New NFL Kickoff Rules Should Benefit the Indianapolis Colts
The Colts' kickoff and punt return coverage have always been the Colts' achilles heel. Year after year the coaching staff and front office promises it will get better yet it rarely does. In last year's playoffs against the Jets, Antonio Cromartie's 47 yard return at the end of the game set up the winning field goal ending the Colts' season.
Naturally it would make sense for the Colts to address (or at least promise to address special teams coverage).
More after the jump.
Well, it looks like the Colts won't have to after all. The NFL will do it for them.
After moving the kickoff tee back to the thirty to counter the league trend of using kickoff specialists to increase touchbacks, the NFL seems to have reversed its stance and has moved the kickoff line back the 35 yard line. I guess with kickoffs going up 200 percent anyway, the NFL figured what's the point. The result however will still have an impact on the gameplay. Touchbacks are likely to further increase, meaning that teams that have the ability to string together long drives with be the main beneficiary.
(Cut to Manning calling Commissioner Goodell to tell him he's not such a bad guy after all).
No team is better at long drives than the Indianapolis Colts. No team defensively will benefit as much either.
Let's start with the offense.
Technically by NFL standards, long drives are considered series that involve 10 or more plays. The Colts last season lead the league in this stat. They also led the league in touchdowns scored off of long drives converting on an incredible 52.5 percent of such drives (that btw is as phenomenal an offensive stat as any Peyton might have earned in recent seasons).
It's no surprise that the Colts led this category because sustaining long drives requires top flight quarterbacks with unflappable focus. It's also not surprising then that the Patriots, Falcons and Eagles (teams with three of the best quarterbacks) were ranked up there with the Colts.
Of course the Colts would like better field position but with Peyton they can overcome the hurdle (imagine if the Colts had an awesome return specialist...sigh).
So when the Colts take the field, we won't see much of a difference. The rule change won't really affect the offense, but it will negate the offense of other teams and thus improve our defense.
If more and more balls continue to sail into the end zone, return specialists will see fewer and fewer chances to produce game changing plays.
As I fan of the NFL in general I think the league is making a mistake. Big returns are one of the more exciting plays in football and were becoming more and more of an important part of the game. Adding that third X factor element was exciting and allowed teams to be creative in building their rosters. It gave teams options. As a fan of the Colts though, its great. No complaints! The NFL could move the tee to the 45 for all I care. Hell, do away with kickoffs entirely. Put the ball at the 10.
The Colts defense doesn't give up big plays. Returns were the only exception to that. Now if Pat McAfee can continue burying balls in the back of the end zone, the Colts defense we be relieved of a major burden. Instead of teams only needing 20 or 30 yards to get into field goal range with starting field position (such as the Jets only needed in our last game), teams will now be looking double that.
Let's see how good Mark Sanchez is then (timeout not included).
For all the 'wrinkles' installed by defensive coordinator Larry Coyer, the Colts defense is still the same bend-but-don't-break strategy as before. While such a design can be maddeningly torturous at times, it does prevent the big play. The Colts typically rank in the top of the league for fewest plays allowed. Of course this doesn't mean our defense can't be improved but it does mean - and if you look back at the teams we play the results will show - that above average quarterbacks are really the only ones that can light up the Colts.
Granted that is an obvious statement. Duh. The better quarterbacks put up better results. But, the rule changes go beyond that. If return games are neutralized it will put further pressure on quarterbacks. It will also negate the running backs as well. Sure five or six yards on average doesn't sound like much. But try telling that to Jay Culter who relies on Devin Hester or whoever is playing qb for the Browns who depends on the field position gained by Joshua Cribbs.
The fact that the Colts don't give up quick strikes and big plays me that our opponents have to be methodical to begin with. Now take off an average of say 30 yards of field position a game. Not only does the quarterback have to be more focused and efficient (not an easy task), the running game suffers because now the team has to spend more energy.
Longer drives also mean more potential third downs as the Colts make opponents work for their yards. Quick strikes don't only translate into huge gains but also more consistent first downs. In 2007 and 2009 the Colts gave up the fewest plays of 20+ yards in the league.
Good luck to Jake Locker, whoever the Browns throw out there, ditto for the Bengals and all the rest of the quarterbacks who aren't elite status because remember, not only will they lose field position, the Colts still have Freeney and Mathis.
How will this ultimately affect the Colts? In the long run, it won't really. Will it lead to eeking out one or two close games?Possibly. But if that game comes in early January it could make all the difference. It would have last year.
* My apologies to Pat McAfee for the unflattering pictures. Photographers don't focus much on kickoffs.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Opponents will probably kick short
So that we try and run it back, and get stopped at the 15.
by braveheartcolt on Jun 17, 2011 8:02 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
I agree in premise...
But it seemed like our DEF lead the league in “long drives” given up.
5 yards here. 8 yards there. 4 yards here. 11 yards there. 7 yards here. 4 yards there. Teams have figured out that we give up the short stuff, and protect against the long stuff. It’s extremely counter-productive for our team, as well, since we are essentially negating our biggest strength: Freeney & Mathis. Teams have figured that out and have become methodical against us.
Any stats on where our DEF stood in this category?
the link on 52.5 in the part about scoring off long drives is broken
you missed the first HT in HTTP at the beginning of the link.
if you care to go back and change that.
great article otherwise!
i don't give autographs
by muncie_in_this on Jun 17, 2011 12:05 PM EDT reply actions
This is great news for us.
I’ll take any advantage we can possibly get.
Brock C.
by BleedingBlueForever on Jun 17, 2011 5:45 PM EDT reply actions
you stole this article from NFL.com
I know there is not much happening but come on !!
by Indianapolis Colts on Jun 18, 2011 10:02 AM EDT reply actions
So any article on another site about the Colts is stolen if a similar one appears here?
That’s like accusing someone of stealing your work because they wrote a WWII book after yours was published.
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Jun 18, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
no
you should at least reference it !!! thats common courtesy
by Indianapolis Colts on Jun 18, 2011 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions
i agree he liberally borrowed an awful lot without attributing a source
some paragraphs are almost direct adaptations of the original, and they’re structured similarly.
There’s a lot of other musing that presumably are his own though. Still i agree with “Indianapolis Colts” that it displays questionable ethics.
Being in politics is like being a football coach. You have to be smart enough to understand the game and dumb enough to think it's important. -- Eugene J. McCarthy
Irrespective of the possible plagerism
Are you going to comment on the actual subject matter?
by braveheartcolt on Jun 19, 2011 3:05 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Woah there Blog Sherriff
im sure he didnt mean to break your rules !!!
And that is the subject matter people always discuss the relevance of the source. Dont nit pick, not everything needs to be an argument !
by Indianapolis Colts on Jun 19, 2011 3:46 AM EDT up reply actions
ha ha
Don’t knit pick! A fairly interesting ‘football article’ in a desert of news, and all you want to do is knock the writer. Give me a fucking break there sonny.
And as you’ve pretty much stolen that user name, are you gonna flame yourself?
Wyatt
by braveheartcolt on Jun 19, 2011 11:20 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
a stolen "football article"
ahhah your an idiot your not getting the point so i’m just going to leave it
im not going to feed the troll !!!
by Indianapolis Colts on Jun 19, 2011 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
my comment on the subject matter is in agreement with The Punless One:
kickoffs are super exciting, and to diminish them is a mistake.
You know how they have that double-long commercial break occasionally during games, right after a score, where they come back to the game after 5 commercials just long enough to show the kickoff, then give you three more commercials before the offense takes the field. Well, even though it irritates me that they’re so blatantly screwing with me, i still hurry back to the TV screen to not miss that intervening kickoff, because anything can happen and they’re such dramatic plays.
Being in politics is like being a football coach. You have to be smart enough to understand the game and dumb enough to think it's important. -- Eugene J. McCarthy
Much Better
I on the other hand think the opposite, and if I’m watching a recording, I generally fast fwd to the first play. Which doesn’t make sense, as I was at the Giants v Pats game in 2007 when NYG ran back a kick-off and the whole place was going nuts. Incredible.
by braveheartcolt on Jun 19, 2011 7:52 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

by 




































