Colts @ Saints: Wednesday Injury Report

by Dave Cariello on Oct 19, 2011 6:04 PM CDT

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS at NEW ORLEANS SAINTS on Sunday night
INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

Practice Report
	OUT (DEFINITELY WILL NOT PLAY)
	Wednesday	QB Peyton Manning (neck)

	DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN PRACTICE
	Wednesday	RB Joseph Addai (hamstring), S Antoine Bethea (not injury related), T Anthony Castonzo (ankle), LB Kavell Conner (foot), LB A.J. Edds (concussion), TE Brody Eldridge (knee), DE Dwight Freeney (not injury related), DT Drake Nevis (back)

	LIMITED PARTICIPATION IN PRACTICE
	Wednesday	QB Kerry Collins (concussion)

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

Practice Report
	DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN PRACTICE
	Wednesday	DT Sedrick Ellis (ankle), TE John Gilmore (neck), LB Will Herring (hamstring), C Olin Kreutz (not injury related), DE Turk McBride (shoulder), T Zach Strief (knee), LB Jonathan Vilma (knee)

	LIMITED PARTICIPATION IN PRACTICE
	Wednesday	TE David Thomas (concussion)

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Kreutz isn't hurt but he is on the list?

Is he sick or are they bout to cut his a$$?

When all your wishes are granted....All you dreams will be destroyed.

by AcquiredPanic on Oct 19, 2011 6:15 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

Kreutz needs to be downgraded to a

backup role, he has shown me that clout can carry a player when ability is swept under the rug. We need to activate Ivory, sorry Ingram shows us that he can run it into the endzone when he has an obvious huge hole to run through. Ivory has shown us that he can see that no hole exists and bounce it to the outside.

by jonrockets on Oct 19, 2011 7:02 PM CDT reply actions

I agree, activate Ivory

I haven’t seen Ingram break tackles like Ivory does (or did), and we know he (Ivory) is a formidable weapon. That being said, there really wasn’t much room to run for anyone last Sunday. Who knows what might have happened. We need a bruising style runner to wear down defenses, and it seems at the moment it’s our running backs that are taking the bruises. Got to make the defense pay a little when they tackle you.

by Valmo on Oct 19, 2011 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions

Earl Campbell couldn't have worn down defense with only 16 running plays.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -Albert Einstein

by HB-NOLA on Oct 19, 2011 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions

You have more success at running

then you call more running plays.

by Valmo on Oct 19, 2011 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions

apparently not

During the 3rd quarter on Sunday, the Saints started a drive with four running plays (gaining 2, 3, 6, 5 yards) and two passing plays. Then, at TB’s 16 yard line, they ran six straight plays in shotgun formation, and settled for a field goal.

Similarly, on the Saints last drive with 7:24 left on the clock – one running play, and then ten straight passing plays, seven in shotgun formation. At no point during that drive were the Saints pressed for time. In fact, they would have done better by running more time off the clock, leaving less for the Bucs, had they managed to score.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -Albert Einstein

by HB-NOLA on Oct 19, 2011 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't think you realize

I’m speaking hypothetically, as in what-if Ivory was in. I know what happened Sunday.

by Valmo on Oct 20, 2011 5:14 AM CDT up reply actions

I guess I'm not getting it

I thought you were saying that if the running plays were more successful, they would call them more often. I used a couple of drives from Sunday to illustrate what’s been true all season – that despite having success when they do run the ball, they’re still not handing the ball off very much. I don’t think Ivory would change that at all. Pierre is pretty good at breaking/slipping tackles as well.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -Albert Einstein

by HB-NOLA on Oct 20, 2011 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions

What I mean is

If instead of getting 2,3,5 yard running plays they instead were getting 6. 8, 10+ yard runs. I get the feeling the Saints feel like small run gains are a waste of time and they might as well pass it – and I would agree except for all the INTs. 2 and 3 yard runs really aren’t going to force a defense to respect a run game enough to change their coverage. However, gaining good chunks of yards on the ground forces them to play honest and thus opens the door for the receivers. We probably both agree on this, where we differ is that I think Ivory would have gained more yards than Thomas or Ingram, with some potentially big runs. Thus they might have thought more about the run in some of those red zone series.

by Valmo on Oct 20, 2011 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions

ah, I see

I disagree about the effect of short yardage gains on the opposing defense. But I get what you’re saying and wouldn’t argue about the how Payton and Co. view those short gains.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -Albert Einstein

by HB-NOLA on Oct 20, 2011 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions

It's like the lottery!

I always tell people that I’ll never win the lottery. I know this because I don’t play the lottery! Same thing with the running game. We’ll never have a chance for a big run if we don’t do it more often. If you look at the average yards per carry before the Tampa Bay game our RBs had decent stats with the exception of Ingram which I can accept because he is a rookie and gets most of the grunt work. We have the weapons…we just fail to use them a lot of the time. I think if Payton hadn’t been hurt we may have ran more! As for the bruising style runner, we have that in Ingram. Don’t tell me we’re already giving up on him already! When Ivory does come back we’ll be even more lethal if we let Ingram develop into his potential instead of forcing it. If Pierre Thomas plays the leadership role along with Sproles and maximize their receiving abilities we could keep defenses guessing with multiple back packages. Especially since we have a very promising fullback in Collins who isn’t the best but does seem to understand his role in the offense. It’s maddening to me to sit there and watch what could be a devastating backfield never get enough action. We had 177 rushing yards once this season against Jacksonville not because they suck but because we used the run effectively. When I say effectively, I wonder where the real Sean Payton is hiding because while he likes hardnosed running attacks he still knows how to mix it up! Sorry about the rant but it’s late and I didn’t want to go to bed until I got that out!

by thukel on Oct 20, 2011 12:00 AM CDT reply actions

Thanks for reminding me to

start playing the lottery.

by jonrockets on Oct 20, 2011 6:56 AM CDT up reply actions

Rec to you guys metioning Kreutz ain't worth a crap.

I knew this ever since pre season and been speaking badly about him every week. Again, the guy is done, even Chicago was happy to release him. When the guy is in there we play much more poorly. It’s time for him to take a walk, a walk far away from this team. Also, you guys can talk run all you want, but the reason we lost this game is due to the fact that we ran the ball too much. We won’t be very succesful if we continue this pattern, trust me. The defense is also losing games for us. The defense has to tighten up big time, Shaun Rogers and Kreutz has to go and we need to run the ball less than what we did Sunday to be more succesful.

by tommy v on Oct 20, 2011 10:13 AM CDT reply actions