Thread: QB Preservation Strategy; Run the Ball Tice!....................

Originally Posted by XxMidwayMonstersxX

Burris is wrong again. The Colts never had a bad defense that year. They had an injured defense that year. The offense was able to carry (via Payton Manning, one of the best ever to strap a helmet on) and get them to the playoffs. Bob Sanders and a few others came back and that defense was rock solid. Being bad and gaining momentum isn't the same as being injured and getting players back.

Anyway, what do you guys want to do? Run it 40 + times? Thats a little silly. Also forgot to address the 2 RB set. That is Tice being stubborn and not wanting to use a lead blocker. We got rid of Clutts remember? We don't need to run a 2 back set unless we are goal line.

2 back set = stuffed run.

I don't recall anyone coming back at playoff time other than Sanders. I could be wrong though. I live in Colts country and follow them fairly closely. Sanders was a beast when healthy, so he does make a big impact, but not enough to go from 32nd (I think that's where they stood prior to his return) to a playoff caliber defense.

My point was that we have the potential, and all of the weapons, to be unstopable if the play calling is improved.

Originally Posted by JJ-30

I don't understand why we aren't using more double RB formations, I knopw we are keeping our TE in more to help with the blocking, but are RB know how to block also. Lets use Bush as a lead blocker on some of Forte runs, no one can tell me that big 245 lb moster can't knock Defensers off their feet to give Forte and nice hole. Also by having both RBs in the backfield the Defense can never tell who will get the ball and which way they will be running.

I don't know that any team uses that approach much anymore JJ. When ever you see two guys in the backfield it seems that one of then is invariably just a blocking back. It seems the days of having a FB/RB like Payton had with Harper and Suhey are long past.

But with Jeffery sidelined I think there are opportunities to play them both and use Forte in the slot or in motion to the slot. Overall he's a better choice to throw to on short passes than Hester is and since Davis can't seem to hold onto the ball he's become somewhat useless until he does. Besides his forte is running seam routes or delayed releases from the line where he can catch on the run anyway. Once he has a head of steam up he's a load to bring down.

I also made a suggestion in the Hester thread about how we could design a more effective short passing game using Sanz as opposed to Hester. Force teams to cover the quick slant by taking a Safety out of the box or dropping a LB off into that zone. We always seem to have one man less to block them that we need. I see a lot of plays that could go for big gains if we could take that one extra guy out of the gap or off the edge.

Originally Posted by soulman

I don't know that any team uses that approach much anymore JJ. When ever you see two guys in the backfield it seems that one of then is invariably just a blocking back. It seems the days of having a FB/RB like Payton had with Harper and Suhey are long past.

But with Jeffery sidelined I think there are opportunities to play them both and use Forte in the slot or in motion to the slot. Overall he's a better choice to throw to on short passes than Hester is and since Davis can't seem to hold onto the ball he's become somewhat useless until he does. Besides his forte is running seam routes or delayed releases from the line where he can catch on the run anyway. Once he has a head of steam up he's a load to bring down.

I also made a suggestion in the Hester thread about how we could design a more effective short passing game using Sanz as opposed to Hester. Force teams to cover the quick slant by taking a Safety out of the box or dropping a LB off into that zone. We always seem to have one man less to block them that we need. I see a lot of plays that could go for big gains if we could take that one extra guy out of the gap or off the edge.

I like that.

Soul, not sure why you are so down on Hester. Looking at the two statistically He and Earl are basically interchangable: Hester has 1 more rec on one less target, 1 more TD, and 2 less 1st downs. He's got 3 more catches over 20 yards, and his long is 39 to Bennetts 25. Hesters average is also 3.1 yards more. Again I like Bennett, and I think both are great pieces on the team; but this Hester hate and Bennett love isn't based on this years facts. Hester is every bit as reliable as Bennett is right now. What he lacks is the ability to make the circus catch or the jump ball that Bennett can, but that doesn't mean he should be used less. He's doing his job to a tee. Hell he's even got less dropps on less targets then Bennett, who has the best hands in the league(as of last year).


http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/pl...alse/count/161

RK	PLAYER	TEAM	REC	TAR	YDS	AVG	TD	LONG	20+	YDS/G	FUM	YAC	1DN
122	Devin Hester, WR	CHI	10	19	152	15.2	1	39	4	25.3		32	5
173	Earl Bennett, WR	CHI	9	20	109	12.1		25	1	27.3		27	7

Originally Posted by XxMidwayMonstersxX

Burris is wrong again. The Colts never had a bad defense that year. They had an injured defense that year. The offense was able to carry (via Payton Manning, one of the best ever to strap a helmet on) and get them to the playoffs. Bob Sanders and a few others came back and that defense was rock solid. Being bad and gaining momentum isn't the same as being injured and getting players back.

Anyway, what do you guys want to do? Run it 40 + times? Thats a little silly. Also forgot to address the 2 RB set. That is Tice being stubborn and not wanting to use a lead blocker. We got rid of Clutts remember? We don't need to run a 2 back set unless we are goal line.

2 back set = stuffed run.

It's all about balance MM and play selection. I'll agree with you when you say that when we run versus when we pass looks like a problem too but when you run only 28 times versus 41 passes against a team like Detroit you're running right back into "Martzville" and despite your opinions to the contrary that didn't work. It nearly got Cutler killed and it will again if we keep doing it.

We get through two games where sacks drop only to see them climb right back up to five sacks on Monday night. There would have been more if Cutler hadn't finally decided to use his feet again to get out of trouble.

No matter how you want to shade it a 60/40 mix of passes to runs when you have a defense playing the way ours is can't be justified. That's stupid football.

As I pointed out in another thread what we lack is an effective 3 step drop short passing game to take the pressure off the run as far as moving the ball. Force teams out of 8 men in the box defensive sets by hitting the zone they can't cover when a Safet or an OLB is playing run first defense.

You also can't make your play fakes work effectively when you're not running the ball enough to get then to bite on it. Bottom line is we are not making team pay enough for how they play defense against our offense. If we gonna pass that much than make the needed adjustments in the passing game so that we take advantage of their run stuffing tendencies.

Force them to cover and open up running lanes. Use Bush more instead of passing. The guy is a very good RB. He may not get you 35 yards in one carry like Forte can but he'll get that for you consistently in 7 or 8 carries and keep drives alive whereas Forte makes a long run but gets held to less than 3 ypc on others as a result of too many men in the box shutting down his cutback lanes.

When they do that start running Bush straight at them. We have a power blocking line now that actually fits that style of running better. Forte is a cutback runner and works better with a zone blocking scheme and we're starting to get away from that. His longest run Monday came on an off tackle run where Webb and Rachal pushed there guys back and cleared a hole and Louis pulled and took out the LB. Nothing fancy. Just very good execution.

Both of us could have gained yardage on that play.