hankins and Simon, but maybe some as to Anderson/Autry).

Look, it wouldn’t be very fun if everyone just posted their gripes and complaints here, and then everyone else just agreed. If that’s all everyone hears then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone needs the perspective that comes from genuine, respectful disagreement (or even disrespectful agreement that has actual substance). As I think you mentioned in a prior post, responses consisting only of insults are not useful. I’ve tried to provide meaningful detail when I post - much to your dismay given the length of some of my admittedly long posts – but that’s only so that people will provide equally detailed responses and the discussion will have some useful substance.

I’ll happily sit this one out. I’ll save it for the debates that will occur if the team falls 1-2 games shy of a division title and playoff birth.