View Single Post
Old 11-07-2013   #11
thunderkyss 
& so it begins
 
thunderkyss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Age: 41
Posts: 32,284
Rep Power: 153118 thunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respected
Send a message via Yahoo to thunderkyss
Default Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck View Post
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.
Along those same lines, I'm wondering why no one questioned Keenum's ability to find Hopkins in the first half.
__________________
thunderkyss is offline   Reply With Quote