Our Defense is still the weak link.

we need to start better. you have to wonder just how many times you can fall behind because you give up two long tds and still win the game.

 

Its how you finish on the score board that matters.

Our defense held the best offense in the NFL to 17 points and we won the game.

Now thats results that mean something.

 

i understand that, but you're putting your entire team in a whole when you give up two tds like that.

we've outscored people 41-3 in the second half the past two weeks. just how long can we do that? we need a more complete game from both sides of the ball.

 

If we are playing cover 2 we shouldn't be giving up those long pass plays. However, I agree. Hard to say much bad about the defense the last 3 games. It also helps when our offense converts 3rd downs and keeps the other team off the field which helped the D big time Sunday.

Add in that the Colts we stupid not opening the game up more because running the ball helped us by keeping the clock running and putting them in 3rd down situations. I bet if Manning threw the ball on all three downs over 90% of the time he gets a first down. They completed 75% of their passes despite Harrison missing a well thrown ball that ended up being intercepted by Sirmon. Stokely missed a pass he should have caught and there was at least one other drop I remember. The colts ended up with the same number of running plays as passing plays for the game which took the ball out of Manning's hands IMO.

 

Well....a lot!

Criticizing the D isn't about THIS particular game.

Yes, we had a solid game plan though we were lacking in some areas both in concept and personel.

First of all, we were very lucky to win that game. The Titans certainly played hard and had an incredible win, but we still gave up a ton of yards and if not for 2 bad plays that were all the Colts doing, we lose that game.

Harrison shouldn't have run out of bounds and should have scored. But even after he didn't, if Utecht didn't push off, they probably score a TD there.

Point is, without our offense doing an EXCELLENT job of controlling the clock in the second half, this is a different game.

I liked the idea of playing a 4-3 zone against their 3 WR set (though they ran well against this inexplicably in the first half). Better yet was going to a 3-4 look. Considering Conover is a backup player, wouldn't it be smarter to actually stay in a 3-4 with Haynesworth at NT and Smith and KVB at DE with the 4 LB's being Bulluck and Thornton on the outside with Sirmon and Tulloch on the inside?

And when we get these guys into 3rd and long, WHY is LT in the middle of the field and Pac playing the short zone at 5 yards? Have LT drop down into the flat and let our BETTER secondary players play the deep zone when they need 10-15 yds? And for that matter, why is LT on the field? Lowry looked good on that one play....so why did he play so little when the thing you fear about playing a young S is happening to LT almost every game?

Again, this comes down to scheme (in putting the best players in the best position to make plays). I don't blame Schwartz for players not executing a D (unless there is a recurring theme ala LT)...but there is still much to be desired from a personel/scheme perspective.

Furthermore, when the concept of shifting to a 3-4 was brout up previously, Schwartz basically said it couldn't be done (even though several other teams were successfully doing it). I guess it can...

We can not rely on the offense to hold the ball for most of a half. And if you want a serious playoff team, you need at worst a middle of the pack D. We have the talent for that, but not the production....even in a great win vs the Colts.

How often do you expect to give up 400yds of offense and win a game?

Gut

 

Agreed.

We've been going into emergency mode so many times this season because of the way we start games. We have won some and lost many when playing in this mode. I guess its like playing roullette. We either win or tie a game with a final drive or field goal or risk a loss.

We have to take control of the game early instead of gamble and play the way we've been playing for the second half of the last 4 games, and the way we've been playing during the first half of much of the first 6 games of this season.

I guess consistancy is the name of the game. I hope experience will fix this.

 

Well...

I haven't looked back at all our games, but I think you'll find that the vast majority of the time we give up 400 yards on offense, we lose....and THAT is the problem.

And the LT mind cramps are nothing new...they are a regular feature of the defenses problems. So why take them out? If you were the Colts, you'd have a better argument in taking out Harrison's mind cramp of not scoring (since he almost always does). Also the Colts managing to get an offensive pass interference call from the 1 yd line. You're not gonna get that very often either.

Point is, we played hard but also needed some 'luck.' Without several breaks going our way, we probably lose the game. But even in winning, we had defensive problems that keep happening! And that, is my problem.

If you took our stats for this game and projected it for a full season, we STILL don't have a good defense...we gave up 451 yards of offense. They also scored TD's on 3 out of their first 5 possessions. Is that great D?

On their ONLY 3 possessions of the second half (thanks to our offense), they hurt themselves with penalties on 2 of those drives and still had a chance to take the lead.

The defense has played better and after numerous tries and numerous examples of how to attack the Colts offense, Schwrtz is finally getting a clue though a lot of improvement is still needed. Do we have to wait for a Pro Bowler at EVERY position before we get a middle of the pack D?

Gut