Game Planning Manning

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning

    Last time, with Matt Cassel running things, the Colts needed a 52 yard field goal by Vinatieri to go ahead 18-15, and then the Patriots were pushed back out of field goal range by a penalty, so the final score was 18-15. 

    Peyton Manning is only a field goal ahead of Cassel?

    Three things have changed:  Cassel is gone, VInatieri is on injured reserve and the entire Patriots defensive backfield is new, but they've been working together for nine weeks.  All these rookies add speed to the passing D.

    So, why not use last year's game plan?  Brady can beat 18 points most days.

    I'm reading that you have to make Peyton dance in the pocket, distract him, to lower his quarterback rating.  You may never hit him but you have to try.

    I'm a fan of BB's patented big nickel.  This defense appears to have been designed especially for one pass-happy team, Indy.

    Adalius Thomas covered Dallas Clark successfully in last year's game, allowing 2 catches.  Brandon McGowan may share those duties at times.  Taking away Clark apparently makes things harder for Peyton.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ManningbeatsBrady. Show ManningbeatsBrady's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning


    The Colts' receiving corp will not be thinking twice. They will be running and catching.  It doesn't matter if the Patsies have some big hits.  The Colts will find the open man on a consistent basis.  Colts 24 NE 23.

    n Response to Re: Game Planning Manning:
    [QUOTE]Back in the Ty Law days we'd knock the receivers hard at the line to throw the timing off. If you can pressure Manning (ideally without blitzing) and disrupt routes by getting physical with the receivers you can disrupt the timing of that offense and get Manning rattled.  Not sure anyone in our current crop of corners is as physical as Law was, but maybe we can get enough big hits from our safeties to get the receivers thinking twice before they catch the ball.
    Posted by soloflyfisher[/QUOTE]
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MaritimePatsFan. Show MaritimePatsFan's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning

    In Response to Re: Game Planning Manning:
    [QUOTE]Last time, with Matt Cassel running things, the Colts needed a 52 yard field goal by Vinatieri to go ahead 18-15, and then the Patriots were pushed back out of field goal range by a penalty, so the final score was 18-15.  Peyton Manning is only a field goal ahead of Cassel? Three things have changed:  Cassel is gone, VInatieri is on injured reserve and the entire Patriots defensive backfield is new, but they've been working together for nine weeks.  All these rookies add speed to the passing D. So, why not use last year's game plan?  Brady can beat 18 points most days. I'm reading that you have to make Peyton dance in the pocket, distract him, to lower his quarterback rating.  You may never hit him but you have to try. I'm a fan of BB's patented big nickel.  This defense appears to have been designed especially for one pass-happy team, Indy. Adalius Thomas covered Dallas Clark successfully in last year's game, allowing 2 catches.  Brandon McGowan may share those duties at times.  Taking away Clark apparently makes things harder for Peyton.
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    Clark had 4 catches for 63 yards. Thomas held Clark to two catches when he played for Baltimore.

    Taking away Clark for Manning is equivalent to taking away Welker for Brady. Clark and Welker are the chain movers for these offenses. Yes Moss and Wayne make big plays and can move the chains, but these two are the reliable checkdowns that both look too.

    Seems to me Bill has tried to increase the number of checkdowns for Tom by getting another quick, underneath, sure handed receiver in Edelman. Figure they already had two in Welker and Faulk and by adding a third should make this offense hard to get off the field on third down. Give it till next year, Once all these guys are healthy and on the field together for a year...we have all heard the Pats "dink and dunk" down the field, but we really have no idea...

    Also, this will open the long ball up immensely for Randy and possibly Tate who will get his shot next year.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning

    Given our recent defensive success against the Colts, and the steady, 17 or so points allowed each game this season (not counting against the two loser teams), I would say the real matchup is Brady against the #1 defense in the league.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning

    In Response to Re: Game Planning Manning:
    [QUOTE]Given our recent defensive success against the Colts, and the steady, 17 or so points allowed each game this season (not counting against the two loser teams), I would say the real matchup is Brady against the #1 defense in the league.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]


    I feel the same way. I am more anxious about whether this offense can actually get some scoring done. Indy does two things well: they rush the passer, and protect deep.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Game Planning Manning

    In Response to Re: Game Planning Manning:
    [QUOTE]Moss, the backpedaling begins. You stated that if the Pats hold the Colts to 18 points and we lose its the Defense's fault. Then when Z asked if we lost 3-0, you said yes its the D's fault because they failed by allowing the opposing teams offense to allow the field goal, we now know thats not true because I explained to you defense stops TDs and Special Teams units try to block field goals. Either way you look at it, your initial statement that in holding the Colts to 18 points and still losing means its the D's fault. It is a team loss. All three phases of the game lost. I think most would assume holding the Colts to 18 points means we played very good defensively. That is what was being said.
    Posted by MaritimePatsFan[/QUOTE]yes its a total team loss,but when you lose there is nothing good about it,but in my anwsers to the other statements you dont see me back pedaling,but saying that the offense wasnt getting it done either.being that this game was last year,and cassel was at the helm.i would think it would be up to the defense to pick up the slack.so i could in this case putting some heat on the defense.if it was brady then it would be a diffrent case.either way its my opinion,and you,and everyone else has there own opinion.i think in all factors we are right,and wrong based on technicalities.
     

Share