Recap: Preason Game Indianapolis Colts v. Dallas Cowboys

by BigBlueShoe on Aug 10, 2007 1:21 PM EDT in Game Recaps Comment 30 comments

I turned on local news this morning in Indy because I have no Internet connection, and I have to go down to Netheads in Broadripple (great place) to check email and the blog. Anyway, local news was saying last night how the Colts defense looked shaky; that they gave up far too many yards and points.

Question: Did these idiots watch the same game I did, and did they forget it's just a dumb preseason game? Whatever they saw will likely conflict with my game observations:

The Colts started a rookie, Ed Johnson, at DT last night in place of Anthony McFarland, who is now done for the season (tip to MarkV037). And guess what? Ed Johnson looked terrific! He penetrated the Dallas o-line every series he was in there, and was solid in his tackling. When Brad Johnson fumbled the high snap in the second quarter, it was because Johnson was going to sack him. Impressive night for the rookie, and a reason for hope.
Freddie Keiaho, Marlin Jackson, Kelvin Hayden, and Antoine Bethea all stood out and played excellent football. The starting and most of the second string defense played excellent. Despite no Bob Sanders, no Freeney for most of the game, no Mathis, and a new DT, guys were flying to the ball, making hits, making tackling, and punishing the ballcarrier.
Colts were hitting Cowboys players so hard they kept losing their helmets. On one drive, Cowboys players lost five helmets.
Tony Ugoh played very well for his first time out. The Cowboys are now a blitzing machine, and despite blitzing like crazy, Colts QBs had time to throw. He wasn't perfect, but for a rookie going up against Demarcus Ware, I was impressed.
Jim Sorgi and Josh Betts stink. I mean, they really, really stink. Receivers like Gonzo and Roy Hall were open all night, and Sorgi especially had trouble getting them the ball.
DeDe Dorsey, despite a solid camp, did not look impressive. He kept slipping on the turf.
Special teams looked outstanding. Coverage units were making hits, and TJ Rushing is now the starter at returner. I don't want ot see anyone else. He has an extra gear, and he has the vision to hit the lanes and gain big yardage. His DB play was also solid as well. Rushing has come a long way.

So, for a preseason game that was no game planned by the Colts, I was impressed. The final score in contests like this is meaningless. The main question marks for this team (Ugoh, DTs, Special Teams, etc.) looked good. This team still has a long way to go this preseason, but last night was very encouraging.

For a recap on from a Cowboys fan's perspective, head over to BTB. Yes folks, football is back! Go Colts!

0 recs | Comment 30 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Betts

for a guy off the practice squad/3rd QB I liked what I saw from Betts. 9-14 77yrds 1 TD 1 INT 22yrds on 2 rushes, not bad. He's probably headed back to the practice squad but he's at least more fun and less frustrating to watch than Sorgi.

by shake n bake on Aug 10, 2007 1:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This site has an agenda

You should have liked what you saw. Take away one ill advised throw & Betts looked very good. Gil Brandt was raving about him on Sirius radio. This is the only Colts site I have found that does not think Betts is having a good camp. That ought to tell you something.

You can take the word of Ed Thompson, Gil Brandt or a kid who has not internet connection.

by horseshoepete on Aug 10, 2007 2:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

well....

You could trust die-hard fans of a team who go to training camp and watch, or a national reporter who watched one preseason game and made a bunch of comments.

I thought Betts looked OK. He did take off a couple of times, which is exciting if you're a Colts fan because we don't see too much of that, but he didn't look too comfortable in the pocket to me.

by the21eraser on Aug 10, 2007 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought Betts looked decent

He looked a lot better than Sorgi, but if you look at what Sorgi has done in the regular season when he's been in, he has great numbers. I don't know what that means, but I do know Betts looked decent. Not great, not bad, but decent.

by BSanders37 on Aug 10, 2007 3:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

defense

i was most impressed with the defense... with all the new starters on the first team the first couple of series against dallas starters did look good... room for improvement, but good.. Where did ed johnson come from. he looked quite good and #60, despite a stupid roughing the passer penalty did well too...

by bluegirl on Aug 10, 2007 3:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

penalty

The penalty wasn't a really bad one. I can see why it was called, he should have just touched him with a hand, but he wasn't taking a dirty shot on Romo.

by shake n bake on Aug 10, 2007 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

stupid to take

that's why i referred to it as stupid, he was careless in how he made sure Romo was down, but since there was helmet to helmet it was going to be called, even though the actual hit wasn't much.

by bluegirl on Aug 11, 2007 5:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ed Johnson.....

Looked great on plays (2 Sacks, 1 TFL), but I also so him get blown 6-8 yards off the ball on a few of the running plays. He's definitely a work in progess, but his potential is encouraging. I hadn't heard much of him before the game, but I did see something about him scouts.com:

http://colts.scout.com/2/666508.html

There's not a ton of information,, unless you subscribe to the site and listen to the audio. Sounds like he's basically your typical 1-gap DT who get good penetration and has size and potential, but has had some character issues. Hopefully he'll fall in line under the leadership of Dungy and the veterans.

by rudy0498 on Aug 11, 2007 9:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

BBS

I don't know what game you watched, but the Cowboys rarely blitzed or ran any stunts. Their defense was very basic and vanilla.

Ugoh looked okay because he got help from backs and the left guard everytime he had to block Ware, who ran around him like his feet were planted in cement.

by Terry on Aug 11, 2007 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Blitzing

Terry, the Cowboys blitzed virtually every play in the first half. DeMarcus Ware came on every snap. He's listed as a LBer. When the LBer doesn't drop into coverage, that's called blitzing.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Aug 11, 2007 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah Terry ...

at least if you can't laugh with him, you can laugh at him. His "40 years" studying football, and he still can't tell crap.

Terry, you couldn't see them blitzing because they weren't getting through. Props to Ugoh for that.

by PaytonMenning on Aug 12, 2007 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

PM

I obviously knew you wouldn't know what the definition of a blitz was, unlike BBS.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No ...

looks like you need to check your facts, like usual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitz_%28American_football%29

by PaytonMenning on Aug 13, 2007 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and again I'm right and you're wrong

the key element to the definition is "bringing more defenders than the O line can block."

In a 4-3, a blitz would obviously mean bringing a LB or DB because thats more than the traditional 4 down linemen O lines block on a passing play.

In a 3-4, one of the OLBs plays the role of the DE in a 4-3, so that means still only 4 defenders are rushing, not more than what the O linemen can block.

Ware goes after the qb on every passing play, just like Freeney does as a 4-3 DE.

If you knew anything about football, which obviously you don't as you needed to research the definition like some nerd, which you probably are, then you would already know this.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Terry

One of the main weaknesses in your arguments that I have noticed is that you tend to see things in black and white, without much regard for subtleties.

In this particular case, you confidently assert that Ware goes after the QB on every play, as a LB in a 3-4 always does. This is simply not true. It may be true that such a LB often rushes the QB, but certainly not always. A lot depends on the down and game situation. There are many situations (particularly obvious running downs) where an OLB rushing the QB would be wasting a defender. And many teams that run the 3-4 are thrilled when their DLs get good penetration, because that means they don't have to bring a LB, thus freeing him up to be a "ghost" or "sniper." And even in a 4-3, sometimes the DEs don't rush the QB. Look at how Mathis and Freeney (whom you claim rushes the QB on every play) collapsed the line on running plays in the playoffs last year. As much as Bob Sanders helped, using the DEs more prominently in the Colts run D was just as responsible for their success.

Ultimately this is an argument at least partly about semantics. Call it a blitz, call it a normal rush, call it "Lulubell," I really don't care. The comment that spawned all this debate was about how the Colts line, particularly Ugoh, held their own against Dallas' pressure. And that remains true, whatever you feel like calling it.

by ctnyc on Aug 13, 2007 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

not true

what started the argument was BSS stating that the Cowboys blitzed Ware because he's an OLB which is simply not true.

Under Phillips scheme, Ware rushes the qb along with the DL on every play, so to say he was blitzing is simply false.

In a 3-4, the only time an OLB doesn't rush the passer is in a prevent defense when only 3 DL are rushing, otherwise an OLB is always rushing on a pass play.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Which version of the truth, Timmy?

Go read the thread, now come back to this post by Terry.

Blue's original point was really that Ugoh did a nice job of blocking Ware, regardless of what you want to call what Ware was doing "blitzing" or "rushing".

Timmy claims that Ware ran around Ugoh like his "feet were planted in cement." However, below Timmy also claims that Ware came on "every play", because that's part of the Cowboy's 3-4 scheme.

Timmy, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If Ware came on "every play", then Ugoh most definitely did a fine job against him, giving our QBs time to throw. Note that stopping a defender isn't always the goal - sometimes it's just slowing them down enough.

If Ware didn't rush/blitz on every play, please let us know which ones "count" in your version of the Universe.

by PaytonMenning on Aug 14, 2007 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Clearly, you can't read ...

Try actually reading the article Timmy.

by PaytonMenning on Aug 13, 2007 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

clearly you not capable

of understanding what you read. I'm sorry for your learning disability.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That escalated quickly...

I mean that really got out of hand.

What is and isn't a blitz is far from the most interesting thing we could be discussing right now. To me a blitz is when the D rushes 5 or more. I don't know how often the Cowboys did that.

I think we all just miss football.

by shake n bake on Aug 13, 2007 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I've been meaning to talk to you about that

You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while because you're probably wanted for murder.

Bullets Forever: Blogging with Phenomenal Swag!

by JakeTheSnake on Aug 13, 2007 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha!

awesome.... BBS's absence seems to be making everyone a little stir-crazy here.

by the21eraser on Aug 14, 2007 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who knew

I had so much sway over people's moods. :)

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Aug 14, 2007 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're exactly correct

and the Cowboys rarely rushed more than 4 against the Colts.

by Terry on Aug 14, 2007 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BBS, I thought you knew football

In a 3-4 defense, OLB are the same as DE in a 4-3, they rush every play, its not a blitz when the rush the passer.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

3-4 rush

I'm not an expert on the 3-4, but they bring a minimum of 5 rushers on every play?
(NT, DE, DE, OLB, OLB)

by shake n bake on Aug 13, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You need to look up ...

the definition of a blitz, putz.

"In American football or Canadian football, a blitz, or quarterback rush ..."

'nuff said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitz_%28American_football%29

by PaytonMenning on Aug 13, 2007 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's all a matter of what you consider a blitz...

There's really no official definition that I've ever seen. It's generally accepted that anyone who is not a down lineman rushes the QB. Now trying to apply that the a 3-4 is tricky....I say that definition is based off of a conventional 4-3 defense. So any more than 4 defenders rush... in my opinion it's a blitz.

In a 3-4, not all 5 guys rush on ever play, as you suggest. One of the OLBs often drops into coverage. Part of the beauty of a 3-4 is that you never know which side the 4th guy is coming from, making it difficult to designate blocking assignments. So in a sense, that in itself is a blitz.

Plus, I distinctly remember DeMarcus Ware pissing and moaning last year about being converted to a 3-4 LB because he had to learn how to play pass coverage.

I guess your self proclaimed "40 some odd years" of analyzing football hasn't taught you everything.

by rudy0498 on Aug 13, 2007 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I found this...

"I was looking at some Colts tape the other day from last year and I looked big and slow," James said. "We all know that we needed to drop some weight to be faster. And now you're seeing why. This defense is about running to the football. I feel so much better, too. I don't have to stuff myself to keep my weight up. Now I'm eating normal. I feel better. We all do."

It's from here: http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10287759

It's interesting that inspite of how bad the Colts' defense was alleged to be, other professionals watch their tape to learn how to play 21st century football.

by will on Aug 11, 2007 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that was all Parcells influence

His 3-4 scheme was a 2 gap with the DL and LB reading and reacting to the run first, pass second, which required DL and LB to be very big and bulky to take on OL head on, instead of playing a 1 gap like Phillips scheme, which requires more speed and shooting 1 gap, playing the pass every down and stopping the run on the way to the qb.

by Terry on Aug 13, 2007 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs