Bocephuz Posted September 9, 2015 Author Posted September 9, 2015 Nope...they hit 193 on opening day last year with lesser RBs, a lesser OL, and low-brow play-calling. This is to say nothing of the fact that we have a dual-threat QB. Figuring we could get 30 yds or so from Tyrod.. definitely take the over
mabden Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 Go ahead Colts and contain the edges....watch Sammy destroy the middle of the field and Clay burn the seams for at least 1 TD... each. Fixed
Blokestradamus Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 I think they've got better up front with Anderson and Parry starting but they're both rookies. One thing not to overlook is that they practiced every day against that Stanford power run offense. Roman will obviously throw stuff at them that they're unfamiliar with but they're not exactly unfamiliar with the concepts. I still think we've got the advantage over them and should be able to run the ball consistently on them.
YoloinOhio Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) I think they've got better up front with Anderson and Parry starting but they're both rookies. One thing not to overlook is that they practiced every day against that Stanford power run offense. Roman will obviously throw stuff at them that they're unfamiliar with but they're not exactly unfamiliar with the concepts. I still think we've got the advantage over them and should be able to run the ball consistently on them. though they both came from Stanford, Hamilton and Roman have different offenses. Indy doesn't even carry a FB on the roster. Fleener isn't a quality blocking TE. Their Guards are not good run blockers. Hamilton wants to run the ball, and they will if the defense gives them that. But against good defenses he tends to just air it out and be very aggressive. Because he can. Edited September 9, 2015 by YoloinOhio
Blokestradamus Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 though they both came from Stanford, Hamilton and Roman have different offenses. Indy doesn't even carry a FB on the roster. Fleener isn't a quality blocking TE. Their Guards are not good run blockers. Hamilton wants to run the ball, and they will if the defense gives them that. But against good defenses he tends to just air it out and be very aggressive. Because he can. I was talking more about their days at Stanford rather than what they've gone up against since getting drafted.
YoloinOhio Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 I was talking more about their days at Stanford rather than what they've gone up against since getting drafted. i thought you were referring to the Indy D practicing against a version of our offense. Misread - sorry. Yes, I agree. Similar concepts.
John from Riverside Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 This just feels like a game where we control the game on the ground.....make Luck sit a lot........and just try to get points of some form on every series.
Blokestradamus Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 i thought you were referring to the Indy D practicing against a version of our offense. Misread - sorry. Yes, I agree. Similar concepts. No worries. I could've phrased it better. It shouldn't be a big thing, just something that interests me. I like David Parry because he favourited one of my AJ Tarpley tweets.
YoloinOhio Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 No worries. I could've phrased it better. It shouldn't be a big thing, just something that interests me. I like David Parry because he favourited one of my AJ Tarpley tweets. they are comparing Parry to Kyle Williams in Indy. Both 5th rounders. if so, would be a much-needed draft steal for their D.
Blokestradamus Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 they are comparing Parry to Kyle Williams in Indy. Both 5th rounders. if so, would be a much-needed draft steal for their D. The comparison isn't great. It's because he's kinda white and kinda short. He's just a pain in the arse as a 2-gap NT. He's really strong, he can penetrate, technically sound. If they had better inside linebackers, I'd be worried about his ability to clog up inside rushing lines. Long story short, he's a bloody nuisance.
hondo in seattle Posted September 9, 2015 Posted September 9, 2015 I agree that their DL is lousy, and that we should be planning to bring the run right at them. I also think the zone read will be a big component, as their edge defenders are almost exclusively pass rushers (save for Bjoern Werner), and I see them getting overly aggressive to stop the inside counter, which will give Taylor a lot of room to keep the ball and hit the edges for big chunks. I also think that their offensive weakness is the OL, specifically the interior trio of Herremens, Holmes, and Louis. Kyle and Bryant should be able to win their matchups inside, and I wouldn't feel really confident in either Costanzo or Mewhort holding up against Hughes and Mario, respectively. The Colts are one team where winning along the lines needs to be a given, since those are truly the weak points on each side of the ball. When you win in the trenches, you usually win on the scoreboard. I'm looking forward to a fun Sunday.
truth on hold Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 theyre getting Mathis back ... had 19.5 sacks in 2013.
Steve Billieve Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Nope...they hit 193 on opening day last year with lesser RBs, a lesser OL, and low-brow play-calling. This is to say nothing of the fact that we have a dual-threat QB. Sounds like 227.
CSBill Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I'm completely serious: Bills rushing yards Sunday, over/under: 189. Anyone taking the under? take the over
machine gun kelly Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I'm completely serious: Bills rushing yards Sunday, over/under: 189. Anyone taking the under? BC- I'm definitely on the over as TT will be the difference with at least 40 yards rushing along with the RB's. I could also see McCoy getting a few screens as well.
YoloinOhio Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 theyre getting Mathis back ... had 19.5 sacks in 2013. I think that was because he was on PEDs (err infertility drugs) that he was then suspended for. Isn't he like 35 now and coming off an achilles injury?
Recommended Posts