18 Plays-Jaguars
Written by Deshawn Zombie   
Thursday, 17 September 2009 09:22
18 Plays is normally our weekly podcast, but we couldn't get it to go this week.  Demond had the flu, broke his computer, and forgot to DVR the game.  It was a trifecta that couldn't be overcome.  So, I'll have to present 18 Plays in written form.  But first some general game observations after finally watching the tape in detail:
  • Before Gonzo got hurt, the Colts were going 2 TEs all the time.  They were splitting Tamme and Clark wide, basically giving a 4 wide look.  AFTER Gonzo went down, it was all three WRs.  Gonzo's injury was the end of the of the 2 TE look that was so effective early.  For everyone saying that Collie and Garcon's inclusion doesn't change the offense, all they have to do is look at the tape to see that's not true.  The Colts' offense was fundamentally altered after 11 went out.
  • A reader wrote to ask about TE help for the line.  Here's the good news:  there was very little all day.  I counted 6 pass plays where the TE was left in to block.  I counted three left and three right.  The pass pro was straight up and very effective.
  • The effectiveness of the blitz was WILDLY overstated.  I counted 10 blitzes.  5 were successful.  5 were not.  The Jags had, I believe, 5 first downs against the blitz.  By my count the Colts' blitz forced 2 punts, 2 4th downs, and 1 turn over on downs.  Now, those are great results, but don't let anyone oversell the value of the blitz.  It came up enormous on the Jags' final drive, but was very spotty until then.
  • The Colts D is smart.  There were several key knock downs of passes by the DBs, but they always came on the second time the Jags tried to run the same route on them.  Any time the Jags tried to run a play that had already worked, the Indy D was all over it.  Hayden and Powers both beat down passes that had beaten them earlier in the game.  It was very impressive.
Now for your 18 Plays:

1st Quarter
  1. 10:06  2nd 4, 4  INT by Cox We've already discussed it, but Manning had Clark open in the flat.  Instead he went left to a double covered Wayne.  He wished up the throw.  It was awful.  He said as much...let's move on.
  2. 6:18  1st 10, Jax 49 Freeney's sack helped alter the nature of the Jags' drive.  They showed TE help left, but moved the man in motion away from Freeney.  It was a mistake.  After a vintage spin, Garrard went down hard.

2nd Quarter

  1. 14:00  2nd 6, Jax 26,   Addai fumbles, but as near as I can tell, the ball was not knocked out by a Jaguar.  I watched the play 10xs, and it looks like he hits the ball on the hip of Jeff Saturday.  It was a horribly unlucky play that killed the Colts' second drive.
  2. 11:41 2nd 3, Ind 47 The Colts blitz right with Session.  This moves Hagler and Brackett more to the middle of the field.  The Jags' simply run left and there is no one there as MJD rumbles for 26 yards.  The blitz lead to a big play for Jags as there was no one to play that gap.
  3. 9:12  2nd 6,  Ind 6,  The officials miss an obvious pick (offensive pass interference) as Hagler is screened off his man thanks to contact with a WR.  Hayden is left to come up and make play on the TE coming out of the backfield.  It's a classic mismatch that often leads to DBs getting run over at the goal line.  Instead, Hayden delivers a blow to Estadia who drops the pass.  Hayden was brilliant on Sunday and earned every penny.
  4. 8:10 3rd and 13, Ind 19, Manning hits Wayne for 39 yards.  CBS was too busy showing a replay to let me see the line play, but Wayne makes an incredible leaping grab on 3rd down to set up the Colts' first score.  Manning threw a well timed jumped ball, and Cox had no shot.  Elite play by Wayne.
  5. 6:46 3rd and 6, Jax 38, Manning to Clark for 21 yards and a first down.  Simple route across the field. The pass blocking was immaculate.
  6. 1:10 3rd and 8, Ind 30, MJD catches a screen for two yards.  The Colts blitzed on third down here, and the Jags tried to fool them again with a screen.  Once again, what worked once won't work twice.  The Jags tried the same thing on the first 3rd down of the game successfully, but this time Bullitt reads the screen and forces MJD inside where Session heads him off for a short gain and a Jags field goal.
  7. :08 4th and 1, Ind 46 Manning throws deep incomplete to Clark.  This was a ballsy and great play and play call.  The throw is just off Clark's hand, and it looks like he had to look back into the sun for the throw.  If the roof is closed, he might make that catch.  Great risky call by Caldwell almost paid off.

3rd Quarter

  1. 10:11  3rd and 9, Ind 30, Kuharsky broke this down a few days ago
  2. 7:04 1st and 10, Ind 35,  TDManning to Wayne for a 35 yard TD.  Hey!  It's the stretch play!  Manning does a p/a fake, which saves Clark who has his hands full blocking on the edge.  The fake sucks in the corner and the deep safety is slow to recover, and the Horse takes the lead.  The stretch directly lead to a touch down.  That's why it's an awesome weapon, even when they don't run the ball with it.
  3. 5:43  3rd and 5, Jax 25 The Colts blitz which puts a rookie corner 1 on 1 with one of the best receivers of all time.  Jerraud Powers says, "I like it like that!".  He blankets Torry Holt and makes a brilliant play to bat down a ball and force a punt.  For the blitz to be effective, the Colts CBs will have to make lots of plays like this.  On Sunday, they did.

4th Quarter

  1. 11:12 4th and 2, Ind 7, Great call by Del Rio to go for the score.  The Colts blitzed on the play, and it turned out similar to the earlier run play where they blitzed.  Session came in on the right, and Freeney almost blows up the play in the backfield (he was everywhere!).  MJD slips past him, and a WR managed to block both Hagler and Powers at the same time.  Again, the LBs shifted to the right to compensate for the blitz, and Powers didn't read the play well.  Two men being blocked by one opens a huge hole and Jones-Drew cruised for a score.
  2. 2 PT conversion failed The Jags lined up with MJD in the shot gun.  He took the snap, faked the handoff, and sprinted up the middle.  The Colts' DTs held the line, and Freeney (shocker) darted in to take him down.  This play saved the game for the Colts and was the margin of victory.  Kuharsky also covered this
  3. 7:08, 4th and 2, Jax 44, McAfee punt to the 1  I didn't like the call to punt, but it worked.  Snow makes a brilliant tip to Jacob Lacey who downs the ball at the one.  You can't do a better job punting than Pat McAfee did in his first NFL game.
  4. 5:25  3rd and 8, Jax 3, This was a classic four man rush with Freeney and Mathis causing problems for Garrard who scrambles for 7 when he needed 8.  Mookie Johnson makes an amazing play to run down Garrard and help Hagler tackle him a yard short of the first.  Hagler squares up on Garrard, but Garrard FLATTENS him.  Fortunately, Johnson was hustling, and it was enough to make the stop.
  5. 2:06  4th and 1, Jax 35, Brown for no gain on the big fourth down.  Foster was the FB on the play, and he went wide to seal the edge.  Brown cut up inside and was taken down by an unblocked LB.  Either Foster needed to come inside to block, or Brown should have followed him wide.  It's still amazing this play didn't work.
  6. 1:23  4th and 8, Jax 37, The Colts' blitz on back to back plays, although I don't know if it was necessary here.  Mathis is on Garrard in a heartbeat, forcing him to spin out.  Brackett grabs his legs as Freeney hits his arm and forces the throw to the turf.    Brackett said it was the first time in his career he's ever blitzed on back to back plays.  It was a fitting end to the day as the those three are the heart of the Colts and the truly irreplaceable players on the defense.



Digg! Reddit! Facebook! Technorati! StumbleUpon! BallHype: hype it up!
Comments (30)Add Comment
...
written by DemondSanders, September 17, 2009
worst trifect ever. good news: i should have my laptop back by the weekend. and i think i beat the flu. no idea if it was the swine variety.
...
written by Anonguy, September 17, 2009
Reading Kuharsky's taking on the Jags' Sparklecat attempt, it probably would have worked if it were reversed, Hughes being the QB and MJD being the Jetback, because almost anyone before the snapped it would say he's keeping it. Match one in the dumpster.
...
written by DemondSanders, September 17, 2009
sparklecat... best football term ever.
...
written by J.C., September 17, 2009
...
written by DZ, September 17, 2009
Thanks, that's a great article. I linked it up on Monday. We are obviously very...comfortable with him.
You read the Times??
written by J.C., September 17, 2009
*GASP*

I love Kerry Byrne:

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/patriots/kerry-byrne/2009/09/16/uncovering-why-brady-able-do-what-he-does
...
written by DZ, September 17, 2009
Interesting. For what it's worth, Manning's TD to pick ratio is 2.2 after his rookie season.

So many rate stats for Manning are heavily influenced by playing right away for a horrible team.
Like the 5-11
written by J.C., September 17, 2009
Talented Juggernaut that Tom inherited in 2001.
...
written by DZ, September 17, 2009
Dude, it was a hell of a lot better than the 1997 and 1998 Colts. There's no comparison. The 1997 Colts gave up 62 sacks. That was Manning's line his rookie year.

Plus, when Brady took over, he had already been around for a year. Big difference.
...
written by DZ, September 17, 2009
Actually, you just have to take his first six games out. He got sacked 11 times, threw 6 TDs and 14 picks. The last 10 games, he got sacked 11 times, threw 20 TDs and 14 picks.
Just out of morbid curiosity
written by Anonguy, September 17, 2009
Does anyone here read www.smartfootball.com ? I really think this guy has a good head on his shoulders when it comes to the Xs and Os of football.
Everyone down here
written by J.C., September 17, 2009
Thinks the Fish are going to win Monday night.

I don't, but they do.
...
written by shake n bake, September 17, 2009
@JC that actually makes me feel better. The -3 line that looked ridiculously low had me nervous that Vegas knows something I (and most people I had heard talking about the game) don't.
...
written by Derek, September 17, 2009
A little off the subject, but I have high hopes for this. Colts signed Hank Baskett. He didn't produce alot of stats, but he was an all acadameic honoree (great for colts offense) and he is a big high jumping target. (6'4" 240 lbs. and high jump champ of college)

If he can get clicking, I think he could be a sleeper possession receiver.
...
written by Guy., September 18, 2009
Not sure I'm getting your point about the offense when compared to the AG injury. They may have altered their offensive game plan due to what they saw the Jags doing. I can't see any reason why losing your number 2 receiver would prompt offensive sets with more receivers... I'm thinking they would have done that whether he was hurt or not. Nevertheless, it's inconclusive either way.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
I can't answer the question as to why, but on every (or almost every) play before the injury, I marked 2TE on my sheet.

As soon as Gonzo went down, I don't believe I had 2TE marked even once. The Colts were moving the ball effectively, so there didn't seem to be any reason for the change other than they play Collie and Garcon together as a unit.

It makes no sense, I know. But that's what they did. The change was instant, and it was wholesale.

It was not inconclusive. It did not look like a response to the Jags defense, as they never at any point went back to the two TEs (that I saw). Something about Garcon being in the game required Collie instead of a TE. I would love to know what that was.
...
written by Guy, September 18, 2009
I just went over the game again, and I can tell you exactly what happened. They didn't start going 3-wide all of a sudden after the Gonzalez injury. They were going 3-wide the entire game. The only thing is that Clark was working the slot before the injury, and Collie was there after the injury. It was still a 3-wide set. The fact that Clark is labeled a tight end is what is confusing. Essentially, they subbed Collie in for Clark, Clark in for the 2nd TE spot, and Garcon in for AG. They ran the exact same offense before and after the injury, they just did it with different personnel. You may ask, why not just sub-out Gonzo and keep Clark in the slot? Well, then you have Tamme or Robinson in the game and Collie on the sideline. Clearly they like Collie better than those other tight ends. So there you have it. There is no relationship between Garcon and Collie and needing them to be on the field at the same time. That was just the best way to run the gameplan they prepared. If you watch where Collie lines up after the injury you will see the point. He always lines up on the wide side of the field, the same place Clark had been lining up. After the injury, Clark was always on the short side of the field, playing the traditional tight end position in place of the 2nd tight end. Writing 2-TE or 3-WIDE on your sheet is what messed you up. If you had written 3-wide every time clark was split out (or when it really was 3-wide) you would see very few 2-TE sets on your sheet. Maybe 1. Maybe 2.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
I know what you are talking about, but it doesn't answer the question...why do that after the injury?

If they really liked Collie in the slot better than Tamme, why not start with Collie in the slot?

Collie didn't get in the game at that slot until Gonzo went out.

Your explanation is tidy but it makes no sense based on what happened. If your analysis is correct, they would have started the game in the same set they ended it, only with Gonzo on the field instead of Garcon.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
My labeling of the plays as "2 TE" or "1 TE", had nothing to do with formations, I was tracking the personnel.

The Colts made a personnel change after the injury. No more Tamme and Robinson, and a lot of Collie.

That's what has to be explained. "They like Collie more" doesn't fly. If they did, they would have started him.
...
written by Guy, September 18, 2009
They didn't want Clark relegated to the traditional tight end spot. They wanted to use him in the slot where they could use his versatility against the linebackers. Meanwhile, they had wide receivers 1 and 2 split wide. When AG went down, they had to put Collie in the game. He's the next option. He's the third guy. They weren't going to put Garcon in and leave Collie out. It just so happens that Collie plays the slot position best, or it is what he has practiced the most. Probably the latter. That's it. That's the answer.

The confusion is in what you wrote down on your paper. Collie did NOT go in for Tamme/Robinson. He went in for Clark and Clark took the other TE spot. The main point I am trying to make is that the fundamental offense DID NOT CHANGE. Not at all. They still had a guy in the slot, two guys split wide, one guy tight, and one RB. That was the game plan. Whether those guys have "TE" or "WR" next to their names on the roster is irrelevant.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
That argument makes no sense.

By your logic, the Colts depth chart looks like this:
Wayne
Gonzo
Clark
Tamme-Robinson (depending on need)
Collie,
Garcon,

So then, when Gonzo got hurt, the Colts went with Collie in the slot because they like him better than Garcon, but then they had to play Garcon wide and take out the 2nd TEs?

So they benched two players they clearly thought were more effective early, because they just HAD to play Collie first and Garcon second? That scarcely makes sense, but even if it did, it still suggests a Collie/Garcon link.

The personnel types matter. Taking the extra TE out and inserting Collie in the slot over Clark (who goes back to true TE), affects the audibles that Manning can call. It affects the run game. It affects routes because now Clark is running TE routes instead of slot routes.

2 TEs (regardless of where they line up) creates greater flexibility in play calling. Manning can quickly audible to more of a power run or max protect simply by waiving Clark or Tamme back to the end of the line.

When Collie is the game that disappears.

Even if some formations look the same, the offense is very different with Collie over Tamme/Robinson (regardless of how you diagram the substitution pattern).

The logical move would have been to play Garcon for Gonzo, and stick with the extra TE over Collie. That didn't happen, and I want to know why.

Your explanation (they like Collie more than the TEs and Garcon)doesn't fit the facts.
...
written by LukeM, September 18, 2009
The website listed above "smartfootball" is a virus. DZ, you should delete that link.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
No, it's not. I visited it last night and today without incident. It's a legitimate site. I go there all the time.
...
written by Guy, September 18, 2009
I've never seen somebody so hell-bent on being right no matter what. I thought I was helping you with this conundrum, apparently you've already made up your mind. If you care to actually try to comprehend what I am saying, read on.

"By your logic, the Colts depth chart looks like this:
Wayne
Gonzo
Clark
Tamme-Robinson (depending on need)
Collie,
Garcon,
"
I didn't say this. I said the WR's are Wayne, AG, Collie, and Garcon.

"So then, when Gonzo got hurt, the Colts went with Collie in the slot because they like him better than Garcon, but then they had to play Garcon wide and take out the 2nd TEs?"

They put Collie in the slot because he is a slot receiver and they needed him on the field because he is better than Garcon. They weren't going to put him wide because he isn't ready for that. They weren't going to leave him on the bench because then they wouldn't have their best players on the field. I am repeating myself here.

"So they benched two players they clearly thought were more effective early, because they just HAD to play Collie first and Garcon second? That scarcely makes sense, but even if it did, it still suggests a Collie/Garcon link."

What two players did they bench? Tamme/Robinson? That's not two players, that is 1 position that was being played by two players. And "more effective early"? When were they more effective? More effective than what?

"The personnel types matter. Taking the extra TE out and inserting Collie in the slot over Clark (who goes back to true TE), affects the audibles that Manning can call. It affects the run game. It affects routes because now Clark is running TE routes instead of slot routes."

Go back and watch the game and then try to tell me that Clark didn't assume the position of the 2nd tight end after the injury. You won't be able to do it. And it doesn't effect anything like you said. It's the same exact formation, just with different personnel. In fact, this is what I've been saying. They did this so they COULD run the same plays they had practiced, and didn't have to rearrange the whole offense based on 1 injury. If you don't think Manning can adjust to having Clark on the line mid-game, and Collie in the slot, then you severely underestimate him.

"2 TEs (regardless of where they line up) creates greater flexibility in play calling. Manning can quickly audible to more of a power run or max protect simply by waiving Clark or Tamme back to the end of the line.

When Collie is the game that disappears."

So why did the running game excel when Collie was in? Why didn't they put two tight ends in to run the ball? Why was Clark split wide exclusively before the injury and not "waved back to the line" to run the ball? The fact is that the running game was as good if not better when Collie was in the slot. Addai scored his TD from that formation. They had the same run/pass mix from that formation. The Jags were playing nickel every time Collie was in. The Colts had the same advantage in the running game with that matchup than they did with Clark against a linebacker.

"Even if some formations look the same, the offense is very different with Collie over Tamme/Robinson (regardless of how you diagram the substitution pattern)."

Not true, sir. Watch the game again. I know you've seen it multiple times, but watch it and think about what I have been saying. Watch Clark specifically.

"The logical move would have been to play Garcon for Gonzo, and stick with the extra TE over Collie. That didn't happen, and I want to know why."

I told you why. Collie and Garcon on the field was more desirable than Tamme/Robinson and Garcon on the field. Before the injury, when they went 3-wide, they pulled Tamme/Robinson and replaced them with Collie. Garcon didn't get on the field then, why would he be in over Collie any other time? Seriously think about it.
...
written by LukeM, September 18, 2009
Oh. Hmm. Must have been the IndyStar website then.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
Listen, I understand what you are saying. I don't think it answers the problem.

Collie ISN'T one of the best players. Tamme and Robinson are better options than Collie based on the fact that they started the game. If they are better options than Collie, they certainly better than Garcon. The combo of Collie/Garcon must be seen as preferable than the combo of Garcon/2nd TE, but that still shows there is a definite link to have Collie and Garcon on the field at the same time.

Collie can't play outside (and Garcon can't play the slot which is why he didn't get in the game in the 3 wide set earlier), so they can't run Collie/2 TE.

The only options are:
Garcon/2 TE
Collie/Garcon/Clark

Now, they decided that the second option was better. That's fine, but I find it dramatically worse than than Gonzo/2 TE, and not just because of the drop off from Gonzo being out. I think the 2 TE set is the most effective thing the Colts have, and they do too, which is why they started the game with it. Losing Gonzo takes away not only the player, but the package.

The Colts made two substitutions not one. Clearly, there is a link between Collie and Garcon which you denied.

The offense IS more limited with the 1 TE set. I did watch it.

To sum up:

1. The Colts offense is more limited in terms of options without 2 TEs in the game. It changes the number options Manning has presnap. The run game will be better over time with two TEs than with three wides (by personnel, not by formation...formation doesn't matter)

2. The Colts clearly thought that Garcon/Collie was better than Garcon/2nd TE, but they clearly thought that Gonzo/2nd TE was better than Gonzo/Collie. Why? That's the question that hasn't been answered.
...
written by Guy, September 18, 2009
"The Colts clearly thought that Garcon/Collie was better than Garcon/2nd TE, but they clearly thought that Gonzo/2nd TE was better than Gonzo/Collie. Why? That's the question that hasn't been answered."

That second part isn't true. They put Gonzo/Collie in the game a few times. In fact, the play where he got hurt was a 3-wide set with Collie in the slot and Clark tight. They used the same set the play before. Manning's INT came from that set. All of these were before the injury. You can't say a 2-TE set is "better" than a 3-wide set. They both have their advantages. The point remains that when Gonzo went down, they abandoned their 2-TE set. Why? Because Collie plays the slot and Garcon plays out wide and having Collie on the bench in favor of Tamme/Robinson was not in the picture once AG was unavailable. None of this suggests a link between Collie and Garcon. It was just a coincidence that the roles they play on offense dictate that they have to be on the field at the same time. Either that or they have a 2TE set with their number 1 and 4 receivers on the field, which just doesn't make sense with Collie available.

Just look at Clark. He was playing from the slot (almost) exclusively pre-injury. Post-injury he was playing tight to the line while Collie played the slot. There was always a guy in the slot. Their game plan didn't change, just their personnel, and it was only out of necessity.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
The second part (The Colts thought Tamme/Robinson are better than Collie) IS true.

Sure, there were a couple of plays where they put Collie in the slot, that's to be expected. It wasn't the base offense, however. The base offense was a 2 TE set. That's what the Colts WANT to run, with the option of subbing in Collie from time to time. Once Gonzo left, the other two TEs were gone.

You can't say "Their game plan didn't change, just their personnel, and it was only out of necessity." when the personnel are dramatically different. You aren't running the same game plan if you are running three wides with Clark as a true TE, than if you are running 2 wide, a true TE, and Clark as a flex TE/WR depending one what you want on any given play.

There is a MASSIVE difference between the two. It won't always show up in terms of formation, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Because the Colts cannot play Collie wide. If they feel it necessary to put him on the field, the absolutely have to play three WRs. That means there is a direct link between Collie and Garcon. Collie on the field means Garcon (because Gonzo is hurt) has to play too.

They can play Garcon without Collie, but they can't play Collie without Garcon (or Baskett) to play wide.
...
written by DZ, September 18, 2009
The Colts run most of their plays from the same basic formation. You won't see massive formation changes no matter the package of players.

They'll show the same look whether they are running two TE (with Clark in the slot), or one TE (with Collie in the slot and Clark in tight). You shouldn't confuse that with running the same game plan. The Colts' goal is to reveal nothing by the formation. You can't observe it and determine much of anything.

Once the snap happens, however, anything is possible out of the base set. What you can do is obviously different when you have a TE in the slot verses a WR in the slot.
...
written by Anonguy, September 20, 2009
And the Glitter Kitties got spanked

Write comment

busy
 

Visit our Sponsor


About Bloguin

Bloguin is the revolutionary blog network specifically focused on helping bloggers get the most out of their websites. We're currently working on building a large network of online communities and hope to expand our blogging coverage to include a wide range of topics.

Advertisers

The Bloguin Network allows advertisers to promote their products and services to our ever-growing number of visitors. We offer both site-specific ad placements as well as the ability to run a network-wide campaign. If you're interested in working with Bloguin to meet your advertising needs, please contact us.

Bloggers Wanted

The Bloguin Network is always looking to expand. We're specifically looking for blogs in the sports, entertainment, and video games field, but are open to adding any type of quality site.. If you're a blogger and interested in joining our network, please fill out our application form.

The Bloguin Login

The Bloguin Login gives you full access to everything our network has to offer. Your name and password will work for each and every one of our sites. Signing up is simple, and will allow you to post in all our forums, create member blogs, and access other cool features! What are you waiting for? Create an Account!