Against Baltimore, he was 15-30 for 170 yards and 2 picks, we scored 15 points. Against KC he threw for 268 yards, but he had 3 picks. That's 5 picks in the first 2 games and we still won somehow, but not because of him. Not to mention in the pats game he stunk it up in the first half as well and dug us a huge hole.
i appreciate what Manning has done for Indy, but he didn't do it all himself.
If Peyton wins the super bowl, I think he'll retire immediately afterward. The guy has admitted he's not the same player physically that he was before the neck injury. And Peyton while great, most definitely cares about his stats IMO, I'm not saying that to criticize him, I just think it's true. Peyton was a big reason we won so many regular season games, he was a big reason we made the playoffs every year.
But once we were in the playoffs in 2007, Peyton was not the reason we won the Super Bowl that year. I'm just being honest. Peyton's best years were actually the last few IMO, because that team was a piece of crap.
As far as Irsay wanting to save money, I think that's been silly, maybe on Peyton's contract, but we have what like $40 million in dead deals we are paying on right now?
Peyton's second half against New England was one of the greatest performances by a QB in playoff history. Yeah his stats in the 06 playoffs weren't pretty, but it's not like any of his interceptions cost us. Also, Brady has had some pretty bad playoff stats in recent years. The playoffs are just a different animal as you are playing against elite teams.
Agree 100% with what you say about Irsay. Aside from Peyton, the players we got rid of are no longer any good. I'm grateful for their contributions to the golden era of Colts football, but that doesn't mean that we should have kept them forever.
Irsay has always shown that he is willing to spend on the team. Always. The Marlins example is silly. They got their stadium then after one year they dumped their entire team. The Colts opened their stadium up in 2008 and Peyton played there for three seasons, which included a Super Bowl appearance. In the fourth season, he missed the entire year because of a bizarre injury that no one could have predicted. It's not like Irsay was thinking "I'll fleece the city and get this new stadium. I'll keep Peyton for the first few years to make people think I care. Then I'll cut him after he gets an injury that keeps him out the entire season."
Lucas Oil Stadium opened in 2008, which was Manning's 11 season. Common sense said that Peyton couldn't possibly have played that many seasons there. Three is definitely shorter then we would have expected, but this is a stadium that is going to be around for a long long time. You don't build a 750 million dollar stadium purely to showcase one player that had already played for a decade.
No one could have ever dreamed that things would play out like they did. But the Colts brand seems to have escaped relatively unscathed. Just keep winning.
Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-15-2012 at 02:03 PM.
From the Colts' "firesale" exactly one player that was let go from the Colts is having a better season or is even close to his Colts' replacement. Everyone one of those personnel moves, excluding Manning, have made the Colts better in the short term. Everyone one those those personnel moves, including Manning, have setup the Colts exponentially better in the long term. Whether they ultimately reach their potential is another matter. Just because you supposedly hate Irsay doesn't change this.
And you constantly bringing up Luck inevitably being knocked out for a game, season, or career, doesn't support you in whatever you keep trying to say. You mean it's possibly a football player could get hurt? What if Peyton's storybook comeback comes to a screeching halt because of a blind side hit that breaks his neck? Will you finally give up your nonsense on here, or will you continue to repeat the same things over and over?
Forgive us all if we take your predictions of the Colts impeding doom with a grain of salt.
So this is the business plan:
Get a new stadium, cut Manning in relatively short order, then bring in a low-priced JV squad to play football. Then sit back and rake in the dough.
Except how much dough can you rake in with a losing team, no star potential, blackouts, and dwindling gate receipts?
If Irsay was about short-term dough then keeping Manning until his game deteriorated so much the crowd turned on him (IOW milking his career and name value) seems like a better business plan.
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."
Now back to our current awesome team. Here is a good Q and A The Star did with Grigson:
Isn't that exactly what we're doing? We are 6-3 in just our second year without Manning starting and first year without him on the roster. Last year we sucked because we had the worst collection of starting QBs to ever take a snap.
Can we just stop talking to him? There's no point in arguing.
Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.
There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.