Much is being made right now out of Jeff Saturday's comments about the offensive line.

The whole hullabaloo started when Polian made disparaging comments about the line's play in the Super Bowl, despite some evidence that they had a decent enough game.

While I totally understand Saturday's desire not to see his brethren be made the scape goats for losing the Super Bowl (especially when Caldwell and Hank Baskett are so readily available), I think people are missing the point behind what Polian said originally.

The only play the line can clearly be faulted for was the 3rd and 1 debacle at the end of the first half.  Granted that was a huge, game changing play but the O line was only half responsible for it.  The real blame falls on Caldwell for making his first massive tactical error of the day.  Some wackos acted like Polian was trying to protect Manning by blaming the line.  He wasn't.  Manning needs no cover.  He played great.  By blaming the offensive line, Bill Polian was covering Jim Caldwell's butt essentially saying, "it was a good call to run, but the players didn't execute".  The Colts have handled this entire offseason by placing a deflector shield around Caldwell.  He didn't answer questions after the game.  He hasn't talked about his massive brain cramp in sending in Stover yet.  He hasn't had to answer for anything he screwed up that last night.  That tells me that he must have taken the loss pretty hard.  Maybe he blames himself, I don't know.  I certainly blame him.

Moreover, I took Polian's comments about both the offensive line and the special teams as a signal that change is coming to those units.  Was it fair to say the O-line cost Indy the Super Bowl?  No, absolutely not. Is it fair to say the O-line is mediocre at best and was one of the weakest units the team has had for the past two seasons?  Without a doubt.  Other than Saturday and Lilja, the Colts have no linemen that could be considered even slightly above average.  Every statistical analysis shows that quarterbacks are more responsible for sacks than linemen.  So given the fact that the Colts line is awful at run blocking, I'd say it's safe to say it's a problem area.

Anyone analyzing the Colts right now would put offensive line and special teams as the two biggest priorties for improvement heading into 2010.  That makes it unsurprising that Polian would single those units out.  It is unfair, but he's preparing the ground emotionally for changes to come.  The Colts can't do anything about the real reason they lost the Super Bowl.  They aren't going to fire Caldwell for being too conservative, and obviously Reggie Wayne and Pierre Garcon are safe.  What they can do is fix the special teams (which were a massive problem: bad return, missed FG, failure to recover onside kick), and the offensive line.

Essentially Polian was throwing players under the bus who aren't going to be playing (or at least starting) for the Colts next year.  It's unfair in the specific sense and sort of heartless, but it keeps him from having to kill his coach or his star wideout or a young good player like Garcon.  By blaming the O line, Polian gets his scape goat AND when the Colts open up 2010 with a new left tackle or a new right guard he can say, "we fixed the problem!".

And he'll be right.  The offensive line IS a problem.

Just not in the final game.

Comments (20)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by m@chu, March 03, 2010

my question is why did there have to be a scapegoat in the first place? I could be mistaken, but it seems somewhat out of Polian's m.o. to place direct blame unless, as you say, change is coming.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, March 03, 2010

Right, change is coming and he was signaling who it would be.

They knew before the Super Bowl that the line needed an overhaul. He was just setting that up with his comments

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by m@chu, March 03, 2010

and I just got a chance to watch the Saturday interview. it's hilarious how we can be conditioned, as readers, to infer conflict when there really is none. Be it the behavior pattern of certain 'writers' or other elements, I was really expecting something ... more.

Saturday sounds like a guy calmly speaking his mind, and I'd expect him and BP to be able have a 2 minute conversation over this and move on. In fact, the most telling thing I heard was Saturday saying "I've looked at it, and I don't agree ... you just gotta move on."

Another interesting, related note then is the recent hiring of Ron Prince as OL asst. By all accounts, he favors slimmer (smaller) linemen. How is this a change?

Ahhhh, you know what? Forget it, I'm just getting too far into conjecture, listening too much to the pundits about the past (which is prologue).

Yep, stole that last paragraph straight from BP.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Between you and Johnny O...
written by Doug England, March 03, 2010

You guys totally nailed this.

As Johnny O pointed out, it was two lines of an hour's worth of answers from Polian. And as you pointed out, Polian's comments were really more about not throwing Caldwell under the bus and the changes to come.

BBS used Saturday's comments to continue to reiterate his feelings that Polian just needs to shut up, and let someone else be the Colts' mouthpiece. (And Phil B. would probably agree.)

Personally, I think following the Colts would become a lot less interesting, without Polian being out front.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

I think.....
written by MVPeyton18, March 03, 2010

The play that bothered me the most, and also highlighted the failure of the O-line in the Super Bowl, was the stretch play to the right just before the Garcon drop. Addai had just ripped off a 9 yard run to put us in 2nd and 1 at the 29. They go stretch right and he has no where to go with a 3 yard loss. That play exemplified what you guys had been harping on in regards to our inability to run outside. That play still pisses me off.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by SilentRat, March 03, 2010

I agree with the poster above me, but that just brings me to the most obvious (and frustrating) fact about the game... In the Super Bowl Joseph Addai ran 13 times for 77 yards, with that kind of success he should have been handed the ball more. Now I'm no "run to win" pundit-type, but if a strategy is working, picking up yards and keeping the defense off-balance, you stick with it. Especially in the aforementioned 2nd and 1, instead of getting cute with the outside run, go with the low risk of another run up the gut.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, March 03, 2010

Running outside should not qualify as "cute". If it does, then something is seriously wrong with your offense.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Couldn't agree more
written by LovinBlue, March 03, 2010

with all of your points. I've said as much in various forums (fora?), so it's good to hear someone validate me!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Really, the Colts have only one truly good running play
written by dmstorm22, March 03, 2010

which is that weird fake draw thing they do, where it seems like every LB is going to kill Addai for a 5 yard loss every time, bu he gets by and then weaves around all one-on-one blocks.

The old "stretch" play is dead. Gone. This team needs to go OL and then DE in the first two rounds. Also, I wouldn't min seeing Ugoh or Charlie back at RT.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by coltsfanawalt, March 03, 2010

Sayid looks mean and scary as a bad guy. Locke and Claire are pretty convincing as well.

How can all my questions possibly be answered satisfactorily in the next two and a half months???

Oh, and go Colts.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, March 03, 2010

The descent of Sayid has been amazing. Basically, he's always been evil but has fought to be good.

Last night he lost that fight. It was very cool.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Peyton has surgery on his neck
written by Bob L., March 03, 2010

You guys see where Peyton had surgery? http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...?eref=sihp

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, March 03, 2010

Yeah, I just assume all players have surgery as soon as the season ends. Sounded pretty routine.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@DZ
written by coltsfanawalt, March 03, 2010

Good point. Any predictions on how things turn out in the end? I'm trying to wrap my mind around that alternate "flash sideways" or whatever. The characters are entwined quite a bit and some of it didn't make sense at all. Like the absentees and additions on the plane, for example. I am hoping it all comes together in short oder. Have loved the series so far.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, March 03, 2010

Well, I've started watching Fringe (cue Shake being happy). Fringe is Abrams other show and deals heavily with the concept of an alternate reality, two realities coexisting, but affecting one another (like Jack having an appendix scar he can't remember getting). Here are my top theories:

1. The alternate past is the denouement of the show. This is how things end up after whatever is going on on the island is resolved.

2. Based on a line from last night's episode, the alternate past is the result of Evil Locke's faustian bargain. Jacob's people end up okay, but Locke's get screwed (like Sayid apparently did).

3. The "it's a wonderful life" version. Someone will have to make a choice based on that reality to preserve it or destroy it. Sort of like how Jack woke up and realized everything was wrong and had to get back to the island to fix it once before.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by m@chu, March 03, 2010

seriously though, did they ever explain these 'sideways flashes'? because if they did, I missed the episode.

what's funny is I each episode gets me closer to agreeing w/my wife's theory - the writers don't know what's going on and are just doing their best to throw us all off so we can't keep track. because they've LOST track.

so when they plug the big 2 hour show finale ... we overlook the fact that they're still trying to figure out how to end it.

but yes, Locke, what a perfect character. something about his eyes when he was tempting Sayid. perfect for that role. never would have picked him off the beach in season 1 to be that character.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

If you draft good run blocking tackles we will be able to run.
written by Dan Smith, March 04, 2010

Polian has no one to blame but himself, heck, he drafted the guys. Go out and get some but-stomping, DL-eating, monster tackles and lets get back to the Edinger James running days. I believe we have the backs, lets go out and get two, maybe three tackles. The rest of our drafts should be committed to our D.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Interesting
written by coltsfanawalt, March 04, 2010

I've considered theory one already. Theory two is fascinating. I guess we will see.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Bill Polian
written by matuag, March 08, 2010

also seems to be offended now
Lilja's been cut

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by matuag, March 08, 2010

"Other than Saturday and Lilja, the Colts have no linemen that could be considered even slightly above average" - what does that say about the future of the other 3 guys now

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment