Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Colts vs Chargers

Old School said:
It would be nice to see someone call an audible at the line once in a while.
Click to expand...

Having Manning here wouldn't mean a ton of audibles. Shanahan and Kubiak aren't big audible guys, although Kubiak said he is going to consider adding a few more this off-season.
 
infantrycak said:
Having Manning here wouldn't mean a ton of audibles. Shanahan and Kubiak aren't big audible guys, although Kubiak said he is going to consider adding a few more this off-season.
Click to expand...

They might not be big audible guys now, but they also aren't working with a well established QB like Manning. If somehow the sun blew up and Manning ended up on the Texans Kubiak would get fired if he didn't let Manning audible out of plays after he reads the coverages. I like to think that Mannings ability to audible and whatnot makes up a good portion of what qualifies him as a certified "great".

****, he'd probably have even more talent on offense here than what he would up there.
 
I cant believe a defense caoched by the great Tony Dungy couldn't stop the Chargers when it counted.

Oh wait the same thing happened last year.

He played the am I going to retire again card to take the heat off his inability to get his favored Colts a win in the playoffs again this year & nobody in the media calls him out.

Go write another book Tony.
 
edo783 said:
Ya, kind of. I wonder what would happen if they were both out of them? I guess the game gets played with both teams having 4 time outs.
Click to expand...

If both teams had been out of timeouts, then the Colts wouldn't have been able to call a timeout and therefore, they wouldn't have been given one back.

The officials would have just called an official time out and asked if the Colts wanted a 10 second run-off.
 
b0ng said:
They might not be big audible guys now, but they also aren't working with a well established QB like Manning. If somehow the sun blew up and Manning ended up on the Texans Kubiak would get fired if he didn't let Manning audible out of plays after he reads the coverages. I like to think that Mannings ability to audible and whatnot makes up a good portion of what qualifies him as a certified "great".

****, he'd probably have even more talent on offense here than what he would up there.
Click to expand...

You know Shanahan worked with a QB most consider pretty good, right?

I am sure there would be more audibles just like there may be more this next year with Schaub but I doubt there are many coaches who would allow Manning the freedom he has now. All speculation anyway.
 
Pantherstang84 said:
I did too. I kept thinking that we should have grabbed him last year in the off-season while he was just an assistant.

Now that he is the DC, we probably can't get him.
Click to expand...

Rivera has been a head coaching canidate the last few years and probably should have had a job by now. I wanted Dallas to nab him instead of Wade.

As far as the facemask...I'm not sure what the hell game some of you watched but the guy grabbed it, twisted..didn't let go and then pushed him down. It was a blatant 15 yarder and you could see it in his reaction afterward.
 
mexican_texan said:
Didn't Kubiak take audibles away from Schaub after his first few games?
Click to expand...

Not that I recall. There was noise about Carr not being allowed to audible. Kubiak said that was not true but there are some plays they don't want audibled. I suspect he limited Carr severely on options, but as a general matter he isn't big on audibles. He runs plays sometimes to set up plays later and wants to see the reaction. If the QB audibles out, he doesn't get his read. I'm glad to hear he may be relaxing that philosophy though.
 
steelbtexan said:
I cant believe a defense caoched by the great Tony Dungy couldn't stop the Chargers when it counted.

Oh wait the same thing happened last year.

He played the am I going to retire again card to take the heat off his inability to get his favored Colts a win in the playoffs again this year & nobody in the media calls him out.

Go write another book Tony.
Click to expand...

Oh brother.

He really said LAST offseason that this possibly could be his last year and he hasn't made a big deal out of it at ALL..he's very much one of the coaches that prefers to be low key and not in the news every other day so I don't get your take on that at all.

He told the Colts he would have his mind made up a week after the season was over. I'm sure they are hoping he doesn't retire.

He's one of the best coaches out there and he's dealt with everything in his life with great dignity and character.

Didn't the Colts win the SB a few years ago? Haven't they been competititive for years now?
 
HoustonFrog said:
Rivera has been a head coaching canidate the last few years and probably should have had a job by now. I wanted Dallas to nab him instead of Wade.

As far as the facemask...I'm not sure what the hell game some of you watched but the guy grabbed it, twisted..didn't let go and then pushed him down. It was a blatant 15 yarder and you could see it in his reaction afterward.
Click to expand...

Did I hear right in that all facemask penalities are 15 yards now?
 
I did cut waaayyy back on my watching time this past year but that's truly a "I had my head buried in the sand" type moment.

Thanks. I didn't know that about the facemasks.
 
Showtime100 said:
Or you could do the obvious and have a fair OT. Or you could change one simple rule instead of several rules and have the Charger defense out there like the Indy defense was. I have hated the unfair rule from day one. Guys, this isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

I don't see what's unfair about it. It's not like you don't get to play if you lose the toss.
 
Speedy said:
Yeah, let's just keep going back and forth and keep the game going forever. Better yet, let's adopt the college OT. That isn't even football. No thank you. If you don't win it in regulation, then you take your chances in SUDDEN DEATH!!!!

Colts make the stop on 3rd and 11, Chargers are punting.
Colts don't hold the first time and it's 3rd and 4, no telling what happens. Hold them on the next play Bolts are punting.
Colts don't hold the 2nd time, and SD either punts or goes for a 58 yarder.

OT is just fine the way it is. It isn't unfair. You HAVE to play defense. If you don't, you lose. Why punish the Chargers for the Colts failure on D? That doesn't seem too fair.

Back to the game for a sec...should the Colts have taken the safety instead of punting from the back of the end zone? Yeah it's a 1 point game and SD can win on a FG (they won anyway), but if you're kicking from the 20 and you're more set to defend a return, instead of trying to keep the punt from being blocked, maybe the Bolts are backed up well into their own end of the field instead of starting on Indy's side, which could have made a difference.

Either way, I'm just glad to see a Manning and a division rival go down. Let's make it a 2-fer next weekend.
Click to expand...

I'll give you what I have had in mind for years. Each team is guaranteed the OPPORTUNITY to be on offense once and once only. After that all bets are off. If the team that won the toss scores the opposing team gets a kickoff and, assuming they didn't turn it over on the kickoff, that one opportunity to match or better the other score. Again, from that moment on it is indeed sudden death. That way it is fair. One overtime and one OT only unless of course it's playoff football. Not complicated and is very fair.

If I came off rude before I apologize. I don't react too well to "Are you kidding me?" as was posted by one of you in reaction to my simple innocuous opinion. That might be touchy on my part but there are better ways to get a point across. The beginning of your post was annoying as well since I never suggested anything like what you wrote and I think you know that. It isn't like I am an angel on these boards but I try to hold off unnecessarily overreacting to a simple post. In other words I'm getting better at getting off this board when I'm not in a tolerant mood to begin with, but I still slip and am just as guilty as the next guy. I stand by my posts in this thread but I don't come here to argue with friends, but occasionally a button is pushed. I don't know if this last paragraph was necessary but this is just me being me by attempting to clear whatever air needs to be cleared. If I went to the NSZ I'd have to take out about three mf'ers along with myself, so I don't go there :D.

:texflag: :fans: :texflag:
 
Showtime100 said:
I'll give you what I have had in mind for years. Each team is guaranteed the OPPORTUNITY to be on offense once and once only. After that all bets are off. If the team that won the toss scores the opposing team gets a kickoff and, assuming they didn't turn it over on the kickoff, that one opportunity to match or better the other score. Again, from that moment on it is indeed sudden death. That way it is fair. One overtime and one OT only unless of course it's playoff football. Not complicated and is very fair.
Click to expand...

I'm with you--I don't like the current sudden death system and see no reason why it is more "fair" or any other of the reasons given here.
 
Showtime100 said:
I'll give you what I have had in mind for years. Each team is guaranteed the OPPORTUNITY to be on offense once and once only. After that all bets are off. If the team that won the toss scores the opposing team gets a kickoff and, assuming they didn't turn it over on the kickoff, that one opportunity to match or better the other score. Again, from that moment on it is indeed sudden death. That way it is fair. One overtime and one OT only unless of course it's playoff football. Not complicated and is very fair.

If I came off rude before I apologize. I don't react too well to "Are you kidding me?" as was posted by one of you in reaction to my simple innocuous opinion. That might be touchy on my part but there are better ways to get a point across. The beginning of your post was annoying as well since I never suggested anything like what you wrote and I think you know that. It isn't like I am an angel on these boards but I try to hold off unnecessarily overreacting to a simple post. In other words I'm getting better at getting off this board when I'm not in a tolerant mood to begin with, but I still slip and am just as guilty as the next guy. I stand by my posts in this thread but I don't come here to argue with friends, but occasionally a button is pushed. I don't know if this last paragraph was necessary but this is just me being me by attempting to clear whatever air needs to be cleared. If I went to the NSZ I'd have to take out about three mf'ers along with myself, so I don't go there :D.

:texflag: :fans: :texflag:
Click to expand...

My apologies if I came off as rude, but we hear this every time there's an OT game just about. Everybody wants to change the rules of every game that doesn't come out however.

Sudden Death OT has been around since at least the 1958 Championship game, if not longer. It works. It REQUIRES you to play defense. As I said before, if you want to talk about being fair, how is it fair that the Chargers convert a big 3rd and 11, march down the field, thanks in large part to some dumb Indy penalties, and score, why should they be punished by letting Indy have it on offense? On the flip side, why should Indy get to play like crap on defense and be rewarded by getting the ball back to Peyton because of some silly "fairness" rule?

That's why SUDDEN DEATH works. There's no 2nd chances. You used them up in the first 4 quarters. Now it's time to end this game. First to score and that's it. Play defense, make a stop on 3rd and 11 and your offense gets the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top