Colts

[greasywheels121]

We're down friggen' 17-3 to the Pats towards the end of the 2nd half..... .....Hopefully I can come back to this and post otherwise later on.

[SnB]

Da bears winning over the might red birds of arizona

[greasywheels121]

Ha I have the Bears game also.....Hopefully this thread can change things around....Colts are now down just 17-10 going into the 2nd half......

[Be Good]

GO Colts so the Dolphins can get a game back from 1st

[Spiff]

TD pats 31-10

[greasywheels121]

TD pats 31-10

[greasywheels121]

38-31 Pats now....we were down by 21 in the 3rd....We're coming backkkk.

[greasywheels121]

UGH well we lost 38-34....it was a damn good game though.

[southsider2k5]

UGH well we lost 38-34....it was a damn good game though.

That was s***ty goalline stand by the Colts. I couldn't believe they didn't give Peyton more a chance than they did. It was obvious with Washington in the middle they weren't going to be able to stuff it up the gut. You either had to bounce it outside or use Manning.

[Chisoxfn]

Damn the Colts are the come back kids. They fell short but I thought they had no chance. They have really been struggling lately though.

 

They are like the 2001 Bears....LUCKY.

[Brian]

We're down friggen' 17-3 to the Pats towards the end of the 2nd half..... .....Hopefully I can come back to this and post otherwise later on.

Who's "we"? What position do you play?

 

[witesoxfan]

TD pats 31-10

 

GO PATS!!!

[whitesox61382]

The Colts aren't like the 2001 Bears. They have actually been pretty good the past couple of years, unlike the Bears before the 2001 season. The Colts also have A LOT more talent, including the top offense in the game. They have had 1 or 2 lucky wins, but this is still a very good team with a bright future, unlike the Bears of 2001.

 

They should have won this game. Not being able to get the ball into the end zone on 4 tries for the 1 yard line is unacceptable(give some credit to the Pats D). I don't understand why they didn't do a QB sneak on 2nd down when the ball was on the 1 inch line. Manning is 6'5, and I am pretty sure that he could reach the ball over the goal line. I also didn't like their 3rd down call when they threw a fad, to the short side of the field, to a former practice squad receiver, who didn't play in most of the game. I would have much rather seen them either run the ball twice or rolled out Manning and have him either run it in(if there was no one there with everyone clogging the middle) or throw to the TE coming across. Its easy to second guess after the fact, and Dungy and Moore are great coaches despite the results today.

 

Another thing that upset me was the fake injury by McGinist to stop the clock, stop momentum, and give the Pats D a much need rest when they had no timeouts left. You still have to blame the Colts inability to execute first, but the fake injury could have impacked the game. Oh well, it was still a good game, and a preview of a possible playoff match.

[greasywheels121]

Damn the Colts are the come back kids.  They fell short but I thought they had no chance.  They have really been struggling lately though.

 

They are like the 2001 Bears....LUCKY.

Ha I personally think the Pats are more like the 2001 Bears than anything. The Pats remind me a lot of the Buckeyes. Have they really had any convincing wins? They always just squeak by.

[greasywheels121]

Who's "we"? What position do you play?

 

LOL well you know what I mean. I'm a big fan of the sports in the area (ChiSox, Pacers, Colts, and Hoosiers.) My family used to go down to Indy when I was younger and see a lot of the games. This definitely seems like it could be the year that Peyton at least wins one playoff game.

[Chisoxfn]

Ha I personally think the Pats are more like the 2001 Bears than anything.  The Pats remind me a lot of the Buckeyes.  Have they really had any convincing wins?  They always just squeak by.

Well the Pats had the Colts convincingly beat until they let the game get away. I mean how many huge comebacks have the Colts already had.

 

They have some talent, but they really haven't been playing good as of late, but I can say that about a lot of teams.

 

I believe the Eagles are the best team in the NFC and that the Panthers are the 2nd best. I actually think the Bears are one of the 6 best teams in the NFC (not saying they will make the playoffs...but they are playing good). In the AFC I think that Denver, if healthy is a sleeper team, while the Pats and Titans are the favorites to go to the superbowl (I think it will be the Titans). I'm not a big Miami fan, although Fiedler is a solid qb but the Wanny factor tells me no, plus they haven't proven they can win in the cold and they won't get home field throughout.

[greasywheels121]

Well the Pats had the Colts convincingly beat until they let the game get away.  I mean how many huge comebacks have the Colts already had. 

 

They have some talent, but they really haven't been playing good as of late, but I can say that about a lot of teams. 

 

I believe the Eagles are the best team in the NFC and that the Panthers are the 2nd best.  I actually think the Bears are one of the 6 best teams in the NFC (not saying they will make the playoffs...but they are playing good).  In the AFC I think that Denver, if healthy is a sleeper team, while the Pats and Titans are the favorites to go to the superbowl (I think it will be the Titans).  I'm not a big Miami fan, although Fiedler is a solid qb but the Wanny factor tells me no, plus they haven't proven they can win in the cold and they won't get home field throughout.

I agree with what you're saying; the Colts have had some lucky games. However, don't forget about the 11-1 Chiefs when talking about the Super Bowl.

[whitesox61382]

"I mean how many huge comebacks have the Colts already had."

 

This is your problem, you are under the misconception that comebacks are a sign of luck, which they aren't. I would argue that you could say that it shows MORE TALENT(especially offensively). How many teams in the NFL have the talent/personal to comeback like the Colts have this year(and in previous years)? Is that not an example of good talent? You also have to remember that a key ingredient in a comeback is defensive stands as well. Besides, you make it sound like the Colts have had to comeback in every game, but the fact is that this was really only the second game this year that the Colts had a big comeback. Furthermore, if you check the stats in most games the Colts have dominated. There 3 loses have come by a combined total of 12 points, including 1 overtime lose. Not to mention that they have played one of the hardest schedules in the NFL. This is a very talented team that was good last year, has improved, and has a bright future(especially if they get some defensive help in the draft).

 

"Well the Pats had the Colts convincingly beat until they let the game get away."

 

Come on, you are smarter then that. Just because a team has a big lead it is far from a guarantee that they are going to win or should win for that matter. The fact is that if the Pats didn't get that kickoff return before the end of the half, it would have been a 7 point game with the Colts getting the ball to start the second half.

 

"They have some talent, but they really haven't been playing good as of late, but I can say that about a lot of teams."

 

What do you define as playing good, because they have been winning(which is the #1 sign of playing good)?

 

"while the Pats and Titans are the favorites to go to the superbowl (I think it will be the Titans)."

 

You realize that you are excluding the team with the best record in the NFL? You need to better research your football info. If you truely believe that the Pats are the favorites for the superbowl, than you must think that the Colts aren't too far behind, considering they were literally an inch away from beating the Pats.

 

The Colts have almost nothing in common with the fluke Bears of 2001. The Bears three previous seasons before 2001 were:

 

98' 4-12

99' 6-10

00' 5-11

 

So jumping to a 13-3 record in 2001 had fluke written all over it, especially when you looked at the talent on the roster.

 

The Colts on the other hand have done the following the 3 previous seasons before 2003:

 

00' 10-6

01' 6-10(injury plagued season)

02' 10-6

 

The Colts have had 2 10 wins season the in the previous 3 years, and in 01' they were devasted by injuries. They have been consistantly good offensively over the past couple of years, and have been improving defensively, so how does that equal a fluke? The fact is that the Colts are a very good team, and if they can address some of the defensive weaknesses they could be the best team in the NFL with their offensive power.

[Spiff]

When speaking of the Patriots, and convincing wins, I don't necessarily look at the blowouts, because blowouts don't always tell the story. The bills blew out the Patriots on opening day 31-0. Does that win convince anyone that Buffalo is better than New England? Not really. The Bills are 5-7, now 5 games back of the Pats with four games to go and fighting the Jets for third place.

 

If you want convincing wins by New England, well I think there are a few. After that Buffalo loss they bounced back and beat an admittedly struggling (at the time) Eagles team 31-10. Three weeks later they beat the Titans ( the team everyone seems enamored with) at home by 8. Two weeks later in Miami, the Patriots tied the Dolphins at 13 with 1:49 left in the game after an 8 minute drive orchestrated by Brady. Then on the first play of overtime, he hits Troy Brown for an 82 yard touchdown, game over. Two weeks after that, on a monday night in Denver, down by 1 deep in their own end, they take a safety, kickoff and make the Broncos punt. Brady drives them downfield and throws to David freaking Givens for the winning score. Not to mention the 12-0 shutout of Dallas on a Sunday, which I saw first-hand and convinced me a hell of a lot. Then last week coming from behind in Houston, a game they could easily have lost (being between Dallas and Indy). Then today they held on against Indy with a gutsy goal line stand.

 

If those wins aren't convincing, then I don't know what it is. I still think Kansas City is the team to beat in the AFC, but the Pats are number two.

[witesoxfan]

When speaking of the Patriots, and convincing wins, I don't necessarily look at the blowouts, because blowouts don't always tell the story.  The bills blew out the Patriots on opening day 31-0.  Does that win convince anyone that Buffalo is better than New England?  Not really.  The Bills are 5-7, now 5 games back of the Pats with four games to go and fighting the Jets for third place.

 

If you want convincing wins by New England, well I think there are a few.  After that Buffalo loss they bounced back and beat an admittedly struggling (at the time) Eagles team 31-10.  Three weeks later they beat the Titans ( the team everyone seems enamored with) at home by 8.  Two weeks later in Miami, the Patriots tied the Dolphins at 13 with 1:49 left in the game after an 8 minute drive orchestrated by Brady.  Then on the first play of overtime, he hits Troy Brown for an 82 yard touchdown, game over.  Two weeks after that, on a monday night in Denver, down by 1 deep in their own end, they take a safety, kickoff and make the Broncos punt.  Brady drives them downfield and throws to David freaking Givens for the winning score.  Not to mention the 12-0 shutout of Dallas on a Sunday, which I saw first-hand and convinced me a hell of a lot.  Then last week coming from behind in Houston, a game they could easily have lost (being between Dallas and Indy).  Then today they held on against Indy with a gutsy goal line stand.

 

If those wins aren't convincing, then I don't know what it is.  I still think Kansas City is the team to beat in the AFC, but the Pats are number two.

God why'd you have to bring Buffalo into this?

 

Bunch of dumbasses are going to finish like 6-10 or something and get some s***ty pick and not get an impact player.

 

Anyways, I agree with pretty much everything you said.

[DBAHO]

Well the Pats had the Colts convincingly beat until they let the game get away.  I mean how many huge comebacks have the Colts already had. 

 

They have some talent, but they really haven't been playing good as of late, but I can say that about a lot of teams. 

 

I believe the Eagles are the best team in the NFC and that the Panthers are the 2nd best.  I actually think the Bears are one of the 6 best teams in the NFC (not saying they will make the playoffs...but they are playing good).  In the AFC I think that Denver, if healthy is a sleeper team, while the Pats and Titans are the favorites to go to the superbowl (I think it will be the Titans).  I'm not a big Miami fan, although Fiedler is a solid qb but the Wanny factor tells me no, plus they haven't proven they can win in the cold and they won't get home field throughout.

Yeah da Eagles will be favs now afta what they did to da Panthers today, though da Cowboys r still in there, but their runnin game stinks. Quincy Carter has really improved but Hambrick's has not.

[Chisoxfn]

I watch a ton of football. I spend my Sunday mornings at the bar every week drinking coke and watching football with my buddies.

 

I just don't see the Chiefs as being that good. They give up a ton of points, although part of it has to deal with al ot of the time teams are passing trying to come back, but they are still giving up the point.

 

4 weeks ago, I would of said the Colts were one of the top teams out there. I give them credit for the wins, but I try to watch how a team is playing at this point. The Colts are good, but I think the Titans and Patriots are better. Things can change a week from now or two weeks from now. Right now the Colts aren't clicking on all cylinders and they are still in the games.

 

They haven't looked that good since the Jacksonville loss, imo. I usually don't see the late games unless the Bears are playing, I just see highlights of them, but where I watch there are tv's on with all the games so it allows me to see a ton of football.

 

I ain't a statitician, I just go on my eyes for the most part. I can tell a lot by how a team is playing.

[whitesox61382]

"If those wins aren't convincing, then I don't know what it is. I still think Kansas City is the team to beat in the AFC, but the Pats are number two."

 

At this point I don't think you can clearly say that this team is better then that team in the NFL, and AFC for that matter(among the elite). The Colts were literally 1 inch away from beating the Pats. Does that make the Pats clearly better then the Colts? The way that I see it is that there are really 4 elite teams in the AFC, and all have an equal chance to make it to the Superbowl. It is going to come down to which team is hot and getting the breaks during the playoffs, because it isn't clear that one of the 4 teams is better then any other. All of them have weaknesses that can be exploited and have a similar amount of talent. Attempting to say that 1 team is clearly better then any other is an clear case of bias.

 

Don't forget about the NFC either. While I don't think the top NFC teams have the same amount of talent as the 4 AFC teams, there are some teams that are really hot right now and could most certainly beat the top AFC teams(the Pats a couple years ago are an example of a team with less talent winning the Superbowl). The fact is that there is parity in the NFL and that almost any team that makes the playoffs has a good shot at winning it all.

 

"I just don't see the Chiefs as being that good. They give up a ton of points, although part of it has to deal with al ot of the time teams are passing trying to come back, but they are still giving up the point."

 

You answered you own question. In almost every game they have a big lead, and their D is simply trying to not give up the big play that could let the other team back into the game. That means that they will give up some yards and points, but doesn't mean their D is bad, although it isn't great. I do agree that the Chiefs aren't as good as people are making them out to be(their schedule is extremely weak), but they are still as good as the other 3 teams in the AFC and certainly have a good shot of making the Superbowl.

 

"4 weeks ago, I would of said the Colts were one of the top teams out there. I give them credit for the wins, but I try to watch how a team is playing at this point. The Colts are good, but I think the Titans and Patriots are better. Things can change a week from now or two weeks from now. Right now the Colts aren't clicking on all cylinders and they are still in the games."

 

The Colts were literally an inch away from beating the Pats and you can honestly say that they are clearly a better team? That just doesn't make any sense. If you truely follow football like you claim, than you would have known that the Colts have been hammered by injuries the last couple of weeks. This includes missing their top receiver, their #3 receiver, their #4 receiver, their #1 TE, their #2 TE, their #1 O-lineman, another starting O-lineman, their starting DT, their starting safety, plus some key role players/backup, ect. at some point over the last couple of weeks. There might not be another team in football that has been hit as hard with injuries the past couple of weeks. If you follow football so religiously you would have know this, and figured out that was the main reason why this team hasn't clicked on all cylinders as you point out. I usually don't like to point to injuries, but when you are missing almost half of your starters you should at least point that out. I think the fact that they have overcome most of those injuries, and won 2 games against solid(but not great opponents) as well as coming an inch away from beating the Pats has showed me that the Colts are truely a top team. If healthy this team is clearly a top team in the NFL, with injuries they are still very good, please see the Pats game for evidence. Call me crazy, but I just can't find the justification that would allow you to say that the Pats(1 inch away from losing) or any other team is clearly better then the Colts.

[Chisoxfn]

Injuries are a part of the game. I'm not going to judge how good a team is at this point based on who they have out. You have to get by with what you got and the Colts are doing a great job of that. Sure they will be better once those guys are back. I was well aware of Dallas Clark and some of their lineman being out. And I give credit to the Colts playing as well as they have despite the injuries.

 

But the Packers have been hit just as hard by injuries and I think the Patriots would be quite a bit better with Ted Washington and Rosie Colvin around. Plus I remember seeing something on Sports Center with the Pats as the only team with a winning record in the history of the NFL to have the amount of injuries they have (Don't remember the exact stat, but I know it dealt with games missed and all that).

 

Not trying to knock the injury card cause I'm pretty sure most of the Colts injuries aren't serious (unlike the most of the Pats injuries) but I just go by how a team is playing at this point. If the playoffs started today...I think it would be Titans Eagles and the Titans would play the Pats in the AFC championship game with the Eagles against the Panthers.

[Spiff]

If you want to talk injuries, the Patriots have had more starters this year than any team in NFL history, and they are 10-2. They're starting rookies all over the place, they've had Dan Klecko play like five different position, they had to sign J.J. Stokes and Dedric Ward just so they had enough recievers because Troy Brown, David Patten and David Givens were all injured. With Deion Branch, Bethel Johnson and Ward as their top 3 recievers against the likes of Harrison, Wayne and Walters there's no way the Colts should have lost. Same with Edgerrin James vs. Kevin Faulk. The bottom line is that Tom Brady is clutch and Peyton "0 playoff wins" Manning is not. You're right, the Colts were an inch away from beating the Pats, but Manning didn't get that one inch. Brady would have gotten that inch because that's what he does.