You watched a defense take the field 9 times, giving up 7 TDs and 2 field goals, and wonder what might have been if you had your offense back?
I didn't watch the game, so maybe I am off base a little. Some guys on the defensive side of the ball would seem to need to take after the tin man and go looking for a heart. Or some guts. Or maybe some balls?
There's no doubt in my mind that Peyton being on the sidelines effects the defense. When you believe you have a chance to win, you play harder than when you think it's pointless. That's basic human nature.
If you want to argue whether or not it's acceptable, I'd probably on your side of the argument.
But simply put, this team has given up and quite frankly they haven't had much fight in them all year.
The mental approach is just as important as the phsyical one.
Point is we know what Manning could do with this team last year in which they had an increbible amount of injuries to key players. I think its safe to say that with a healthy Collie, Dallas and a better running game that he would lead this team to a 10 or 11 win season.
Edit: FWIW, the colts were ranked 23 rd last year in scoring defense and this year they are 32. That number drops into the mid 20's if the Colts have Peyton this year. IF the defense plays with a lead it can be deadly.
Last edited by Gamble1; 10-24-2011 at 02:48 PM.
Of course you could also look at it as a blessing in disguise because Caldwell may have been given a pass for this dismal season.
World Series ratings top Saints-ColtsEmailPrintComments160Associated Press
Highlight Of The Night
Derek Holland pitches 8 1/3 scoreless innings as the Rangers defeat the Cardinals in Game 4 to even the World Series.Highlight Of The Night
Highlight Of The Night
Highlight Of The NightDerek Holland pitches 8 1/3 scoreless innings as the Rangers defeat the Cardinals in Game 4 to even the World Series.Saints March All Over Colts, 62-7
Saints March All Over Colts, 62-7Saints become only the fifth team to put up 62 since the mergerHolland Success From Controlled Emotions
Holland Success From Controlled EmotionsBuster Olney joins Mike and Mike in the morning to discuss the reason for Derek Holland's tremendous Game 4Holland and Napoli Seal the Win
Holland and Napoli Seal the WinTim Kurkjian and Richard Durrett discuss how Derek Holland and Mike Napoli helped tie the World Series 2-2.Tags: Texas Rangers, World Series, Derek Holland, Mike Napoli, Tim Kurkjian, Richard DurrettNEW YORK -- The World Series beat the NFL on Sunday night this time.
WS: Rangers vs. Cardinals
Complete coverage of the Rangers-Cardinals matchup. More Ľ
A close Game 4 drew a higher preliminary television rating than the football rout. The Texas Rangers led the St. Louis Cardinals 1-0 into the sixth inning, winning 4-0. The baseball game on Fox earned a 10.1 overnight rating and 16 share.
The New Orleans Saints led the Peyton Manning-less Indianapolis Colts 21-0 after the first quarter of a 62-7 victory to draw an 8.2/13 on NBC.
Last year, Steelers-Saints on "Sunday Night Football" earned an 11.8/18 while the Giants-Rangers World Series drew a 10.4/16.
Ratings represent the percentage of all homes with televisions tuned into a program. Shares represent the percentage of all homes with TVs in use at the time. Overnight ratings measure the country's largest markets.
Bravo to the Colts!
They are throwing away a lost season to begin the rebuilding project next year, regardless if Peyton ever plays another down or not. It would be absolutely foolish for them to replace Caldwell at this point as he is following his normal decision making patterns while still enhancing the likelihood of losing every single game the Colts play. That way it doesn't seem nearly as much like they are purposely tanking the season.
Even if they fail in the Luck sweepstakes, they are very likely to pick up another really good player for any of several positions of need that riddle the roster at this point by drafting near the top of the draft, and might even be in the position to convert a star veteran + their pick into getting the first pick.
So, keep up the good work! Goooooooo Colts!!!!!!!!
Wait, why didn't the Colts go 16-0 last year? We won 12 games in 08, 14 games in 09, so shouldn't we have gone 16-0 according to your linear progression models?
In 05 we won 13 games and then 12 games in 06. So shouldn't we have won 11 in 07 and then 10 in 08? Well, that didn't happen as we won 13 and 12.
Patriots went 16-0 with Brady in 07, then 10-6 in 2009 when Brady played again. So shouldn't they have won like 4 games last year according to your linear progression theory?
There's a much bigger difference between winning 6 and 10 than winning 10 and 14. When you win 14 like the Colts did in 09, that means you are most likely pulling out some close games and getting lucky here and there. In 2010, we didn't get quite as lucky as we were more banged up and didn't get as lucky in certain situations as the year before. But we were still a decent team. Just because we dropped off a bit doesn't mean we were headed to be a horrible team this year. Your linear argument just makes no sense.
We haven't had a losing season with Manning since 01. We would have easily won the Browns, Chiefs, Steelers, and Bucs games with Manning. Probably would have won against Houston with Manning given that he wouldn't have fumbled 80 times like Collins did. I think Manning could have pulled a win out against Cincy too.
Find me any example in NFL history where a team follows some linear progression model. It never happens. Records don't follow any particular pattern.
Last edited by Sollozzo; 10-26-2011 at 03:40 PM.
The colts for the last 5 years have been down in drafting and FA signings and unlucky in the injury department. Combine that with a coaching void and you have a perfect storm. I don't think this team is built very well and I don't think it was headed for a 14-2 season under Manning at all. I think 10 to 11 wins is about right were the team would be with Manning. Take the HOF away and you got yourself a terrible team.
Yeah, I think this Colts team has maybe 4 wins with Manning. I understand the points of view like he keeps the D off the field or the entire team playing with more focus/energy b/c they feel they have more of a chance to win. I just think the combination of other injuries plus lack of quality talent and depth would override some of that.
I absolutely do not believe we'd be legitimate SB contenders. Not to say we might not wind up there with a streak of outstanding play. Yes Manning, good fortune, and momentum can propel you even to those heights, but it would be hard to overcome the Oline & the D in general, not unlike a major part of the problem in 2nd half of 06 with Saints. D just could never get them off the field.
Regardless of the PM injury impact, I still strongly believe that the general disrepair and inability of our D for the past several years has been our achilles heel. And the primary responsibility lies with those making player personnel and coaching decisions.
I mean, Coyer had been run out of town as DC at plenty of places. Wasn't he the architect of the Denver D that we routinely shredded in the playoffs in the early 2000s? The one that was purportedly high ranking and aggressive, but that just wilted and looked clueless? Then we'd run up against the NEs of the playoff world and look downright pedestrian on offense.
I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
Several missed my point: I realize you can go back in time all you want, but how much of that is relevant?
I'm connecting a measurable, OBVIOUS, and undeniable decline from the moment Jim Caldwell took over as head coach. It doesn't take a football genius to see that he was way over his head. It reminds me of Mike Davis inheriting talent at Indiana after the Knight firing and fooling us for a little while that he could coach. Then it got worse, and worse, and worse, and pretty soon it was obvious that the guy was in well over his head and it just wasn't going to get better, EVER.
Another lesson from the IU coaching carosel is that one bad head coach hiring decision is damaging. If an even worse one follows it, you have damaging-squared. If Polian is around to pick a yes-man as his head coach, I think you will have damaging-squared. With Peyton or without, with Luck or without.
Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 10-26-2011 at 09:15 AM.
I don't know how anyone missed your point, because it was pretty straight forward. You said that since they were a 14 win team two years ago, 10 wins one year ago, that they would be a 6 win team this year, if Peyton had stayed healthy.
That's a pretty easy point, no matter how wildly flawed, to follow.
Such a weird thing to say considering you're the one that went back in time to use past W/L records in order to use linear progression as evidence that they would have won only 6 games.
Two years isn't evidence of a trend, especially when the previous 8 seasons are all 10+ wins.
Until there is more evidence, with Peyton, your linear progression model isn't based on a logical conclusion.
I don't know about the linear progression model but I do know the Colts have not been able to stop the run or get a conservative team off the field in much of the Manning era and that has been our undoing during many a playoff game and the reason this team doesn't have the playoff record/SB appearance/wins of their chief rival- The Patriots.
We can argue over who you blame for that... but this Manning injury should show us we've potentially waited too long to address this fatal flaw and somebody needs blamed for it.
Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.
"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."
In a way, I blame Manning for it. He enabled Dungy to implement his nonsensical demand that his linemen on both sides of the ball be quick instead of powerful. Manning, aided by his use of the no huddle, has been so quick to get rid of the ball that it has covered the majority of this weakness during the regular season, and reduced the opposition's ability to fully exploit the Colts weakness in stopping the run. Also, I would guess these quick linemen tend to be cheaper than the more desireable power linemen, enabling the Colts to retain the required receivers for Peyton to throw to, as well as being able to afford Freeney and Mathis to solidify what is otherwise a very weak defense.