Week 7: Colts @ 49ers

[I_am_1z]

Crazy to think that the DBs alone almost had 6 turnovers themselves, but are being thrown under the bus this game. Norman had 3 forced fumbles and I think there were 3 dropped INTs. I have no idea who taught the DBs to wrap up their guy in coverage when going vertical, but obviously this game wasn't on the DBs. Warner's the highest paid player on the defense and he's nowhere to be found. Shanahan runs the ball successfully the 1st drive using a lot of "windowdressing", then never gets back to the misdirection/motion runs. I'm not sure if he just has a limited number in his playbook, but the Colts didn't show they had an answer for it.

[CrimsonCrew]

Crazy to think that the DBs alone almost had 6 turnovers themselves, but are being thrown under the bus this game. Norman had 3 forced fumbles and I think there were 3 dropped INTs. I have no idea who taught the DBs to wrap up their guy in coverage when going vertical, but obviously this game wasn't on the DBs. Warner's the highest paid player on the defense and he's nowhere to be found. Shanahan runs the ball successfully the 1st drive using a lot of "windowdressing", then never gets back to the misdirection/motion runs. I'm not sure if he just has a limited number in his playbook, but the Colts didn't show they had an answer for it.

Nowhere to be found in coverage is usually a good thing, and I don't recall seeing Warner get beat in that area yesterday. He was pretty active in the run game, with seven solo tackles, two for a loss, and a fumble recovery.

The QBs were clearly struggling to throw yesterday, so it's not as if the DBs were making amazing plays. The would-be INTs were mostly balls that were right to them. Norman had a very up-and-down day. He was active in the run game, forcing one fumble and maybe two (I don't recall three), and he had the one near-INT. He also completely blew his coverage responsibility repeatedly while cheating inside to help against the run. The DBs in general commit way too many penalties. CBs outright grabbing receivers downfield. Tartt literally just running through the receiver when he could have played the ball. It was sloppy, and it cost us in a big way in a low-scoring affair.

Though there was PLENTY of blame to go around in this one, starting with the coaching staff.

[thesack12]

Most of these issues are only correctable with experience which is the conundrum the team faces because the best move for the future is to get him out there now and get that experience but the safest move for now is to stick with Jimmy G.

I'm not much of a believer into the notion you could "ruin" a QB by starting him too early because I believe the two main factors in a QB being ruined are either the QB didn't have "it" in the first place or the team he's on is a dysfunctional mess and sometimes it's both. QBs that start their rookie years typically are drafted high to bad teams that are poorly run which is one big reason they ultimately fail not necessarily because they were thrown in there too soon. We've seen rookie QBs start their first year develop just fine and usually the common denominator is a quality coaching staff and organization.

I get why they'd stick with Jimmy though because we the pundit class simply aren't wired to think like those on the inside do. While we believe that the team has virtually no shot at winning a Super Bowl even if it makes the playoffs so might as well raise our chances for next season the organization is thinking that if they can just get to the playoffs and clean a few issues up they can make a run.

For me though the Jimmy G offense has crashed its head on its ceiling and while again I don't strictly point the finger at Jimmy only I don't see him doing anything to make it dramatically better either. For me the smarter bet is to start Lance, hope you win some games while taking your lumps, and maybe towards the end of the season he's more comfortable and the offense is more explosive while being less of a bumpy ride with Lance at the helm. And even if that doesn't happen you'll still have gotten Lance some much needed snaps and experience that will give him a solid foundation to build on next season.

I disagree that you can't harm a QB's development if you throw him to the fire too early.

All of the high end QB prospects (1st round picks) were all at one time highly regarded and in most cases had pretty decorated pre-NFL careers. In other words there is a reason they became 1st round picks.

These are guys who before getting to the NFL were almost always vastly superior to and were used to dominating most competition they have faced. It has been that way for their entire lives for most cases. All these guys know is success and being able to impose their will on opponents. More often than not, things came relatively easy for them.

Then these guys get into the NFL, where everybody on the field resides in that top 1% caliber athletes. Suddenly they start to encounter more adversity than they ever have. If that adversity sustains it leads to those QB's struggling, which leads to the media and fanbase starting get antsy and openly questioning/criticizing said QB. In a lot of cases with these guys, they haven't ever experienced the struggles or the criticisms. These guys have walked on water before getting to the NFL. So when they are suddenly surrounded by negativity, it can have negative long term effects some of those guys.

Basically it boils down to a confidence/psyche deal. One thing you can never quantify is just how much a guy's psyche/confidence will be effected with struggles/criticism until he experiences it. Not having things come to them easily or not playing well is a foreign concept to these guys.

Because we are looking back on them as known failures, Its easy to say that guys like David Carr/Tim Couch/Vince Young/Matt Leinart/Marcus Mariota/etc failed simply because they they just weren't good enough to succeed even if they had sat early in their careers. Which could very well be the case, but like I mentioned earlier its impossible to quantify their psyche after struggling early and often. So we'll never know how these guys' career might have turned out differently if their development had been approached differently.

On the flip side, its easy to declare that guys like Aaron Rodgers/Drew Brees/Tom Brady/Patrick Mahomes/Eli Manning/Phillip Rivers/etc greatly benefitted from sitting early in their careers. These guys had time to sit back and learn the nuances of the NFL without having their feet in the fire. However, All of these guys could have very well became just as successful as they did even if they got thrown into the fire from day 1.

The point is we'll never know just how big of a factor sitting or not sitting played in the career arc of these guys.

As for Trey Lance specifically, I haven't done a deep dive into it but he could very well be the most under-experienced 1st round QB ever. Tannehill and Trubisky immediately come to mind as other green prospects, but neither were nearly as green as Trey was. Lance only had 17 starts. Only 2 years total in an organized college program, 1 year of which he was the backup thus got backup reps in practice. And all this was at the FCS level.

That isn't exactly a great recipe for just throwing a guy out there just because the fan base wants to see something different. While its true a lot of Trey's improvements will only come with playing, but that doesn't mean he can't improve by sitting. If Kyle truly feels that the only thing he can currently consistently trust Trey with are QB runs out of power formations, which considering his play calls in the 'Zona game would lead you to beleive that is the case, then having Trey out there isn't good for Trey or the team.

[I_am_1z]

Crazy to think that the DBs alone almost had 6 turnovers themselves, but are being thrown under the bus this game. Norman had 3 forced fumbles and I think there were 3 dropped INTs. I have no idea who taught the DBs to wrap up their guy in coverage when going vertical, but obviously this game wasn't on the DBs. Warner's the highest paid player on the defense and he's nowhere to be found. Shanahan runs the ball successfully the 1st drive using a lot of "windowdressing", then never gets back to the misdirection/motion runs. I'm not sure if he just has a limited number in his playbook, but the Colts didn't show they had an answer for it.

Nowhere to be found in coverage is usually a good thing, and I don't recall seeing Warner get beat in that area yesterday. He was pretty active in the run game, with seven solo tackles, two for a loss, and a fumble recovery.

The QBs were clearly struggling to throw yesterday, so it's not as if the DBs were making amazing plays. The would-be INTs were mostly balls that were right to them. Norman had a very up-and-down day. He was active in the run game, forcing one fumble and maybe two (I don't recall three), and he had the one near-INT. He also completely blew his coverage responsibility repeatedly while cheating inside to help against the run. The DBs in general commit way too many penalties. CBs outright grabbing receivers downfield. Tartt literally just running through the receiver when he could have played the ball. It was sloppy, and it cost us in a big way in a low-scoring affair.

Though there was PLENTY of blame to go around in this one, starting with the coaching staff.

My error. I read on twitter Josh Norman had three forced fumbles, but they were talking about the on the season.

I don't get why you think your highest paid defender that plays LB should be having silent games that are run heavy?

[CrimsonCrew]

Crazy to think that the DBs alone almost had 6 turnovers themselves, but are being thrown under the bus this game. Norman had 3 forced fumbles and I think there were 3 dropped INTs. I have no idea who taught the DBs to wrap up their guy in coverage when going vertical, but obviously this game wasn't on the DBs. Warner's the highest paid player on the defense and he's nowhere to be found. Shanahan runs the ball successfully the 1st drive using a lot of "windowdressing", then never gets back to the misdirection/motion runs. I'm not sure if he just has a limited number in his playbook, but the Colts didn't show they had an answer for it.

Nowhere to be found in coverage is usually a good thing, and I don't recall seeing Warner get beat in that area yesterday. He was pretty active in the run game, with seven solo tackles, two for a loss, and a fumble recovery.

The QBs were clearly struggling to throw yesterday, so it's not as if the DBs were making amazing plays. The would-be INTs were mostly balls that were right to them. Norman had a very up-and-down day. He was active in the run game, forcing one fumble and maybe two (I don't recall three), and he had the one near-INT. He also completely blew his coverage responsibility repeatedly while cheating inside to help against the run. The DBs in general commit way too many penalties. CBs outright grabbing receivers downfield. Tartt literally just running through the receiver when he could have played the ball. It was sloppy, and it cost us in a big way in a low-scoring affair.

Though there was PLENTY of blame to go around in this one, starting with the coaching staff.

My error. I read on twitter Josh Norman had three forced fumbles, but they were talking about the on the season.

I don't get why you think your highest paid defender that plays LB should be having silent games that are run heavy?

Again, I don't think seven solo tackles, two TFLs, and a fumble recovery is "silent." Though admittedly, although I think he's good at it, playing the run downhill isn't where Warner truly excels. He's a guy with unique movement skills and coverage ability at the position. He's not going to regularly blow up guards. Very few players excel in both areas, and in today's NFL, the movement guy is much more valuable. And there's no doubt Warner got blocked out of the play a few times in this game. But he still played pretty well. He certainly wasn't the problem in this one.

[CrimsonCrew]

How was there no holding called there? Absurd.

[CrimsonCrew]

And I'm in the wing thread. Ha.