PDA

View Full Version : Screw the Colts



BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 10:51 PM
Either play your starters or don't. To play your starters into the 3rd quarter and get the lead just to then shut it down and basically give the game to the Jets is pathetic. I hope someone destroys them in the playoffs, even if it's San Diego.

Every time the Colts do this they wind up losing in the playoffs. I hope it happens to them again.

KCL
12-27-2009, 11:14 PM
Either play your starters or don't. To play your starters into the 3rd quarter and get the lead just to then shut it down and basically give the game to the Jets is pathetic. I hope someone destroys them in the playoffs, even if it's San Diego.

Every time the Colts do this they wind up losing in the playoffs. I hope it happens to them again.

I fail to see what difference it makes really...if they feel it's best to sit the starters in order to prepare for the playoffs..so be it :whoknows:

GEM
12-27-2009, 11:16 PM
My only question is....it hasn't worked before, why do it again. It always seems to bite them in the ass. Just play your guys, they get paid to play. Trust your players.

Buff
12-27-2009, 11:18 PM
...And Derrick Mason for that matter.

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:18 PM
Didn't they rest their guys the year they won the SB?

I don't mean to be mean, and BTB you're one of my favorite posters, but they don't owe anyone anything. They are one of the best ran teams in the NFL, if they feel that the course of action they're taking is in their best interest, that's their prerogative.

JDL
12-27-2009, 11:20 PM
I've always thought it was in the best interest of the game to leave division games to the last 3 weeks of the season and NEVER in the first 4 weeks. I think that is just plain stupid.

It would create far more meaningful games at the end of the year. As we've seen, Oakland didn't just lie down for us, Cle didn't just lie down for Pittsburgh. You may occasionally have teams lock things up like the Colts did this year, but because so many division games are played those last 3 weeks you'd still have teams with legit shots at winning the division very late... I mean is it right that Cinci clinches their division this late against a non-division opponent who really isn't playing for anything... you know Oak/KC/SD would NEVER lay down when they played us and it would just make the final weeks far more interesting.

Rusty Shackleford
12-27-2009, 11:24 PM
My best mate is a Colts fan and he actually was embarrassed today at the idea that the jets could beat us to the playoffs after beating his team's reserves.

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:25 PM
To be fair to Cincinnati, they won three straight divisional games, which is incredibly hard, and something that I didn't want.

We didn't get off easy at all. None of those teams laid down for us in any game.

I wasn't exactly stoked that we had to play the Chargers and the Vikings in back to back weeks. Is it fair to force a team to play two elite teams in a row?

Is it fair to put Cincinnati in a division that consistently sports two top five defenses?

Is it fair for the Cardinals to get to play in the worst division in football?

Is it fair for the Eagles, Cowboys, Skins and Giants to play in the same division, I mean that division is stacked.

Is it fair for the Texans to have to be an expansion team in the AFC South? I mean hell, that division usually puts out two really good playoff teams.

Life is hard and then you die.

champbronc2
12-27-2009, 11:25 PM
Didn't they rest their guys the year they won the SB?

I don't mean to be mean, and BTB you're one of my favorite posters, but they don't owe anyone anything. They are one of the best ran teams in the NFL, if they feel that the course of action they're taking is in their best interest, that's their prerogative.

Nope, that was the year they played their guys through the season.

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:29 PM
Nope, that was the year they played their guys through the season.

You are correct.


http://www.nfl.com/players/peytonmanning/gamelogs?id=MAN515097&season=2006

WVUnBroncosfanJim
12-27-2009, 11:29 PM
I think this notion of "resting players" before the playoffs is one of the most laughable things I've ever heard... it just halts momentum. The only way I would "rest" players before the playoffs is if they were on the verge of an injury, like Pierre Garcon with his hand. Fine. Rest him. But, resting Peyton Manning for the sake of resting him? Horseshit.

But, if the Colts want to make their fat hump fans unhappy by resting their players then gettin knocked out of the playoffs early, then so be it.

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:31 PM
I think this notion of "resting players" before the playoffs is one of the most laughable things I've ever heard... it just halts momentum. The only way I would "rest" players before the playoffs is if they were on the verge of an injury, like Pierre Garcon with his hand. Fine. Rest him. But, resting Peyton Manning for the sake of resting him? Horseshit.

But, if the Colts want to make their fat hump fans unhappy by resting their players then gettin knocked out of the playoffs early, then so be it.

This is something I do agree with. I want Cincinnati to play their guys most if not all of the way through against the Jets. I do believe in momentum, you can't measure it, but it's impossible to miss.

I have heard the argument that if you do play your guys and you loss you could kill momentum entirely, and that does seem reasonable.

I still want my football players to play football.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:35 PM
Didn't they rest their guys the year they won the SB?

I don't mean to be mean, and BTB you're one of my favorite posters, but they don't owe anyone anything. They are one of the best ran teams in the NFL, if they feel that the course of action they're taking is in their best interest, that's their prerogative.

They at least owe it to their fans not to have them waste money to come see a team play that they think is going for a perfect record. If you're going to rest you're starters, fine, just let it be known before hand so your fans don't waste their valuable time and money going to see it.

I just think that was a crappy thing to do in their situation. They were going to easily win the game had they kept their starters in and it's unlikely that there would have been any serious injuries.

If they were getting blown out, or blowing the Jets out, or had they been in a bad weather situation, then fine. But I just think they handled that the worst way possible today.

KCL
12-27-2009, 11:36 PM
They're an organized bunch...I don't see how playing them or benching them really matters.Right now IMO them and the Chargers are the top 2 teams...I wouldn't have put SD above the Saints a few weeks ago but I would now.

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:36 PM
The fans knew. Caldwell is Tony Dungy lite, and it was pretty clear to me that he was going to go that route.

He played his games for a half, that's probably adequate.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:37 PM
And I really hope the Bengals play their starters this week, or the Jets will have received the most BS playoff berth I have ever seen.

GEM
12-27-2009, 11:37 PM
They at least owe it to their fans not to have them waste money to come see a team play that they think is going for a perfect record. If you're going to rest you're starters, fine, just let it be known before hand so your fans don't waste their valuable time and money going to see it.

I just think that was a crappy thing to do in their situation. They were going to easily win the game had they kept their starters in and it's unlikely that there would have been any serious injuries.

If they were getting blown out, or blowing the Jets out, or had they been in a bad weather situation, then fine. But I just think they handled that the worst way possible today.

BTB....just admit it....the reason you are really upset is because it helped the Jets get a game up on the Broncos.

:lol: Total sarcasm, don't get mad.

EDIT** After your last post, I take that back. :laugh:

Buff
12-27-2009, 11:38 PM
I thought Bill Simmons had a good point on Twitter today... Or at least something worth thinking about. If the plan is to play your players for only 1 half--why not make it the second half?

Poet
12-27-2009, 11:38 PM
And I really hope the Bengals play their starters this week, or the Jets will have received the most BS playoff berth I have ever seen.

I can't lie, my hatred for Rex Ryan makes me want us to play our guys and beat their asses so bad that they draft another QB.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:39 PM
The fans knew. Caldwell is Tony Dungy lite, and it was pretty clear to me that he was going to go that route.

He played his games for a half, that's probably adequate.

Not by the way they were booing. And based on the fact that Manning never took his helmet off, I'm not so sure he expected it either. When you're leading late in the 3rd with your starters still in, I think it's reasonable to expect them to finish it out.

KCL
12-27-2009, 11:39 PM
They at least owe it to their fans not to have them waste money to come see a team play that they think is going for a perfect record. If you're going to rest you're starters, fine, just let it be known before hand so your fans don't waste their valuable time and money going to see it.

I just think that was a crappy thing to do in their situation. They were going to easily win the game had they kept their starters in and it's unlikely that there would have been any serious injuries.

If they were getting blown out, or blowing the Jets out, or had they been in a bad weather situation, then fine. But I just think they handled that the worst way possible today.

I think their fans esp the STH would be there no matter what.Look at their record..I would hardly call it wasting their money.

I also think keeping players healthy and fresh for the playoffs is a hell of alot more important that having a perfect season...how did that work out for the Pats?

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:40 PM
BTB....just admit it....the reason you are really upset is because it helped the Jets get a game up on the Broncos.

:lol: Total sarcasm, don't get mad.

EDIT** After your last post, I take that back. :laugh:

Yes I'm mad because it hurt the Broncos, but I still think it was lame how they went about it.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:42 PM
I think their fans esp the STH would be there no matter what.Look at their record..I would hardly call it wasting their money.

I also think keeping players healthy and fresh for the playoffs is a hell of alot more important that having a perfect season...how did that work out for the Pats?

How has it worked out for the Colts every time they have done it? They always lose in the playoffs when they shut it down at the end of the season. Their one SB was when they played all the way through.

I don't think you can use the Pats as an example. They didn't lose because their starters didn't get rest over the last few weeks, I think that's preposterous. They lost in large part because the Giants benefited from the most fluke play I have ever seen.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:43 PM
I think their fans esp the STH would be there no matter what.Look at their record..I would hardly call it wasting their money.

I also think keeping players healthy and fresh for the playoffs is a hell of alot more important that having a perfect season...how did that work out for the Pats?

If I knew my team was going to shut it down and not try to win the game, no way I waste my money on it. Once they put Painter in the game, it was 100% over.

KCL
12-27-2009, 11:46 PM
If I knew my team was going to shut it down and not try to win the game, no way I waste my money on it. Once they put Painter in the game, it was 100% over.

well STH have already paid for their tickets so that is a moot point for them.
and as far as what has happened in the past to the Colts...that's exactly what it is...the past.

BroncoWave
12-27-2009, 11:52 PM
well STH have already paid for their tickets so that is a moot point for them.
and as far as what has happened in the past to the Colts...that's exactly what it is...the past.

If my team was 14-0 and I had tickets to the game and I knew they were going to rest their stars and not try to win, I'd have told those tickets in a heartbeat, so no, it's not a moot point.

And you know what they say about those who don't learn from history...they are doomed to repeat it.

WVUnBroncosfanJim
12-28-2009, 12:02 AM
Didn't they rest their guys the year they won the SB?

I don't mean to be mean, and BTB you're one of my favorite posters, but they don't owe anyone anything. They are one of the best ran teams in the NFL, if they feel that the course of action they're taking is in their best interest, that's their prerogative.

People pay to see Peyton Manning, not Curtis Painter. Plus, I don't think there was anything wrong with Manning. On top of that, teams like the Jets can sneak into the playoffs because of the other team "resting" their players. All I know is, if I were a Colts fan and this were my first Colts game I attended... I'd be bitching and asking for my money back.

(Note: He was on one of my Fantasy Teams, but I had the insight to sit him and play Alex Smith.)

KCL
12-28-2009, 12:03 AM
If my team was 14-0 and I had tickets to the game and I knew they were going to rest their stars and not try to win, I'd have told those tickets in a heartbeat, so no, it's not a moot point.

And you know what they say about those who don't learn from history...they are doomed to repeat it.

Maybe you would have sold your tickets...you're not a Colts fan so yes it is a moot point...esp now since the game is over..:lol:

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 12:07 AM
People pay to see Peyton Manning, not Curtis Painter. Plus, I don't think there was anything wrong with Manning. On top of that, teams like the Jets can sneak into the playoffs because of the other team "resting" their players. All I know is, if I were a Colts fan and this were my first Colts game I attended... I'd be bitching and asking for my money back.

(Note: He was on one of my Fantasy Teams, but I had the insight to sit him and play Alex Smith.)

Agreed. The Colts gypped every fan who wasted their valuable time and money to go to that game today. They owe it to the fans who have supported them throughout their first 14 wins to either try to win #15, or to let them know beforehand that they had no intentions on winning the game.

Like I have said, though, the way they went about it is embarrassing.

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 12:09 AM
Maybe you would have sold your tickets...you're not a Colts fan so yes it is a moot point...esp now since the game is over..:lol:

:lol: given this logic we shouldn't discuss anything that's happened in the past, seeing as it's a moot point.

sneakers
12-28-2009, 12:34 AM
stupid ass colts

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 12:59 AM
Excellent article by Teddy Bruschi:

http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nfl/columns/story?columnist=bruschi_tedy&id=4775238


Perfect season worth going for
Comment Email Print Share
Bruschi By Tedy Bruschi
ESPNBoston.com
Archive

"Our goal wasn't a perfect season."

Those were the words of Indianapolis Colts coach Jim Caldwell on Sunday after his team played the New York Jets.

Mission accomplished then.

With quarterback Peyton Manning on the sideline for most of the second half, the Colts lost to the Jets 29-15 at Lucas Oil Stadium. The manner in which Indianapolis' pursuit of a perfect season ended was disappointing.

[+] EnlargeJim Caldwell
Andy Lyons/Getty ImagesJim Caldwell's decision to not go all out for a shot at history doesn't sit well with Tedy Bruschi, whose 2007 Patriots fell just short of perfection.

Having been a member of the 2007 New England Patriots team that completed the regular season 16-0, I expected more from an Indianapolis team that I thought would go for an undefeated season. I was actually rooting for the Colts to make a run for perfection.

Manning will more than likely own every quarterback record known to man by the time he's done, so why shouldn't he be the one to complete a season with a 19-0 record?

There's one problem, though. Manning didn't seem to want it either. Just like his head coach, he seemed to be favoring the decision to rest.

My question is: Rest for what? The playoffs?

The Colts already have a first-round bye. That is the time to rest.

There aren't many times in your life when you have a chance to do something that has never been done before. When you are faced with a challenge like that, my feeling is that you embrace it and see if you've got what it takes to conquer it.

That's the way we felt in New England. And yes, we lost the Super Bowl, but let me be clear: We lost the Super Bowl because the New York Giants played better than we did that day. It was not because we were tired and needed more rest.

Maybe Caldwell, being a rookie head coach, didn't want to shoulder the burden of being the coach of the team that surpassed the 1972 Dolphins. Yes, surpassed, because 19-0 in this day and age would be more celebrated than a 17-0 record 37 years ago.

I didn't see much disagreement from the Colts players on the sideline when they were pulled out of the game either. Manning did look like he wanted to play, but looking like it and telling your coach that you're playing (e.g., Brett Favre) are two different things. Maybe the players didn't want the pressure either.

I understand that they are trying to win the Super Bowl and they have decided that resting gives them the best chance. But I always thought the offseason was the time for rest.

Here's the reality: Some teams don't just play for championships, they play to be the best there has ever been. Others are just satisfied with doing what's required. The Colts decided that resting is more important than making a run at history. They are telling us that what they have done up to this point in the season is good enough. They are satisfied with home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. 19-0? No big deal. History? Didn't want it.

Should the Indianapolis Colts go on to win the Super Bowl, do you celebrate them or wonder: What if they did want it?

Poet
12-28-2009, 02:35 AM
He's wrong. You do what you have to do in order to win the SB. Going undefeated and losing the SB meant nothing for the Patriots. It made them a punchline, a footnote if you will.

What does it accomplish? Nothing. No one thinks the Dolphins are the best team ever. To be honest, going undefeated just means you got really lucky. The Patriots got gifts several times in their 16-0 season. Between the timeout the Ravens called that they couldn't have called to several teams just self-destructing for them, they proved they were a great team.

And a very mortal one.

Assume the Colts go 19-0, if I still argued the 89 Niners or the Steel Curtain I'd have a great argument. I could point out that the Colts got it as an offensive team in a league where the rules are set up to help offensive teams put up points it would also show that they did what they did in the most ideal circumstances possible.

Winning the SB is all that matters. You have to do what increases your odds the most.

Now, I disagree that sitting your guys is the right way to go, but I also don't put much value on an undefeated season because it's the buildup for getting into the playoffs and winning what does matter. The Colts have the record for most consecutive wins, we'll all remember that they mailed it in and gave up on the record.

An analyst, I think it was Steve Young said that when he talked to the Saints they were all up in arms about the undefeated season and the Colts were not.

The undefeated season is an ideal, and honestly a stupid one. The Saints will walk into the playoffs with two or three losses and be a strictly worse team than several teams with more losses than them. They won't win the SB, and you'll look back on them and realize that they got prayers in the season.

The Colts are still the best team with one loss, just like they were with zero losses.

No, I wouldn't argue that my 5 loss team is better than any 3 or less loss team, but I know that the 05 Steelers had 5 losses and were the best team in the league.

All that matters is the postseason.

I'm not saying that going 19-0 wouldn't be maybe the greatest feat ever; I'm saying that the SB trumpts what the Patriots did, and the Dolphins accomplished that feat and they aren't in my top five teams of all-time.

In a nutshell, the Colts weren't wrong (IMO) for not chasing the perfect season, they were wrong for not letting their guys play football in preparation for the playoffs.

Then again, if a major player was hurt during the game Caldwell would be crucified. If Manning got hurt everyone would think he's the dumbest coach ever, and then no coach would ever chase after the dream, and rightfully so.

The more I think about it, the more I like playing your guys for a half of each game, maybe a little more or a little less.

But Bruschi, he's laughable. The Colts have plenty of guys who are banged up, and if you do let them play a half they won't be on rest. Personally I think the bye is great if you want to make a deep run, but I'm not sure that it's so hot if you want to win it all. So, do you throw some games if you believe that?

That's the point, it's really easy to second guess everything a coach does.

If I'm the coach, I do what my gut tells me. Yes, this has burned the Colts in the past, but not really. I remember that it was the Patriots and Chargers who kept ending the Colts' season, not rust. And if you watch those games you'd remember that the Colts got manhandled, their opponents beat them because of the scheme, not because the Colts were out-of-sync.

In short, it's a bunch of great hypothetical situations. Even if the Colts go on a deep run and DON'T win the SB, Caldwell looks like a genius. If the Colts win the SB then everyone who thought he was wrong would look like an ass. If the opposite occurs then people will be clamoring about failing to get something meaningful out of a season, even though we all know that they'd be no different than the Punchlinetriots.

Oh, and Bruschi can shove it with his holier than thou spiel; he makes it sound like the Colts are somehow cheating people out of something. Congrats on becoming the Eric Mangini of journalists, Ted.

silkamilkamonico
12-28-2009, 03:24 AM
Sorry, but this thread sounds like nothing more than hating on another team for not taking care of business for the Denver Broncos.

You've won your division and clinched home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

You wanna rest your starters? Rest them. You've earned it.

HORSEPOWER 56
12-28-2009, 08:25 AM
I felt terrible for the Colts' starters this week. You could see it in their faces on the sidelines. They worked so hard to be perfect only to have that record dashed by fear. Their coach is scared. Pure and simple. You'd think a rookie HC would listen to his HOF QB. I guarantee Peyton and the others didn't want to be pulled.

A chance at an undefeated season is special. Had they just lost it would've been different. Instead, they now look like quitters who thought it was more important to go into the playoffs "rested". Guess what? They already get a 1st round bye to "rest". I know their thoughts were, "but what if one of our star players gets injured?" Sure if you are 12-2 with homefield clinched and nothing to play far, rest your starters if you want (even though this never seems to work and all that happens is that you get bounced in your first game because the team is "rusty"), but not when you are on the verge of history.

That would've been a great feather in their cap. Now they're just like every other team in the NFL that has had a good season. It's not like the Colts are going to win the superbowl this year. I think whomever they face in the 1st round is going to knock them out of the playoffs, especially now.

Nomad
12-28-2009, 09:42 AM
Sorry, but this thread sounds like nothing more than hating on another team for not taking care of business for the Denver Broncos.

You've won your division and clinched home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

You wanna rest your starters? Rest them. You've earned it.

Bingo! BRONCOS fans wouldn't be crying about this if the BRONCOS had taken care of their end!!

And yes they have earned the rest, whether or not it comes to bite them in the ass!!

broncophan
12-28-2009, 09:58 AM
Not having your best players on the field when there are playoff possibilities on the line for many teams in the nfl.......just doesn't seem like the right thing to do.......but......yes the Colts have earned that....they can do whatever they think is best for them...........still doesn't seem "right".....though...

Devilspawn
12-28-2009, 10:07 AM
After more thought, I feel robbed as an NFL fan to see history. I would understand if 16-0 was a common thing, but COME ON MAN!

Now I'm listening to local radio announcer (and Jets fans) Joe Beningo thanking the Colts organization for basically gift wrapping their playoff chance for next week. They're laughing it up now. What a joke!

And this isn't some mish mosh team. This is a team that won at least 12 games forever. This is a team with one of the greatest players in the game of all-time. Makes me sick.

MasterShake
12-28-2009, 10:14 AM
After more thought, I feel robbed as an NFL fan to see history. I would understand if 16-0 was a common thing, but COME ON MAN!

Now I'm listening to local radio announcer (and Jets fans) Joe Beningo thanking the Colts organization for basically gift wrapping their playoff chance for next week. They're laughing it up now. What a joke!

And this isn't some mish mosh team. This is a team that won at least 12 games forever. This is a team with one of the greatest players in the game of all-time. Makes me sick.

Same here. I would have rooted for the Colts to do it. I don't loathe them like I did the Patriots in '07. You never saw Indy run the score up on helpless teams.

The only thing that makes me mad is it let the Jets back in and made it harder for us to back into the playoffs! :lol:

Devilspawn
12-28-2009, 10:34 AM
What does it accomplish? Nothing. No one thinks the Dolphins are the best team ever. To be honest, going undefeated just means you got really lucky. The Patriots got gifts several times in their 16-0 season. Between the timeout the Ravens called that they couldn't have called to several teams just self-destructing for them, they proved they were a great team.

And a very mortal one.

Assume the Colts go 19-0, if I still argued the 89 Niners or the Steel Curtain I'd have a great argument. I could point out that the Colts got it as an offensive team in a league where the rules are set up to help offensive teams put up points it would also show that they did what they did in the most ideal circumstances possible.

Winning the SB is all that matters. You have to do what increases your odds the most.
Here's why I disagree.

1) This game is about momentum and rhythm. The only time the Colts won the SB pulling this crap was when they played 16 full regular season games. They lost the other years they did this nonsense.

2) You have a chance to be immortalized as on paper the best team in the history of the league, and unless the league extends the season, the best a team can do is tie your accomplishment, even if they dominate all 19 games. And talking about teams of the past is just that, talk. We can debate forever and ever about who would be who, we can sim it in Madden, but regardless, it won't take away from the fact that the 2009 Colts > the 1985 Bears, 1989 Niners, Steelers teams because those others lost a game. And no opinion will be right because it will be just that.

3) I would bet you that if the Colts win the SB this year, they, the fans and even Caldwell and his staff will wonder what would've been. They'll backtrack. Calwell will probably say he got what he wanted. Manning & Co. will be bothered if some other team goes 19-0. The fans will be happy at the moment of winning, but for future talk, it will always be in the back of their minds.

At least the Patriots, Bears and Niners had their perfect season taken from them legitimately. The Colts didn't. The Jets MAY have won, they would've at least been in the game until the end. But we will never know, and that's what sucks about it.

Nomad
12-28-2009, 10:38 AM
:lol:Everyone's all worked up about the Colts and seeing the perfect season...sounds like Ditka is about to cry!!:laugh: FTW!!

Skinny
12-28-2009, 10:41 AM
Eh, the Colts can do what they want to do. Whatever Caldwell thinks is best for his team.

I just wish he would give us FF owners (Wayne, Clark) a little more heads up next time...

NightTrainLayne
12-28-2009, 10:51 AM
I wish the Colts would have packed it in in the second half against us. .. .well, no I don't, but if the Jets make it in, no way in the world can they say that they "earned" their playoff spot.

missingnumber7
12-28-2009, 11:24 AM
I wish the Colts would have packed it in in the second half against us. .. .well, no I don't, but if the Jets make it in, no way in the world can they say that they "earned" their playoff spot.

They kept the game close and when Manning and others went out they took care of business. The only people we have to be pissed off at is the Broncos. I could care less about 'earned'. Lets go back to last week and losing to Oakland...or maybe a month and half ago to losing to Washington. We shot ourselves in the foot.

Mike
12-28-2009, 11:50 AM
I hope it comes back to bite them. And that has nothing to do with how it impacted the Broncos.

Ravage!!!
12-28-2009, 12:13 PM
Caldwell had two choices:

1) Take your starters out, and stay 'safe' for whats important.... the Super Bowl

2) Keep your starters in, and appear that the undefeated season is more important than keeping the MAIN goal in mind.


If he keeps them in there, and they lose ONE starter..... then he has to live with that for the rest of his life as far as wondering "what if I didn't take him out?" He would CONSTANTLY have to answer to that decision.

If he takes them out, and wins the Super Bowl... he doesn't have to worry about such questions. He never has to wonder if he made the right decision. The SB is the ONLY goal. If he doesn't make it to and win the Super Bowl.. the undefeated season would have meant squat anyway.

There was really on ONE decision here. I would have loved to see them go for it as well.. especially since the Patriots are the ones that came the closest... BUT.... considering Caldwell is a Dungy clone, I was expecting this since last week after they won Home Field advantage.

Mike
12-28-2009, 12:19 PM
Caldwell had two choices:

1) Take your starters out, and stay 'safe' for whats important.... the Super Bowl

2) Keep your starters in, and appear that the undefeated season is more important than keeping the MAIN goal in mind.


If he keeps them in there, and they lose ONE starter..... then he has to live with that for the rest of his life as far as wondering "what if I didn't take him out?" He would CONSTANTLY have to answer to that decision.

If he takes them out, and wins the Super Bowl... he doesn't have to worry about such questions. He never has to wonder if he made the right decision. The SB is the ONLY goal. If he doesn't make it to and win the Super Bowl.. the undefeated season would have meant squat anyway.

There was really on ONE decision here. I would have loved to see them go for it as well.. especially since the Patriots are the ones that came the closest... BUT.... considering Caldwell is a Dungy clone, I was expecting this since last week after they won Home Field advantage.

And those starters couldn't have gotten hurt in the first half?

Ravage!!!
12-28-2009, 12:23 PM
And those starters couldn't have gotten hurt in the first half?

absolutely. I've asked the question all week long if someone can show me that more injuries happen in the second half over the first in order to justify playing them at all.

BUT... if you want to keep your team playing... to keep in rythme.. you choose your poison. You play, but then limit the chances.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 12:36 PM
Blah, blah, blah...Yer all just mad cuz it effects us. Next week it'll be the same when Cincy lays down..which they should. You will not lose momentum when ya play for 2 plus quarters.

I actually think you are all missing the bigger picture, or question, which is...


Who are the Colts afraid of? This was not just some move to rest their players. Manning never gets hurt and they still kept a bunch of important starters in. Just not specific ones. This IMHO was a clear attempt to leave 2 threats out of the playoffs. I believe we are one of them and Pittsburgh is the other.

Nomad
12-28-2009, 12:41 PM
Blah, blah, blah...Yer all just mad cuz it effects us. Next week it'll be the same when Cincy lays down..which they should. You will not lose momentum when ya play for 2 plus quarters.

I actually think you are all missing the bigger picture, or question, which is...


Who are the Colts afraid of? This was not just some move to rest their players. Manning never gets hurt and they still kept a bunch of important starters in. Just not specific ones. This IMHO was a clear attempt to leave 2 threats out of the playoffs. I believe we are one of them and Pittsburgh is the other.

Colts wish this would effect the Chargers from getting into the playoffs!!

:lol:

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 12:49 PM
I have to laugh at the people who say the ONLY reason I'm mad is because it hurt the Broncos. That's just not true. Even the year the Colts laid down for us in week 17 I felt kinda lame about getting into the playoffs that way and we showed in the wild card game against them how much we deserved to get in.

Even if we had clinched a spot yesterday I'd STILL be pissed at what the Colts did. I'm not necessarily pissed that they rested their starters, just the manner in which they did it.

And to anyone who says "well everyone knew they were gonna do it", go back and watch the players reactions on the sidelines to being pulled and listen to the fans reactions.

I feel like Caldwell (or whoever in the organization made the decision) cheated the fans who spent their hard-earned dollars to go to that game, the players who have given everything they have to go 14-0, and probably themselves as this will now kill the rhythm they had.

It doesn't matter if we make the playoffs or not, I hope this comes back to bite the Colts and that someone slaughters them in the playoffs, even if it's the Chargers.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 02:07 PM
Why would it matter HOW they did it? That makes no sense to me. They played their guys for over a half so they keep some timing and rhythym and after a few shots to Manning, they decided to call off the dogs. Would you rather all of the Colt faithful arrive at the game only to find out that the starters had been pulled just before gametime?

I personally didn't know they were gonna do it, but ya shouldn't be surprised that it happened. The Jets made it a point to make Peyton eat turf yesterday. Perhaps the coach saw that and figured it best to not risk a shot at the the ultimate prize.

Northman
12-28-2009, 02:18 PM
Caldwell had two choices:

1) Take your starters out, and stay 'safe' for whats important.... the Super Bowl

2) Keep your starters in, and appear that the undefeated season is more important than keeping the MAIN goal in mind.


If he keeps them in there, and they lose ONE starter..... then he has to live with that for the rest of his life as far as wondering "what if I didn't take him out?" He would CONSTANTLY have to answer to that decision.

If he takes them out, and wins the Super Bowl... he doesn't have to worry about such questions. He never has to wonder if he made the right decision. The SB is the ONLY goal. If he doesn't make it to and win the Super Bowl.. the undefeated season would have meant squat anyway.

There was really on ONE decision here. I would have loved to see them go for it as well.. especially since the Patriots are the ones that came the closest... BUT.... considering Caldwell is a Dungy clone, I was expecting this since last week after they won Home Field advantage.


Unfortuantely, history with even the Colts has proven otherwise. In 06' the Colts played every game and went on to win the SB. previously to that they rested starters and ended up losing in the playoffs. Denver sat players in 96' and it backfired. In 98' they tried it but lost to the Giants on a last play. But they tried and i give them credit for that. Fact is, a starter can get hurt in ANY game and while the undefeated record is not as important as the championship it doesnt mean you are guaranteed the trophy for sitting players. Fact is, people might laugh at the Pats for losing the SB but at least they tried to get the record. It means very little now but the fact they at least played and tried is worth a lot to the sport itself. Even New Orleans tried but lost to a team in the process. Indy didnt even try so its easy to root for them to lose in the playoffs anyway. In the long run it makes no difference to me since im not a Colts fan. But, its utterly cowardly to me to sit players because your "scared" for them to get hurt. Its football, not badmitton.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 02:21 PM
. But, its utterly cowardly to me to sit players because your "scared" for them to get hurt. Its football, not badmitton.

Would you be calling them stupid if Peyton was to get hurt w/ everything wrapped up?

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 03:04 PM
Would you be calling them stupid if Peyton was to get hurt w/ everything wrapped up?

Peyton has never been injured in his career and has not been sacked in I think 140 dropbacks (I heard that on ESPN but I could be wrong). The odds of him sustaining some serious injury were so minuscule it's really not even worth discussing. Going for the perfect record is WELL worth the minute risk of Manning getting injured IMO.

To be honest, I think he had a better chance of being injured by tripping on something walking down the sideline or getting stabbed in the ass by a splinter on the bench than he had of getting hurt in that game.

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:10 PM
Would you be calling them stupid if Peyton was to get hurt w/ everything wrapped up?


No. Its football.

Poet
12-28-2009, 03:11 PM
Peyton has never been injured in his career and has not been sacked in I think 140 dropbacks (I heard that on ESPN but I could be wrong). The odds of him sustaining some serious injury were so minuscule it's really not even worth discussing. Going for the perfect record is WELL worth the minute risk of Manning getting injured IMO.

To be honest, I think he had a better chance of being injured by tripping on something walking down the sideline or getting stabbed in the ass by a splinter on the bench than he had of getting hurt in that game.

Not true, remember when he almost missed the season opener because of a knee injury two or three years ago? They lost to the Bears on MNF.

It is worth discussing. Tom Brady had a long resume of not being injured and then he tore his ACL. The same thing happened to Palmer. Brees had his arm shredded during his last season in SD, etc etc etc.

16-0 means nothing unless you win the SB. SB>16-0. If the main goal is winning the SB then you should do what you think increases your odds of achieving that goal.

Caldwell was wrong for pulling his guys because they may get rusty, not because he didn't care about 16-0.

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:12 PM
Peyton has never been injured in his career and has not been sacked in I think 140 dropbacks (I heard that on ESPN but I could be wrong). The odds of him sustaining some serious injury were so minuscule it's really not even worth discussing. Going for the perfect record is WELL worth the minute risk of Manning getting injured IMO.

To be honest, I think he had a better chance of being injured by tripping on something walking down the sideline or getting stabbed in the ass by a splinter on the bench than he had of getting hurt in that game.


For me, its not even about his injury history. Its football, if your worried about getting hurt than choose a different profession.

Poet
12-28-2009, 03:14 PM
For me, its not even about his injury history. Its football, if your worried about getting hurt than choose a different profession.

The players aren't worried about getting hurt, that's the coaches job.

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:15 PM
The players aren't worried about getting hurt, that's the coaches job.


Manning should of just waved him off like he did Dungy all the time. I would told Caldwell to kiss my ass.

Poet
12-28-2009, 03:17 PM
Manning should of just waved him off like he did Dungy all the time. I would told Caldwell to kiss my ass.

Manning waived off the kicking teams and decided he was going to go for it.

Not even Manning would be dumb enough to do that. He's not Brett Favre.

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 03:18 PM
Not true, remember when he almost missed the season opener because of a knee injury two or three years ago? They lost to the Bears on MNF.

It is worth discussing. Tom Brady had a long resume of not being injured and then he tore his ACL. The same thing happened to Palmer. Brees had his arm shredded during his last season in SD, etc etc etc.

16-0 means nothing unless you win the SB. SB>16-0. If the main goal is winning the SB then you should do what you think increases your odds of achieving that goal.

Caldwell was wrong for pulling his guys because they may get rusty, not because he didn't care about 16-0.

Teams win the Super Bowl every year. Peyton probably has another good 6 or 7 years in the league to win more Super Bowls. 19-0 is something they will probably never have another chance at. Sorry, but I think the minute risk of Manning getting injured was worth the Colts going for it. I'd be pissed if the Broncos did what the Colts did and I'd have felt cheated out of my money had I gone to the game.

You'd think the Colts would learn that this strategy NEVER works for them. But if they want to be idiots and lose again in the playoffs, more power to them. I'll just laugh my ass off when it happens.

Poet
12-28-2009, 03:22 PM
Teams win the Super Bowl every year. Peyton probably has another good 6 or 7 years in the league to win more Super Bowls. 19-0 is something they will probably never have another chance at. Sorry, but I think the minute risk of Manning getting injured was worth the Colts going for it. I'd be pissed if the Broncos did what the Colts did and I'd have felt cheated out of my money had I gone to the game.

You'd think the Colts would learn that this strategy NEVER works for them. But if they want to be idiots and lose again in the playoffs, more power to them. I'll just laugh my ass off when it happens.

But it doesn't mean anything unless you go undefeated the entire way. When the Patriots lost in the SB the mentality most people had was 'oh well, their season was still meaningful'. It wasn't, the story that year was the SB winning team. No one cares about a perfect regular season.

The thing is if that 'minute' chance does happen Caldwell's name is mud. He'd look like the biggest tool ever and then their regular and post season would basically be for naught.

BTB, you do seem a little bitter. ;)

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 03:27 PM
But it doesn't mean anything unless you go undefeated the entire way. When the Patriots lost in the SB the mentality most people had was 'oh well, their season was still meaningful'. It wasn't, the story that year was the SB winning team. No one cares about a perfect regular season.

The thing is if that 'minute' chance does happen Caldwell's name is mud. He'd look like the biggest tool ever and then their regular and post season would basically be for naught.

BTB, you do seem a little bitter. ;)

You act like one thing happening guarantees that the other thing can't happen. Are you saying the Pats lost that Super Bowl because they went undefeated? That is just ridiculous. They lost that game because the Giants played their best game of the year and benefited from one of the flukiest plays of all time. Also, if you look at the teams who have rested their starters, a LARGE percentage of them didn't win the Super Bowl or even get there. More often than not, the teams who win the Super Bowl are the ones who play the whole way through, not the ones who rest their starters.

And if I'm Caldwell, I take that chance. I think the reward is well worth the risk.

Nomad
12-28-2009, 03:27 PM
But it doesn't mean anything unless you go undefeated the entire way. When the Patriots lost in the SB the mentality most people had was 'oh well, their season was still meaningful'. It wasn't, the story that year was the SB winning team. No one cares about a perfect regular season.

The thing is if that 'minute' chance does happen Caldwell's name is mud. He'd look like the biggest tool ever and then their regular and post season would basically be for naught.

BTB, you do seem a little bitter. ;)

King, if this game wouldn't have effected the BRONCOS, there wouldn't be such an issue! I'm more bitter about the BRONCOS laying over for SD and Pitt at home and letting the Raiders win at Invesco.....now this is where BRONCO fans deserve a refund!!

Who cares rest or not, Colts are going to lose to the Chargers in the AFCCG anyway!!

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:42 PM
You act like one thing happening guarantees that the other thing can't happen. Are you saying the Pats lost that Super Bowl because they went undefeated? That is just ridiculous. They lost that game because the Giants played their best game of the year and benefited from one of the flukiest plays of all time. Also, if you look at the teams who have rested their starters, a LARGE percentage of them didn't win the Super Bowl or even get there. More often than not, the teams who win the Super Bowl are the ones who play the whole way through, not the ones who rest their starters.

And if I'm Caldwell, I take that chance. I think the reward is well worth the risk.

Yea, i dont understand the logic either BTB. The Pats still got to the SB but lost on what was really a great play by Eli in the final minutes. If NE wins that SB than not only do they get another ring but they go down in history as the only other undefeated team like the Dolphins only with more games played. When the Dolphins did i just didnt see too many people complaining that the players played all the way through. The game of football is physical. Even if Caldwell sits his guys they could very easily lose Manning in the first playoff game and still not make the SB. So not only do they not get a ring but they lose a chance at history. Hell, more times than not sitting your players hurts more than helps so i just dont understand the logic.

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:44 PM
King, if this game wouldn't have effected the BRONCOS, there wouldn't be such an issue! I'm more bitter about the BRONCOS laying over for SD and Pitt at home and letting the Raiders win at Invesco.....now this is where BRONCO fans deserve a refund!!

Who cares rest or not, Colts are going to lose to the Chargers in the AFCCG anyway!!

I think so too. Now that Peyton and company will be rusty it will make it that much easier for SD to roll in and kick them out. :lol:

Northman
12-28-2009, 03:47 PM
The other thing that no one is talking about is considering what happened yesterday the Jets could easily go on a run and face the Colts again. If Manning was getting pummeled yesterday just wait and see if they get another shot at him. The Colts could of taken the Jets out of the equation alltogether yesterday and now may face their defense again. I try to look at it from all angles and too me it just wasnt a very good move in my opinion. And from what i hear the players were disappointed that they didnt stay in.

Nomad
12-28-2009, 03:51 PM
I think so too. Now that Peyton and company will be rusty it will make it that much easier for SD to roll in and kick them out. :lol:

And the media is pissed because they don't have anything to hype up:lol:, so they're going to drag this into the ground!

Poet
12-28-2009, 04:24 PM
The other thing that no one is talking about is considering what happened yesterday the Jets could easily go on a run and face the Colts again. If Manning was getting pummeled yesterday just wait and see if they get another shot at him. The Colts could of taken the Jets out of the equation alltogether yesterday and now may face their defense again. I try to look at it from all angles and too me it just wasnt a very good move in my opinion. And from what i hear the players were disappointed that they didnt stay in.

If the Colts took them out of the equation they would probably help cement the Ravens and possibly put a scarier team like Pittsburgh into the WC.

The Jets aren't a scary team. Their entire offense is run based and it pads their defense's stats. I'm not saying the Jets are a bad team, but you factor in that Sanchez is a rookie QB and they look to be the weakest team in the playoffs (assuming they make it).

Poet
12-28-2009, 04:28 PM
You act like one thing happening guarantees that the other thing can't happen. Are you saying the Pats lost that Super Bowl because they went undefeated? That is just ridiculous. They lost that game because the Giants played their best game of the year and benefited from one of the flukiest plays of all time. Also, if you look at the teams who have rested their starters, a LARGE percentage of them didn't win the Super Bowl or even get there. More often than not, the teams who win the Super Bowl are the ones who play the whole way through, not the ones who rest their starters.

And if I'm Caldwell, I take that chance. I think the reward is well worth the risk.

I'm saying that the Patriots lost to the Giants because they matched up horribly against them and the simple fact that they were undefeated didn't mean shit in that game.

In other words, their perfect season didn't mean shit at all. It was an overhyped extravaganza. The perfect season isn't the goal for legitimate contenders, it's something we play up because it's interesting to talk about.

All that matters is the Super Bowl. If a coach thinks that eschewing a perfect regular season so they can take care of banged up players is the right way to go then I understand it because they're doing what they think is best in regards to attaining the real and tangible goal.

I disagree with him about resting his players, but I get the logic.

Northman
12-28-2009, 04:42 PM
I agree with the article.

http://profootball.scout.com/2/932692.html


Indianapolis was less then six quarters from completing a perfect regular season, but Colts management pulled the rug out from under the players and the fans. Scout.com's Ed Thompson says that the move was short-sighted and selfish.

On Sunday, the 2009 Indianapolis Colts guaranteed themselves a place in NFL history that will be remembered as clearly as the 1972 Miami Dolphins' magical 17-0 season.

But for the wrong reason.

The Colts were less than six quarters from completing a likely 16-0 regular season, an accomplishment that only one other NFL team in the history of the game--the New England Patriots--had achieved.

But Colts management shrugged their shoulders at the notion that their franchise and the players could become the first team in the history of the NFL to go 19-0 en route to becoming Super Bowl Champions. Head coach Jim Caldwell benched many of his starters, including quarterback Peyton Manning, with a few minutes remaining in the third quarter and the Colts clinging to a narrow lead. The Jets took full advantage of the situation, scoring 19 unanswered points while Indianapolis treated the balance of the game like a preseason contest.

Fans booed. Players looked frustrated and resigned on the sidelines.

With that single decision, Colts management--Caldwell, Colts president Bill Polian and team owner Jim Irsay-- consciously deprived their players, their own fans and NFL fans across the world of the experience of watching a team strive for true perfection all the way through the Super Bowl.


The voices of the fans and the players were ignored by Colts management.
Andy Lyons/Getty Images

They showed that even in tough economic times they don't care about their customers--the fans who buy tickets and merchandise--callously overlooking the emotional bond between those customers and their brand that results in a level of loyalty that most other businesses will never enjoy from their customer base.

For a company that is usually very astute in how it runs it's business, they bungled this decision badly. All you have to do is check fan polls, Colts message boards and blogs to see how deeply this decision impacted their fans.

And if management doesn't believe that they deflated their players and left them with a "what if" feeling that will gnaw at them the rest of their lives, they are delusional. I can't imagine any other sports team that would do what the Colts organization just did to its players.

The Colts are now in a no-win situation. If Indianapolis wins the Super Bowl, the players will certainly be ecstatic. But the win won't prove that the decision to throw away the perfect season helped the team get there. While the players will look down at the Super Bowl rings they earned with immense pride, those same rings will also be a haunting reminder that the players were deprived of knowing if they were the best team to ever play the game--rather than the best to play that season. And if the Colts fail to claim the trophy and the rings, questions will abound that could cause a rift in trust and confidence between the players and management--if it hasn't already happened.

But if you listen to Colts president Bill Polian, that's simply not the case.

“The perfect season was never an issue with us. We've said it time and time and time again. It's somebody else's issue, not ours. That was of no concern,” he said through the team's official website, Colts.com.

Polian is right to a degree. The pursuit of perfection is someone else's issue. It's hugely important to the fans who dig into their wallets and provide revenue that helps allow the Colts and the NFL to exist. So the Colts president seems to imply that what the fans want really isn't a concern. I can understand that if you're talking about which player to draft or which plays to call. But to blatantly throw in the towel when the team--and through an emotional bond, it's fans--are so close to an achievement that clearly declares them as the best of all time, it's an act of infamy.

And if Polian truly believes he's talking for the players when he says that going undefeated isn't their "issue" and was of no concern to them, he's not paying attention. Their faces on the sidelines and the phrases that were woven into their "company line" responses as quoted at a variety of media sites appeared to indicate that this was a huge issue in their hearts and minds.


Until he was benched, Reggie Wayne was doing all he could to secure the 15th win.
Joe Robbins/Getty Images

"Doesn't everybody want to be a part of history? Not a season goes by that you don't hear about the '72 Dolphins," said wide receiver Reggie Wayne.

"I guess there's a bigger picture," he said. "We all wanted to play, but the big dog (Caldwell) made a decision and we have to roll with that decision. We came out after halftime and felt like we were starting to roll and could score some points, but the manager took us off the mound."

I "guess" there's a bigger picture? By inserting that one word into the sentence, the Pro Bowl receiver subtly pointed out a disconnect between the his outlook and the organization's take. It appears that he doesn't fully understand why the Super Bowl goal and the undefeated season had to be mutually exclusive. And he made it clear that the players wanted to play and believed that they were going to win until the coach took away that opportunity.

“Every time you go out there and compete, you want to go out there and get a win. You want to make history," safety Antoine Bethea said. "But Coach Caldwell made a decision and we rolled with that. He's been leading us all year and he has been a great head coach."

You want to win. You want to make history. But...

"Our job is to win every game, so whatever it is, we need to win every game. That's what I come here to do, that's what I come here to play like and we didn't win, so whatever anybody says about goals, my goal every week is to come out and win, and we didn't win," said center Jeff Saturday.

Obviously there's some level of disagreement between what "someone" is saying about goals and the primary one that Jeff Saturday evidently clings to. And my guess is that deep down, more players personally align themselves with the philosophy of trying to win every game despite what they may say during a press conference or interview to keep management off their backs and the appearance of solidarity.

"We want everybody healthy. We're a little upset, but we have to get ready to win that Super Bowl, that's our goal," said defensive lineman Raheem Brock.

We're a little upset.

I'll bet they are.

Even Caldwell was honest enough to acknowledge that his players might have some issue with the decision to take a seat during an undefeated season.


With his appreciation for NFL history, the lost opportunity for an undefeated season had to be tough for Peyton Manning.
AP Photo/AJ Mast

“Every guy out there, if you ask them, they want to go and they want to go the distance. It's up to us to make the decision, so we did," he said.

Unfortunately, it was a bad one. And it could be disastrous to the long-term psyche of this club. Imagine being a Colts player--or even one that's drafted by the Colts next year--and realizing that no matter how hard you work and how perfect your team plays, you won't be able to prove that you and your teammates were the best of all time unless another team forces management's hand by nipping at your heels through Week 17.

The Colts organization has sent the wrong message to its players and to everyone who competes in sports. Evidently, competing isn't about striving for perfection and doing your best and winning. It's about just doing enough to be better than the other guy. That has to particularly go against the grain of players like Manning, Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark who work tirelessly even after practice to further perfect their trade and improve their timing and precision. The Colts carefully select hard-working, all-business types of players who strive for perfection, but then when they are actually on the path to achieving it, they pulled the rug out from under them.

Go figure.

Some of Caldwell's other statements didn't seem to pass the logic test, and they won't with the players either.

“The most important thing for us is obviously to make sure we're operating on all cylinders come the playoffs,” Caldwell said.

Well, if that's the case, he shouldn't have pulled his starters in the third quarter, at least not on the offensive side of the ball.

While the defense had limited the Jets to just three points in the first half, the offense had scored only nine points. The Colts had converted just 29 percent of their third down chances, had gained just 42 yards rushing, had a number of potential big plays miss the receivers' fingertips by inches or a yard. Following the Jacksonville game, Peyton Manning said that he felt thyet e team still had plenty of things to work on--and that was reflected again on Sunday as they played a 7-7 team with a rookie quarterback. The Colts offense clearly wasn't clicking at the level that will be necessary to win a Lombardi Trophy. Caldwell even acknowledged as much during a halftime interview at Colts.com as he left the field for the locker room.


Fans were hopeful that Caldwell would continue his approach of only resting injured players.
AP Photo/Darron Cummings

"We missed some opportunities," he said. "I think we're playing solid, but we're certainly not able to finish a couple drives like we'd like to."

And when asked about his first-team's performance during his Monday press conference, he said, "We would have liked to have put more points on the board."

Well, that might have been possible if he had let that first-team unit continue to work out those kinks. That group clearly wasn't "clicking on all cylinders" when they were pulled out of the game.

Colts management has also said they want the team to be healthy heading into the playoffs. That's a sensible goal. But it conflicts to a degree with what they've been telling the team for years with their "next man up" philosophy. When Colts players would get injured, the team was told not to worry because the next man on the depth chart was expected to be ready to step in and play at the same level. And they often did.

That's a really convenient technique to keep your players thinking in a positive and fearless manner when they lose a Bob Sanders or Anthony Gonzalez early in the season, but if it's a true and reasonable expectation, why doesn't it apply later in the season? Why suddenly become so paranoid about injuries if you truly have confidence in your depth chart?

Colts management is rightfully putting plenty of emphasis on winning the Super Bowl, but even if the team wins its second of the decade, it'll still be dwarfed by New England's three during that span. And if winning a single Super Bowl is so much more important an undefeated Super Bowl championship, why is it that most fans know that it was the Dolphins who went undefeated 37 years ago, but would struggle to name the team that claimed the Lombardi Trophy five years ago?

Two years ago, the New York Giants had locked up their playoff position and were faced with a tough decision with the undefeated New England Patriots rolling in, trying to secure their perfect 16-0 season. The Giants players wanted the opportunity to compete and make sure that the Patriots earned that final win in what was an otherwise meaningless game for New York. They were willing to risk injuries that could have hurt their chances of winning a Super Bowl.

To their credit, Giants management looked beyond their own walls, realizing not only what it would mean to their players, but to Giants fans and the entire NFL to play the game with their starters. It was simply the right thing to do for the good of the game, its players and its fans.

The buzz for the league and the two franchises leading up to the game was unbelievable. The broadcast drew over 107 million viewers--83 percent of all people watching television during the time slot--and became the most-watched television broadcast in history as of that date. Think about that, not the most-watched NFL game, the most watched broadcast, period. The game was nearly as memorable as the Super Bowl--and arguably gave the Giants the extra push and confidence that allowed them to claim the World Championship against those same Patriots a few weeks later. How much enthusiasm for the NFL--which usually translates into dollars--do you think was generated thanks to that one grand decision by the Giants?

The Colts and the NFL could have been the buzz of the sports world for all the right reasons in the coming weeks while Indianapolis continued a courageous march towards achieving an undefeated season--and for decades to come if they had succeeded. Instead, they've become the buzz of the sports world for the wrong reason--for a selfish choice that showed a total disregard for their fans and the NFL.

No matter what the Colts accomplish from this day forward, they'll now also be remembered as the only 14-0 team in the history of the NFL to willingly deny it's players, it's fans and all NFL fans the opportunity to see if they could have been the best team to ever play the game for a single season. And that decision will follow them like the foul stench of arrogance and selfishness from which it was born.

While Colts management may be thinking that all will be forgiven and forgotten if they win the Super Bowl in a few weeks, that accomplishment will only provide this year's players and their fans with the quick satisfaction of a piece of candy, not the long-lasting and satisfying feeling of a good meal.

But maybe they don't care what the fans and the players think or feel at this point--as long as the corporate goal was achieved.

Either way, they should be ashamed of themselves for being so short-sighted.

Click here for more coverage of your favorite NFL team.

A member of the Pro Football Writers of America, Ed Thompson's player interviews and NFL features are published across the Scout.com network and at FOXSports.com.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 04:49 PM
Didn't they rest their guys the year they won the SB?

I don't mean to be mean, and BTB you're one of my favorite posters, but they don't owe anyone anything. They are one of the best ran teams in the NFL, if they feel that the course of action they're taking is in their best interest, that's their prerogative.

I dont think they did. They year they won the Super Bowl they were a 3rd or 4th seed. They beat the Chiefs then at Balt then vs NE in Indy.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 04:52 PM
I agree with the article.

http://profootball.scout.com/2/932692.html

Bill Polian is the coward.

I dont care if it effected Denver or not. They did a disservice (sp) to Peyton Manning, Wayne and Dallas Clark for not going for it or at least going into the 4th qtr with a lead.

I think SD is going to beat them anyways. They look the best and are on a serious roll. They remind me of the 1998 Broncos (dont flame me please) put aside that you hate them. They can score and cause turnovers on D. Sproles and LT are playing great. Give them their Due. They are not my favorite but I recognize that they are a very talented team that has a huge amount of potential to win it all. We shall see.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 04:54 PM
I'm saying that the Patriots lost to the Giants because they matched up horribly against them and the simple fact that they were undefeated didn't mean shit in that game.

In other words, their perfect season didn't mean shit at all. It was an overhyped extravaganza. The perfect season isn't the goal for legitimate contenders, it's something we play up because it's interesting to talk about.

All that matters is the Super Bowl. If a coach thinks that eschewing a perfect regular season so they can take care of banged up players is the right way to go then I understand it because they're doing what they think is best in regards to attaining the real and tangible goal.

I disagree with him about resting his players, but I get the logic.

My only problem with the decision is that the Colts will not play a meaningful game for like 4 weeks now. Playing painter is not going to help them.

the broncos in 1996 sewed up the #1 seed early as well and then went into a shell for like 3 plus games, only to be upset vs Jax at home when that game still pisses me off. They lost their edge. The Colts have lost their edge every time they have the bye. Why not wait until later in the game or next week to pull the plug. :confused:

Northman
12-28-2009, 04:56 PM
I dont think they did. They year they won the Super Bowl they were a 3rd or 4th seed. They beat the Chiefs then at Balt then vs NE in Indy.

Yea, i eluded too earlier that the Colts in their previous attempts at getting to the SB rested their players but were ousted of the playoffs. In their 06' run they played every game.

OrangeHoof
12-28-2009, 05:00 PM
What bothers me is that they chose to give the game to the Jets when the Jets still had a playoff berth on the line. That's skewing the fairness of the sport. If they had done this against the Bills in Week 17, that's different because the Bills were going nowhere so the loss would only be hurting themselves.

Instead, the Colts chose to make enemies in Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Denver and Houston as well as some in their own fan base. I guarantee you that if the Jets make the playoffs now, there will be some 9-7 teams that will be quite unhappy about this.

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:03 PM
What bothers me is that they chose to give the game to the Jets when the Jets still had a playoff berth on the line. That's skewing the fairness of the sport. If they had done this against the Bills in Week 17, that's different because the Bills were going nowhere so the loss would only be hurting themselves.

Instead, the Colts chose to make enemies in Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Denver and Houston as well as some in their own fan base. I guarantee you that if the Jets make the playoffs now, there will be some 9-7 teams that will be quite unhappy about this.

Also, whoever the other WC team it, if they get a shot at the Colts at some point in the playoffs, you have to think that will give them some extra motivation.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 05:05 PM
What bothers me is that they chose to give the game to the Jets when the Jets still had a playoff berth on the line. That's skewing the fairness of the sport. If they had done this against the Bills in Week 17, that's different because the Bills were going nowhere so the loss would only be hurting themselves.

Instead, the Colts chose to make enemies in Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Denver and Houston as well as some in their own fan base. I guarantee you that if the Jets make the playoffs now, there will be some 9-7 teams that will be quite unhappy about this.

great post and agreed.

at least it shows the 2007 pats had more guts than Bill Polian and I dont even like the Pats but I call a spade a spade

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:06 PM
Why would Indy give 2 shits about what the fans of Denver, Pitt, etc think. I think we're looking way too much into this. They don't give a crap about anyone but themselves and who they might have to play...and if they have a chance to eliminate a dangerous team, they may just do it.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:07 PM
great post and agreed.

at least it shows the 2007 pats had more guts than Bill Polian and I dont even like the Pats but I call a spade a spade

or arrogance...

Northman
12-28-2009, 05:07 PM
Why would Indy give 2 shits about what the fans of Denver, Pitt, etc think. I think we're looking way too much into this. They don't give a crap about anyone but themselves and who they might have to play...and if they have a chance to eliminate a dangerous team, they may just do it.

Actually, according to that article i posted the Indy fans care a lot.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 05:09 PM
or arrogance...

I disagree. Sorry SA. It shows that the Colts can possibly lose their edge. They have never won in the divisional round when they get the bye under Manning. I would think that playing more would help, as opposed to sitting like the 96 Broncos did and lost our edge.

There is not right way but their way has not worked. Just my 2cents. No right or wrong answer.

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:10 PM
Why would Indy give 2 shits about what the fans of Denver, Pitt, etc think. I think we're looking way too much into this. They don't give a crap about anyone but themselves and who they might have to play...and if they have a chance to eliminate a dangerous team, they may just do it.

Every team in the NFL is dangerous, especially a pissed off one, which is what the Colts could face if one of those WC teams wins in the first round.

Medford Bronco
12-28-2009, 05:11 PM
Actually, according to that article i posted the Indy fans care a lot.

What I hate the most is stupid Mercury Morris and Bob Griese get to gloat. I wanted that record to fall. I am so sick of the 72 Fins. They won all those games but to me they are far from the best team of all time.

I think the 85 Bears 84 49ers would have eaten them for lunch. Heck even the 78 Steelers were more impressive.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:13 PM
Every team in the NFL is dangerous, especially a pissed off one, which is what the Colts could face if one of those WC teams wins in the first round.

If something like this acts as the deciding motivating facter, the players on said team have major issues.

Northman
12-28-2009, 05:14 PM
What I hate the most is stupid Mercury Morris and Bob Griese get to gloat. I wanted that record to fall. I am so sick of the 72 Fins. They won all those games but to me they are far from the best team of all time.

I think the 85 Bears 84 49ers would have eaten them for lunch. Heck even the 78 Steelers were more impressive.


Yea, even after all this time the 72' Dolphins still care enough to break out champaign whenever a undefeated go down. Did Shula bench Csonka and Griese at 12-0?

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:15 PM
I disagree. Sorry SA. It shows that the Colts can possibly lose their edge. They have never won in the divisional round when they get the bye under Manning. I would think that playing more would help, as opposed to sitting like the 96 Broncos did and lost our edge.

There is not right way but their way has not worked. Just my 2cents. No right or wrong answer.

I meant NE's arrogance. Indy has the right to run their team as they see fit. I still believe it is a calculated decision meant to lessen the chances of specific teams. Other than not covering Clark, we covered their O very well. Even more, NOBODY wants to face Pittsburgh if Polamalu comes back. NOBODY!

Nomad
12-28-2009, 05:20 PM
Why would Indy give 2 shits about what the fans of Denver, Pitt, etc think. I think we're looking way too much into this. They don't give a crap about anyone but themselves and who they might have to play...and if they have a chance to eliminate a dangerous team, they may just do it.

You're right! Indy doesn't care about fans from the said teams (it's not like they're going to boycott their games:lol:) and obviously they don't care what their fans think or FF people (I'm not one, so I could give two shits about FF). I will repeat myself but the only team the Colts are worried about is the Chargers. I believe they handle and beat the other teams convincingly!!

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:24 PM
You're right! Indy doesn't care about fans from the said teams (it's not like they're going to boycott their games:lol:) and obviously they don't care what their fans think or FF people (I'm not one, so I could give two shits about FF). I will repeat myself but the only team the Colts are worried about is the Chargers. I believe they handle and beat the other teams convincingly!!

Their fans are the ones who pay their bills, they better freaking care about what they think. If it weren't for the fans, there wouldn't be an NFL.

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 05:28 PM
i'm not even going to entertain this thread, because it sounds like a lot of hurt feelings

i, as a Colts fan was seething about it also, I think everyone is, do I think this may oust us? i'm not sure, sometimes the "resting" notion is overplayed

it's a freaking game, and even though it looked messed up, we don't know what could be next week

and seriously, your fanbase would LOVE to be in our position now....

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:30 PM
And noone said that Manning won't play the opening half PLUS next week. Resting doesn't have to mean giving em 3 weeks off. It can mean being cognizant of what is going on around you. And if the Jest are a weaker threat or they are coming HARD after your franchise QB, then ya have to make the tough decision as a coach.

SmilinAssasSin27
12-28-2009, 05:31 PM
Their fans are the ones who pay their bills, they better freaking care about what they think. If it weren't for the fans, there wouldn't be an NFL.

Supply and demand. Where is the line of Colts fans cancelling next year's season tix?

Denver Native (Carol)
12-28-2009, 05:34 PM
i'm not even going to entertain this thread, because it sounds like a lot of hurt feelings

i, as a Colts fan was seething about it also, I think everyone is, do I think this may oust us? i'm not sure, sometimes the "resting" notion is overplayed

it's a freaking game, and even though it looked messed up, we don't know what could be next week

and seriously, your fanbase would LOVE to be in our position now....

I don't think anyone here is questioning the fact of where your team's position is now. I have heard many sports type people say today that they feel it was a mistake for your coach to make the decision to pull the starters yesterday. With the position your team is in, they already will have a bye week the first week of playoffs, so why take any more time off???????

KCL
12-28-2009, 05:40 PM
I would just like to know why the thread title is "Screw the Colts"? :lol:

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 05:43 PM
I don't think anyone here is questioning the fact of where your team's position is now. I have heard many sports type people say today that they feel it was a mistake for your coach to make the decision to pull the starters yesterday. With the position your team is in, they already will have a bye week the first week of playoffs, so why take any more time off???????

take away that ST TD, defensive TD and we still would have the lead, their offense couldn't move ANYTHING on us

am I pissed they pulled them? YES! but if there was anytime to suffer a loss, here it was

I was one of the few that didn't want 16-0 (spare me the whole "YOU COULDA GONE 19-0 notions, it doesn't mean anything to me, a championship is more meaningful) so now that they have one, I believe they're going to do it right this time

my other point is, don't get pissed on our decision because of your playoff hopes, you could have sealed it last night and couldn't do so =/

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:43 PM
I would just like to know why the thread title is "Screw the Colts"? :lol:

Because that's what I felt like titling it. :coffee:

That a good enough reason?

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 05:44 PM
I would just like to know why the thread title is "Screw the Colts"? :lol:

butthurt thread is butthurt

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:45 PM
take away that ST TD, defensive TD and we still would have the lead, their offense couldn't move ANYTHING on us

am I pissed they pulled them? YES! but if there was anytime to suffer a loss, here it was

I was one of the few that didn't want 16-0 (spare me the whole "YOU COULDA GONE 19-0 notions, it doesn't mean anything to me, a championship is more meaningful) so now that they have one, I believe they're going to do it right this time

my other point is, don't get pissed on our decision because of your playoff hopes, you could have sealed it last night and couldn't do so =/

:lol: you DO realize that 19-0 INCLUDES a championship? You CAN have your cake and eat it too.

I fail to understand why so many people act like a perfect season and a Super Bowl are mutually exclusive. THEY AREN'T!!!

Northman
12-28-2009, 05:48 PM
And noone said that Manning won't play the opening half PLUS next week. Resting doesn't have to mean giving em 3 weeks off. It can mean being cognizant of what is going on around you. And if the Jest are a weaker threat or they are coming HARD after your franchise QB, then ya have to make the tough decision as a coach.

They will be coming hard after his QB in the playoffs. They have been coming hard after his QB all year long. Nothing has changed.

Northman
12-28-2009, 05:50 PM
:lol: you DO realize that 19-0 INCLUDES a championship? You CAN have your cake and eat it too.

I fail to understand why so many people act like a perfect season and a Super Bowl are mutually exclusive. THEY AREN'T!!!

Funny, that is what Reggie Wayne said too. :lol:

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 05:51 PM
:lol: you DO realize that 19-0 INCLUDES a championship? You CAN have your cake and eat it too.

I fail to understand why so many people act like a perfect season and a Super Bowl are mutually exclusive. THEY AREN'T!!!

okay? and if we don't make it to that then what? :rolleyes:

it's a cute little piece in history, that's it, and if the team flops, no one remembers, get the loss out the way and move on

the way some of you guys sound like, i'd wonder if ya'll are next to jump off a bridge along with other bandwagoners because of this....

Northman
12-28-2009, 05:56 PM
okay? and if we don't make it to that then what? :rolleyes:

it's a cute little piece in history, that's it, and if the team flops, no one remembers, get the loss out the way and move on

the way some of you guys sound like, i'd wonder if ya'll are next to jump off a bridge along with other bandwagoners because of this....

Seriously GC, your better than this trolling your doing right now. I think BTB and a lot of us have made some very valid points in our arguements. Does the loss hurt the Broncos playoff chances? Yea, but that really isnt our angle here. Denver has hurt their chances long before now so its not like we are bitter over the Colts loss yesterday. Fact is, you guys lost because your coach and owner got scared. At least New Orleans lost while trying to get the streak, Denver lost in 98' while trying to get the streak. New England lost while trying to get the streak as well. I know for myself and i know that the Indy players would much have rather lost while on the field than to be pulled and giving the chance at perfection away. It wasnt just the fans that were robbed, it was the players who work their asses off all offseason. Sure, you might win the SB this year and that will be great for you. But, in the back of their minds they will always wonder if they could have done it undefeated. Thats what we are getting at.

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 05:56 PM
okay? and if we don't make it to that then what? :rolleyes:

it's a cute little piece in history, that's it, and if the team flops, no one remembers, get the loss out the way and move on

the way some of you guys sound like, i'd wonder if ya'll are next to jump off a bridge along with other bandwagoners because of this....

The same thing that would happen if you lost in the regular season and still lost in the playoffs. It's not like resting your starters improves your chances of winning the Super Bowl. In fact, the Colts have proved just the opposite in this decade.

But if they want to keep being idiots and making the same mistakes that have cost them before, more power to them! I will just laugh even harder when they lose in the playoffs.

KCL
12-28-2009, 06:01 PM
Because that's what I felt like titling it. :coffee:

That a good enough reason?

Oh now BTB...Don't get all pissy....:lol:

BroncoWave
12-28-2009, 06:05 PM
Oh now BTB...Don't get all pissy....:lol:

Just answering your question. :salute:

KCL
12-28-2009, 06:06 PM
Just answering your question. :salute:

yes you're right....an answer with a pissy attitude...:lol:

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 06:17 PM
Seriously GC, your better than this trolling your doing right now. I think BTB and a lot of us have made some very valid points in our arguements. Does the loss hurt the Broncos playoff chances? Yea, but that really isnt our angle here. Denver has hurt their chances long before now so its not like we are bitter over the Colts loss yesterday. Fact is, you guys lost because your coach and owner got scared. At least New Orleans lost while trying to get the streak, Denver lost in 98' while trying to get the streak. New England lost while trying to get the streak as well. I know for myself and i know that the Indy players would much have rather lost while on the field than to be pulled and giving the chance at perfection away. It wasnt just the fans that were robbed, it was the players who work their asses off all offseason. Sure, you might win the SB this year and that will be great for you. But, in the back of their minds they will always wonder if they could have done it undefeated. Thats what we are getting at.

the funny thing is, i'm not trolling :coffee:

I don't dispute the fact that Polian played scared, i truly do not believe Caldwell didn't want to pull anyone

and again, this is from a die-hard fans perspective when i say, this was one of the worse things to happen to the team (hence my sig)

my point is, we lost, okay, now it's up to either do one of the two things, erase the memory and do it right or rest up and lay down

personally, i think this will set a spark bigger than what the record could have, now we are playing with bulletin board material, "we holded and folded" etc.

again, there is one game left, and a chance to make a statement, now there's a bullseye on us and we've got to take it off

Buff
12-28-2009, 07:27 PM
I think BTB and Northman and other have made valid points. But so has GC. We are bitter because it affected our playoff chances--to say otherwise is not being 100% truthful. There is definitely a bit of a sour grapes effect at work here.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-28-2009, 08:35 PM
I think BTB and Northman and other have made valid points. But so has GC. We are bitter because it affected our playoff chances--to say otherwise is not being 100% truthful. There is definitely a bit of a sour grapes effect at work here.

To be fair, I believe any other team's fans would also be upset if a move by a team affected their team.

silkamilkamonico
12-28-2009, 08:42 PM
I cannot wait until the time happens when that team going undefeated has already clinched home field, plays their starter's in an unnecesary game, and winds up losing one of their more important players for the playoffs.

You think their fanbase is going to say "shoot. That's too bad. I would have liked the undefeated season"? Hell no. There would be a massive blow up from the fanbase questioning their head coach on "why where they even playing".

Buff
12-28-2009, 08:43 PM
To be fair, I believe any other team's fans would also be upset if a move by a team affected their team.

No doubt. And the fact that there are Colts fans who are furious proves that it was a really questionable, controversial decision.

But some people were scoffing at the notion that sour grapes have anything to do with the argument. It may not be the only reason to be upset, but it's definitely part of the reason.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-28-2009, 09:40 PM
http://cbs4denver.com/broncos/elway.john.loss.2.1394347.html

DENVER (CBS4) - It's simple. If two out of three -- the Jets, Ravens or Steelers -- lose, the Broncos are going to the playoffs. That's the way John Elway looks at it.

But maybe it's not that simple because of the Houston Texans. If one of the above teams loses and Houston can beat New England, the Broncos are in. There are even more ways, including one where the Broncos can actually lose to the Kansas City Chiefs next week and still get in.

With all the different scenarios, Elway reminisced about teams he played on when playoff fate came down to the last game.

"The one year when we were 11-5, I think it was 1985, I think we needed the Jets and the Patriots, I think we needed one of them to lose and we were 11-5 and they both won and we didn't get into the playoffs," Elway said.

Elway said it's much better to have control of your own destiny, which the Broncos did before losing to the Philadelphia Eagles on Sunday.

After dropping seven of their last nine games, many don't think the Broncos even deserve to be in the playoffs, but Elway looks at it differently.

"I don't know if anyone deserves it or not, you're just trying to get in the playoffs. Once you get in there, you know what? Everybody's 0-0. You try to get in there in get on a little bit of a roll."

A prime example of Elway's comment is the Arizona Cardinals. Many didn't think they deserved to be in the playoffs last year and they nearly won the Super Bowl.

Indianapolis Colts head coach Jim Caldwell made a controversial decision on Sunday to pass on history and pull quarterback Peyton Manning and other starters to avoid injuries when the Colts had a chance of going undefeated. After the move Colts players seemed frustrated and the Jets went on to win 29-15.

Elway said he didn't like the decision.

"I think anytime you have an opportunity like that to do something that only one other team in NFL history has done … to me, I don't like it."

Elway pointed out that the Colts now won't play a meaningful game for three weeks since many starters are sure to rest next week and the Colts have a first-round bye in the playoffs.

"I don't know how you stay mentally sharp for three weeks without having played a game. They had the perfect scenario to me to keep their focus because they had something to play for, which was that undefeated season."

Northman
12-28-2009, 09:41 PM
I think BTB and Northman and other have made valid points. But so has GC. We are bitter because it affected our playoff chances--to say otherwise is not being 100% truthful. There is definitely a bit of a sour grapes effect at work here.

Emm, If anyone is bitter than speak for yourself. Denver screwed the pooch by losing to Oakland last week. So i am bitter about that loss.

Buff
12-28-2009, 09:46 PM
Emm, If anyone is bitter than speak for yourself. Denver screwed the pooch by losing to Oakland last week. So i am bitter about that loss.

C'mon, if we had been eliminated from playoff contention 2 weeks ago then this thread doesn't exist. I acknowledge that you'd still be against the decision, and rightfully so, but I think you're fooling yourself if you don't think that the Broncos playoff implications influence your outlook just a tad.

Northman
12-28-2009, 09:51 PM
C'mon, if we had been eliminated from playoff contention 2 weeks ago then this thread doesn't exist. I acknowledge that you'd still be against the decision, and rightfully so, but I think you're fooling yourself if you don't think that the Broncos playoff implications influence your outlook just a tad.

Honestly no. The reason being at the time of the Colts loss i didnt have a clear picture to what Denver needed to get into the playoffs with anyway. I have admitted that the Colts loss hurts Denver's chances but i was this passionate about the Pats undefeated run. Maybe your theory is applicable to some of the others but not for me. Denver needed to take care of their own business last week and failed.

Gamechanger
12-28-2009, 09:54 PM
my bone to pick with this is why is this in the main forum?

this should be in smack :noidea:

Northman
12-28-2009, 09:59 PM
my bone to pick with this is why is this in the main forum?

this should be in smack :noidea:

I cant help you with that.

Medford Bronco
12-29-2009, 01:06 AM
okay? and if we don't make it to that then what? :rolleyes:

it's a cute little piece in history, that's it, and if the team flops, no one remembers, get the loss out the way and move on

the way some of you guys sound like, i'd wonder if ya'll are next to jump off a bridge along with other bandwagoners because of this....

GC what hurt was your team bascially gave up a game they were going to win. They haned the Jets a gift. I want to see Manning as much as possible.

as long as you finish the job you are right no one will remember.

and this has nothing to do with Denver. I want to see the best play, not Painter or whater the backups are.

Also history shows the Colts dont do well when losing their edge.

good luck in the playoffs, as long as its not vs Denver.