[Kevin Bowen] Gus Bradley today on the #Colts defensive issues: -“Starts with me as a play caller,” followed by some missed assignments, tackles -On Sunday’s 1st quarter: “About as poor as you can play.” -Asked about scheme evolving: “At times, it might be getting too cute.”


[Kevin Bowen] Gus Bradley today on the #Colts defensive issues: -“Starts with me as a play caller,” followed by some missed assignments, tackles -On Sunday’s 1st quarter: “About as poor as you can play.” -Asked about scheme evolving: “At times, it might be getting too cute.”

29 comments
  1. “Too cute”?? Brother you don’t call anything, randomly selecting plays on a spinning wheel probably would have done better

  2. That response sounds like a gambler who’s way down but doubling down on next hand nevertheless.

  3. Going with the 85 Bears 46 defense and allowing a couple of bombs to go over your head after stonewalling their run game for the 1st quarter would have been “cute”. Soft zone cover three against that GB team was more like giving up.

  4. Brother I don’t think you’re being cute enough. I think that’s the problem. You need to iterate. The shit he calls is like 2 decades old. Teams understand how to beat it.

  5. Yeah, unfortunately the same on offense with the poor execution, the drops have been very costly. I really think these things will get fixed, but hopefully sooner rather than later.

  6. What the hell does he mean by “too cute”? We run arguably the most basic defense in the NFL. We virtually never mix up our looks, change our fronts, nothing.

    If anything, I’d like to see Gus run something “cute”. At least give the defense a different look every once in a while.

    A wise defensive mind once said “If you aren’t going to be good, you better be creative”.

  7. This guy has zero idea what he’s doing. I could’ve called the defense and gotten similar or perhaps even better results

  8. I agree the scheme is too cute. At least based upon opposing offense point of view. “oooh, they’re running a basic cover 3 and think they can stop us. Isn’t that cute?!?”

  9. To be fair, the buck stops with Gus, but if you’re in our front seven and you’re not DeForest Buckner, you need to stop cosplaying as the Invisible Man. We can’t have Zaire making one or two plays a game. The fact that Cross has to tackle the rusher on most plays is sickening.

    That’s not scheme, though. That’s execution.

    We’re sucking at both.

  10. My brother in Christ…do you even know what a normal, current defense looks like? Or have you just not studied the game at all and ride on the coattails of the Legion of Boom while you continue to cash your fatass paychecks as we all look on in disgust? Fucking jackass. At least give us a real answer, we deserve it at this point.

  11. Coaches fail up (or sideways) in the NFL constantly and Gus is a prime example.

    Trying anything new or adjusting to current schemes is “getting cute.” Better just keep doing the same shit for 20 years and hope we go back to the 90’s

  12. “It might be getting a little too cute”?

    What the fuck? It’s not cute in the fucking slightest. It’s bland and predictable. What the fuck is cute about that?

    ![gif](giphy|W8zSq0vELdBhMAJdG3|downsized)

  13. I rewatched a bunch of the all-22 from Sunday.

    Greenbay’s front 5+TE did an excellent job of maintaining running lanes through our front 4.

    We were spread very wide with our front 4, often leaving massive space in the middle.

    This puts the pressure on our LBs to hit the gaps and tackle. They often over committed, left assignments, and ended up on top of each other instead of in the gap.

    Because of the way their front was blocking, their RB was 2-3 yards before first contact, and with momentum that yielded a 4-6 yd run.

    Our DBs made some crazy mistakes, from giving massive cushion, to turning to sprint too early, to simply not going up for the ball when their receivers did.

    He had to know after the first drive that what they were doing wasn’t going to work. It was the same play after play.

Leave a Reply