The Colts' offense on the other hand...
is great and recovered from the 17 pt. 1st qtr deficit (even when their lousy defense allowed 11 more points). You see, getting interceptions (and even scoring) is not what makes a defense good or great. Stopping an opposing team from gaining yards is what makes a defense great. If you play against a strong team (for instance, one with healthy starters and coaches), you won't always be able to get those interceptions. Interceptions always depend at least a little on the quarterback or the receiver screwing up to an extent. Stopping the other team's offense is a much more reliable and sensible way to win than using a razzle-dazzle offense to put thiry- or forty-some points on the board in the second half.
Anyways, I'm glad the Rams lost, because I'm a Seahawks fan. And I do look forward to seeing the Colts get taken down a notch, but since they have two bye-weeks in a row, that will probably have to wait until November.
Ouch! While looking for the above link, I found out that Seahawks safety Ken Hamlin was brutally assaulted by some idiots at a nightclub. I think the weak defense of 'Hawks will be even weaker for it, but then, sometimes phenomenal players are discovered coming off the bench.
Backlog Bob
P.S. I forgot how much I enjoy writing about football. I'll probably do picks next week.
Anyways, I'm glad the Rams lost, because I'm a Seahawks fan. And I do look forward to seeing the Colts get taken down a notch, but since they have two bye-weeks in a row, that will probably have to wait until November.
Ouch! While looking for the above link, I found out that Seahawks safety Ken Hamlin was brutally assaulted by some idiots at a nightclub. I think the weak defense of 'Hawks will be even weaker for it, but then, sometimes phenomenal players are discovered coming off the bench.
Backlog Bob
P.S. I forgot how much I enjoy writing about football. I'll probably do picks next week.
posted by weblogbob83 at 2:51 AM
4 Comments:
Wrong. The Colt's defense is good. Very good. They are number one or two in every defensive category except yardage. Forced fumbles, interceptions, sacks, defensive touchdowns, and most importantly, points allowed. Even after giving up 28 points Monday night, they still are averaging less than 10 points allowed per game.
And look at what happened last night. They gave up one solid drive to start the game. That's 7 points. Special teams fumbled the ball on the next kickoff and the Rams got the ball inside the Colts' 30. The defense held and the Rams had to settle for a field goal. That's 10 points, only 7 of which can really be blamed on the defense. Next drive the defense gives up a big play, 57 yard pass for a TD. 17 points total, 14 of which to blame on the defense. The Rams' next 7 possessions? INT, Punt, FG (from 49 yards away), Fumble, INT, Punt, INT. That's an excellent for any defense. Four takeaways, two punts and a very long field goal. The Rams' last possession was a TD drive in garbage time on a defense mostly likely playing simply to prevent a big play and use a lot of clock time. The defense forced the Rams to use nearly 5 of the 8 minutes remaining to score 8 when they needed 25.
The Colts' defense is talented, and capable of big plays. Big plays don't lend themselves to the kind of consistancy that guarantees a low score.
The Rams were badly hurt by the absence of their head coach and the loss of their best qb early in the game. And yet they gained a lot of yardage. If the Colts play a good, healthy offense, they will probably rely heavily on their own great offense to outscore them in a pointsfest. And that won't happen if they're playing in the cold. Lucky for them they won't play two outdoor games in the north between now and the postseason (or between now and next year's preseason if they have the best record in the NFL, which they might, because they'll be playing in warm, toasty indoor or southern stadia almost all season and in the Super Bowl, if they get there).
Anyways, expect the Bengals and the Seahawks to score a bunch on their vaunted defense, unless they have major personnel changes to their offenses in the meantime. And expect their (the Colts') offense to look much lamer than usual in their nighttime appearance at Foxborough, even though it's in early Nov. (I think it will be really nippy because it'll be at night. And in Massachusetts.)
Anyways, that's a while in the future, and I'm reticent enough about the future that even though I've already written my picks for the next week, I'm not going to post them until Saturday, because I want to know first if someone gets injured, or if a whole team debauches themselves and draws upon themselves the wrath of God, or something like that. I'll email you my picks if you want, though.
Bottom line: I don't put half as much stock in INT's as everyone else does, at least not as predictors of future success. They're a big help in the game you're in, but you might not get any in the next game, and if you can't stop the team from getting yards because you're always blowing your coverage hoping for a big play, you're going to lose against serious, well-coached teams.
I dunno. I'd say that six games is a pretty good sample. Roughly 40% of the season. And, what do you know? The Colts are the best in the league at preventing points. An average of fewer than 10 per game. Before the St Louis game, fewer than 6 per game.
Seattle might well score a bunch on Indy, because by that time Indy could have home field advantage through the play-offs wrapped up and be resting their starters.
Regarding Cincy, Indy looks to be in good shape there, I think. Indy has played a marginally stronger schedule so far when comparing combined opponent records, 13-20 for Indy to 11-21 for Cincy. They have also played 3 of the same teams: Cleveland, Tennessee and Jacksonville. Against those teams Cincy allowed 13, 23 and 23 points and won the first two. Indy allowed 6, 10 and 3 and won each game.
And finally, about NE, I think Indy looks good for that game too. After all, NE's only home loss comes at the hands of the Chargers who play most of their games on the frozen tundra of San Diego.
I'm no big fan of the Pats, but some of their infirmary-like roster might have recovered by then. Also, the Chargers haven't proved over the last two years that they can't play in the cold - the Colts have. And how cold was it when SD played there anyway?
So the Colts will lose any time it's less than 50 degrees Fahrenheit, but in early November, it might not be that cold, even in Foxborough at night.
But back to my original point: INT's work sometimes, sometimes they don't. But the Colts have yet to stop a good offense from gaining lots of yardage, which is a much better defensive strategy if you're picking between the two. You're not telling me anything new with the whole "they don't allow many points" argument. I wrote the article because I noticed (a week or two ago) that they allowed the fewest points of any team in the league, and I thought at that point that their D must be the best, until I researched a little more, and found out that they're about in the middle of the league in yardage allowed - at the time not having played a great offense, and having the yards allowed stat depressed by the turnovers they cause (and would be unable to cause against a more competent team).
All I'm trying to say is: an offense like the Seahawks' or the Bengals' or the Chiefs' or the Broncos' or the Chargers' or healthy Steelers, is capable of scoring a lot against the first-string Colt defense, and a second-string Rams offense pointed out a lot of their flaws.
The Colts have an excellent chance at winning the Super Bowl, but that's because
1) their awesome (when warm) offense will be playing in the south or indoors in every game except the one in Foxborough, all the way through the Super Bowl (unless they unexpectedly have to visit someone in the playoffs), and their Jekyll/Hyde toasty/cold difference won't be an issue.
2) no team in the league is well-roundedly good this year. The Steelers come close, and if the Colts continue to get lucky when they bet yards against turnovers, they might look like it.
On the other hand, the Colts look a lot like the Bengals: good offense, flashy, turnover-based defense. The Bengals might be able to beat the Colts at their own game, especially if the Colts have unforeseen problems.
Also, a scheme like the Colts' is really vulnerable to the loss of one man. (If Manning or James or June goes out, they're likely sunk in the playoffs. It wouldn't take a disaster wiping out all three.)
Second bottom line: I'm not saying that the Colts are going to lose, I'm just saying that if I had to choose between the Bears' defense and the Colts' I'd choose the Bears D, but I'd try to have a running game too. I mean you do have to score at some point to win, and you won't always be playing against Detroit or a God-cursed team like Minnesota.
Post a Comment
<< Home