Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

AP better win the MVP and comeback player awards


Brooklyn Colt

Recommended Posts

Wrong-O buddy. It is upon YOU to prove your claim right!  Not us to prove it wrong... Name the players they should have brought in.  What was the cap room?  What should the contract(s) for named players  have been for?  What was their projected win value?  If you can't name the players, contract numbers, and cap situation, and win increase expected, then you, sir,  are just blowing hot air.

 

We got Orlovsky back on squad when Collins went down, but he was't o scheme / playbook ready until Painter had already mangled the mid season.  Dan O, the QB who lost 16 straight games with the Lions, managed to steal 2 w's late in the year.  Players were trying but because they plain sucked got cut. Most still don't have NFL jobs because of that performance. Front office staff get kick in the can too.  Irsay blew up the franchise and rebuilt it again in one off season, and people cry foul.  Give me a break.

I don't plan too get to deep into this conversation as I have already said my peace on other boards and don't feel like retyping everything all over again . . .

but as for "proving" it one way or the other (that is did they try or tank), is not going to happen unless someone comes out and admits it, which will not happen . . . nor can we prove that they tried based on their comments, naturally one is going to say they tried as they had a vested interest to presenting a solid front . . . "hey officer those drugs in the trunk of my car are not mine, honest officer. . . "

so we are left with analyzing the facts in front of us and try to determine, if the facts presented, can point in one direction or another . . .

given how things went down last year, Indy's pedigree over the last decade, Manning's release, the colts come back to prominance this year (4th best record in the AFC), the franchises closeness to Luck, what happened to the colts last year was unprecedented, and so on . . . can give rise to at a minimum a raise eyebrow . . . and for many fan bases, more than a raise eyebrow . . .

bottom line, when things happened which have not happened since the Merger (when i started to watch football, i am too lazy to look at facts before then and am going on personal knowledge but would venture to guess that what happened last year very likely has never happened in the history of the NFL), and when this happens . . . people will start to question the situation . . . it the whole smoke and fire thingy . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 268
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You know who else didn't have a capable back up? Kansas City. I guess they tanked too right?

KC has been at or near the bottom of the league for the decade or so . . . unlike the colts, who over the last decade, has had one of the best runs in the history of the NFL. When teams, which incorporate 53 players and coaches, are bad they are bad and it does not take too much to drop to the bottom . . . but on the contrary, great teams, don't just fall of the cliff in one year, and much less, spring back up the very next year . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sensitive at all. I just prefer to get my facts from places other than other teams message boards.

you can make of this as you wish, in addition to what the boobirds wish to make of the colts tanking on your, the fact reamins that, since 1970, no great team has ever garnered the 1st overall pick, except for the 70 Cowboys (who got Ed "Too Tall" Jones first overall in the 1974 draft but got it through a trade with Houston) . . . what happened last year to a team of the colts pedigree has never happened in the 40 plus years of my watching football . . . which means, well, at a minimun, it is next to impossible to happen . . .

you can apply what ever opinion you want on it, but all of those great teams are 0-42 at getting the first overall pick, and that is a fact . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you can make of this as you wish, in addition to what the boobirds wish to make of the colts tanking on your, the fact reamins that, since 1970, no great team has ever garnered the 1st overall pick, except for the 70 Cowboys (who got Ed "Too Tall" Jones first overall in the 1974 draft but got it through a trade with Houston) . . . what happened last year to a team of the colts pedigree has never happened in the 40 plus years of my watching football . . . which means, well, at a minimun, it is next to impossible to happen . . .

you can apply what ever opinion you want on it, but all of those great teams are 0-42 at getting the first overall pick, and that is a fact . . .

Feel free to go 2 - 14 next season, then you too can garner the first overall pick, and the other 31 teams can be jealous and/or speculate as to what the real reason is.      /sarcasm  of course.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a fact-based, objective issue. It's a subjective, opinion-based issue. Unless someone uncovers some "lose a bunch of games" memo from Bill Polian, then it's always going to be that way.

 

Have you read posts from other people in this thread, such as FireJimCaldwell?

 

Yet you have another poster saying "prove to me I'm wrong" about this issue. Kind of doesn't jive...

 

And on top of that, it's very simple to look at the way things went last season, including the fallout, and conclude that there was no edict to tank the season to secure the #1 pick. As others have said, why would players whose careers are on the line agree to not play their best? Why would coaches whose jobs were on the line agree not to make the best efforts they could to win games? Why would Caldwell fire Larry Coyer three quarters of the way through the season? Why would we bench Painter? Why would management -- again, jobs on the line -- not do their best to put a solid product on the field? It just doesn't make sense...

 

Like I said before, we did the same things preceding the 2011 season that we always did. If someone thinks that's a problem, I'd probably agree, and it certainly had something to do with how poorly our season went, but everyone anticipated that Manning would be back for the start of the season. If we really were planning to tank the season, why not just keep Manning on the franchise tag, let Addai and Vinatieri walk, and then retool later? No $10.4m dead cap hit for Manning, no need to release Addai, etc.

 

What happened in 2011 just doesn't add up to a deliberate effort to secure the number one pick. There are too many things Irsay and Polian did that work counter to that argument. You're attempting to paint it in a "we'll never really know" kind of light, and there's really just no reason to believe that it happened in the first place. It's debunked. What 2011 was was the result of poor management and coaching decisions + a few bad injuries that = a 2-14 record. It's a cop-out to say "we'll I think they tanked, and since we'll never really know, we might as well just throw this idea around whenever it's convenient."

 

There are a lot of people who have promoted this idea over the past year. Some I respect; others I think are scum. No matter. But looking at the situation from top to bottom, it doesn't make sense to believe that the team purposely lost enough games to get the #1 pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong-O buddy. It is upon YOU to prove your claim right!  Not us to prove it wrong... Name the players they should have brought in.  What was the cap room?  What should the contract(s) for named players  have been for?  What was their projected win value?  If you can't name the players, contract numbers, and cap situation, and win increase expected, then you, sir,  are just blowing hot air.

 

We got Orlovsky back on squad when Collins went down, but he was't o scheme / playbook ready until Painter had already mangled the mid season.  Dan O, the QB who lost 16 straight games with the Lions, managed to steal 2 w's late in the year.  Players were trying but because they plain sucked got cut. Most still don't have NFL jobs because of that performance. Front office staff get kick in the can too.  Irsay blew up the franchise and rebuilt it again in one off season, and people cry foul.  Give me a break.

Once again, Kerry Collins is all I need to prove my point. Kerry Collins. A QB who was RETIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They didn't sign for one quality CB for that godawful team. Not one quality LB. Not one good O-lineman (wait, wasn't that a Colt major issue?).

Nobody.

The FO did nothing to win. Perhaps THAT'S why Irsay blew it all up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that the team(players) quit in many if any games, maybe the New Orleans debacle, but the players kept fighting for the most part.

 

With that said, the coaching staff did nothing till late in the season when they switched to Orlovsky and ran a simple basic offense.

 

When Manning went under the knife the 2nd time the Manning offensive system should have been shelved. Signing Kerry Collins some can argue is a panic move, but it is still a move. The problem was having him running Manning's offense with a week to 10 days to grasp it, which blew Polian's foolish Kerry can grasp any offense conceptually in 48hours, or whatever it was that he was spewing.  

 

Obviously with Collins getting hurt they turned to Painter who while having more time from a knowledge point of view, he did not have the skill set to run the Manning offense. He didn't have the skill set to be on a roster in my opinion, but if you are going to play him, then at least attempt to put him in a position to have some success outside of Garcon breaking a few short throws for long gains/touchdowns. 

 

So I place blame on the losing record to Peyton Manning's injury. But I put the embarrassing 2-14 record on the ineptitude of the Jim Caldwell,  and Clyde Christensen. Coyer gets his share of the blame, and if there were instructions to not alter the offense from Polian, then more of the blame gets shifted to him. 

 

I've said before that it seems early on Jim Irsay was given the misinformation that Peyton would never play again. At that point he became fassinated with Andrew Luck, and I don't think the team pulled out all stops to win games. If so, the offense would have been converted to your goal line package, and expanded. Which you would start off with the I formation and your various running plays, you then add the 3wr set, the routes/names/calls etc stay the same there isn't an issue there, but it is a pretty easy concept to accomplish.

 

Like go-pats said last year wasn't your traditional 2 win team, not with the talent that was on the team. If the offense would have been halfway competent, meaning, higher 3rd down conversions, better completion %, then the defense would've been placed in a better position, which is one way the improved offense has helped the defense out this year. The same can be said for Denver, but that is for another thread.

 

I won't agree that the team(players) threw away the season. Painter was trying his best, he just wasn't put into a situation that he could succeed. He and Collins both would have performed better in a different system. The team would have had 5-6 wins.

 

As others have pointed out there were a number of games lost within 6-7-8 points and with better quarterback play some of those games would have been in the win column.

 

In the preseason, there were tons of expectations threads, and some were throwing out 3k passing yards, 15, td's, and such, heck those #'s were achieved last year, and I was mocked for having high expectations of both the team and a #1 QB. With competent QB this team would be a playoff team. With Manning, I felt they would be a contender just as Denver is...

 

So I won't buy that the team tanked the season, but I also won't say that they(Polian/Caldwell/Christensen/Coyer/Irsay) pulled out every stop or did the things to prevent the horrendous 2-14 season.   A competent coaching staff would have prevented that.   

I tend to agree with this. The FO did not do anything to save the season. It was beyond saving pretty early on.

I never said anywhere that the players threw a game, or did anything wrong. They just were not put in the position to win many games by the FO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't tell me the Colts didn't try to beat the Steelers last year week 3 at home, at night. Go watch that game over and our vets tried like crazy.......especially Freeney and Mathis.

 

If you want to say some of our team mentally checked out last year thats fine and I would buy it, but to get an entire organization together "to tank" is easier said then done and people think I am often a conspiracy theorist. I believe some of the wind was sucked out of the sails immediately following the Steelers loss and an 0-3 start.

 

Too many just remember the Saints epic blowout loss. It was at night and everyone saw it. Not as many watched this team week by week and saw them lose plenty of winable games if they had a QB.

 

Now as for who the QB was going to be I think the team messed up never having a proper backup plan for Manning and being too stubborn to adjust without him too.

 

But, who were we going to call last year to save us? Aaron Rodgers was not available. We might have won more games last year with Dan Orlovsky but how the heck did we know he was going to be an UPGRADE.

 

If the Colts were playing to lose last year they certainly flirted with giving away the first pick in the draft going into the final Jags game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're still incredulous, google "Colts tank 2011 season" and see what's out there. Kravitz, Florio (who I don't care for, but agree with him on this one)... plenty of media people put it out there.

 

I often agree with you but I don't agree on this. Why google that and get some media fluff? I could also google "Pats and cheating" and get a lot of whoppers that would make Pats fans heads spin.

 

Personally there were times yes I did think the Colts mentally checked out of last season but I am not sure I buy that they intentionally tanked. It was ironic to me since I had this bad feeling going into 2011 if you recall me saying this on another Colts forum. It was before the Manning injury news even hit. I felt like since we gave up on the perfect season in 2009 that many of the players might have lost faith in the coaches and Polian even if they would never say it out loud. I almost felt as if our souls were sucked out of us a bit in 2009 near the end and to get it all back we had to start over maybe. I felt we were becoming broken.......and in 2011 we broke.

 

JMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often agree with you but I don't agree on this. Why google that and get some media fluff? I could also google "Pats and cheating" and get a lot of whoppers that would make Pats fans heads spin.

Personally there were times yes I did think the Colts mentally checked out of last season but I am not sure I buy that they intentionally tanked. It was ironic to me since I had this bad feeling going into 2011 if you recall me saying this on another Colts forum. It was before the Manning injury news even hit. I felt like since we gave up on the perfect season in 2009 that many of the players might have lost faith in the coaches and Polian even if they would never say it out loud. I almost felt as if our souls were sucked out of us a bit in 2009 near the end and to get it all back we had to start over maybe. I felt we were becoming broken.......

JMO

Post of the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what: prove to me that I'm wrong.

You can do that by showing me the trades that the Colts made last season, the free agents that they brought in to help their team win, etc.

Show me the FO's attempts to win at all costs in 2011.

Kerry Collins? A guy who came out of retirement to play? THAT was their big signing?

Please.

This argument you are trying to make is beyond horrid. For one thing, they thought Manning was going to be good to start the season. It was very close to the start of the season when they found out he wasn't and that he might need another procedure, which he later had. By that time, most of the big free agents were gone? Who would you have liked to have seen them go after? Secondly, how many times under Polian did the Colts ever make a splash in free agency? Were they not "playing to win at all costs" in those years too?

If the Colts were trying to tank for Luck, why did they play Dan O. over Curtis Painter down the stretch? Don't forget, the number 1 pick was not locked up until after the final regular season game and the Colts elected to start the guy who was performing better at QB at that time, why would you do that if you want to lose? As for the coaches and GM people tanking, i doubt that considering every loss helped end their employment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't plan too get to deep into this conversation as I have already said my peace on other boards and don't feel like retyping everything all over again . . .

but as for "proving" it one way or the other (that is did they try or tank), is not going to happen unless someone comes out and admits it, which will not happen . . . nor can we prove that they tried based on their comments, naturally one is going to say they tried as they had a vested interest to presenting a solid front . . . "hey officer those drugs in the trunk of my car are not mine, honest officer. . . "

so we are left with analyzing the facts in front of us and try to determine, if the facts presented, can point in one direction or another . . .

given how things went down last year, Indy's pedigree over the last decade, Manning's release, the colts come back to prominance this year (4th best record in the AFC), the franchises closeness to Luck, what happened to the colts last year was unprecedented, and so on . . . can give rise to at a minimum a raise eyebrow . . . and for many fan bases, more than a raise eyebrow . . .

bottom line, when things happened which have not happened since the Merger (when i started to watch football, i am too lazy to look at facts before then and am going on personal knowledge but would venture to guess that what happened last year very likely has never happened in the history of the NFL), and when this happens . . . people will start to question the situation . . . it the whole smoke and fire thingy . . .

 

But I have documented testimony... you have ... feelings...   smoke.   fire thingy's....  what wins in the court of law?  Yours and 75% of fans (quoted by another Pats fan) is unsubstantiated opinion.  And I'll refute at every chance...  with links to 1st person denial.   Like you would if I began to mention asterisks on SB championships...   as you well should since evidence is long been eliminated....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you can make of this as you wish, in addition to what the boobirds wish to make of the colts tanking on your, the fact reamins that, since 1970, no great team has ever garnered the 1st overall pick, except for the 70 Cowboys (who got Ed "Too Tall" Jones first overall in the 1974 draft but got it through a trade with Houston) . . . what happened last year to a team of the colts pedigree has never happened in the 40 plus years of my watching football . . . which means, well, at a minimun, it is next to impossible to happen . . .

you can apply what ever opinion you want on it, but all of those great teams are 0-42 at getting the first overall pick, and that is a fact . . .

No other team ever before had Peyton Manning in charge....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with this. The FO did not do anything to save the season. It was beyond saving pretty early on.

I never said anywhere that the players threw a game, or did anything wrong. They just were not put in the position to win many games by the FO.

 

 

That equates to bad management and poor coaching, and that's the primary reason Polian, Caldwell and their staffs are no longer here. It's also the primary reason the 2012 Colts have $40m in dead cap space.

 

It doesn't have anything to do with tanking, or "Suck for Luck."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, because the phrase "Suck for Luck" wasn't ever mentioned anywhere.

ROFL

Only by the fans of bad teams... full of unsupported opinion...  that they feel is unadulterated truth...and ram it down folks gullet.  No NFL organization endorsed it... or even liked the term.

 

Here... this is for you and all Pats fans....

 

http://nesn.com/2012/10/steelers-fan-writes-spygate-book-claiming-patriots-still-cheating-explaining-unbelievable-success-at/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this story needs is an Ending.

 

When exactly do they announce these awards...????  

 

I had exact dates somewhere  posted but its voted before playoffs, but since 2010 it is first announced sometime during  between the 2 championship conference games and the Superbowl  l

 

HOWEVER But last year it was announced FEB 4th @ 8 PM  I believe and superbowl was Feb 5th

 

FROM LAST YEAR AN ARTICLE ON ANNOUNCEMENT

 

MVP Announcement Tonight   Winner To Be Named At 8 P.M. On WDSU

 UPDATED 9:42 AM CST Feb 04, 2012

 

Read more: http://www.wdsu.com/sports/saints/Brees-Others-Await-MVP-Announcement-Tonight/-/11775408/10974482/-/acqm4g/-/index.html#ixzz2H1Fh2iJy

 

& another

 

 

Aaron Rodgers was just announced as the NFL MVP, as voted by the Associated Press. First Packers MVP winner since Favre in '97.

 

http://tracking.si.com/2012/02/05/aaron-rodgers-named-nfl-mvp/

 

 

Read 1 story , & I am not entering the debate and I  am PEYTON BIASED but

 

Heres a way of looking at who will win , Its also confusing as is my brain these days so attack the writer not me

 

Peyton Manning the MVP, Adrian Peterson the NFL's best player (((  WHA )))

 

above named article is written by someone who covered the   NFL  for 5 years and now covers baseball

here it is & I must say off the bat I think even though he says its Peyton & gives reasoning he is nuts in sense that as he says in article fans dont care about this trophy in football, well this board shows otherwise

 

Before the below he goes into some ranting analogy about the difference with footballs MVP and basebal;ls MVP & Cy Young & that football is a fall sport, baseball a spring sport and what that means ((( WHA )))

 

u follow it if want to, write now I am confused for medical reasons and will just reprint where he starts on football itself

-----------------------------

 

Baseball loves its numbers. The average fan knows how many home runs Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron hit and how many consecutive games Cal Ripken Jr. played.

 

Football? Not so much. I covered the sport for five years, through the Broncos' back-to-back Super Bowl victories, and

the stats of record holders just never stick.

 

Emmitt Smith is the all-time leading rusher — with how many yards? Drew Brees broke Johnny Unitas' record for consecutive games with a touchdown pass, and it was celebrated with all the joy of an empty piñata.

 

Peterson vs. Manning isn't dropping fangs, because the trophy doesn't resonate as much with the fans. (((( WHA )))

 

Either would be a fine choice. For me, the first issue is removing the injury factor. Both returned from significant problems. Manning missed the 2011 season because of a neck injury, unsure for months if the feeling in his fingers and arm strength would return. Peterson turned his knee ligaments into spaghetti in December 2011, returning more quickly and stronger than anyone before. Their medical charts and recoveries are equally remarkable, but that should be left solely to the comeback player of the year award.

 

Most valuable, and this is where it gets tricky, is based on performance and impact.

 

In a quarterback-driven league, Manning was the best quarterback. He changed a team's culture, raised expectations and held everyone from the ball boy to his receivers accountable. He makes those around him better.

 

And then there's Peterson, who's just better than anyone else. He had more than 1,000 yards after contact. He finished 9 yards shy of breaking Eric Dickerson's NFL season rushing record. He did this with a quarterback that nobody feared.

 

I covered Terrell Davis' 2,000-yard season in 1998, and he was brilliant. He also benefited from teams not continually stacking nine guys within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, out of respect for John Elway's arm.

 

The Vikings won three games last season. Now they're in the playoffs. There's no way they sniff the postseason without Peterson. The Broncos, by comparison, reached the playoffs last season without Manning, a run by Tim Tebow that was much easier to appreciate than explain.

 

And this is where the argument gets complicated, not unlike baseball's Cy Young Award and MVP. The Cy Young Award is about the best pitcher. Period. Wins are subjective, out of the pitcher's control. So Zack Greinke can claim the prize on a bad team because his peripheral numbers are staggering.

 

MVP is different. It becomes wider, incorporating intangibles along with absolute proofs. This is where I fall on this debate.

 

Peterson is the NFL's most outstanding player. He faced defenses designed to stop him, and might as well have had Crisco on his jersey the way tacklers slipped off him. It's not like he could audible into a new play.

 

And that's ironic because that's what makes Manning.

 

He has all the hardware and software, running the offense and extinguishing problems like human spyware. I am convinced that Manning could take a bunch of intramural players and make them into a contender (he tried doing this during offseason throwing sessions at Duke).

 

He's the quarterback, the leader, the standard by which the organization is now measured.

Peterson was the better player. His comeback was historic and will be recognized with that trophy.

 

But there's no player in any league on any team that's more valuable than Manning,

 

whose fifth MVP might even make a sport that doesn't romance its numbers wax poetic. (((   WHA )))

 

as I said I have medical reasons right now to be confused periodically & unexpectedly unfortunately past the superbowl

 

This article is this writers work , not mine , I love his conclusion but as said at  startr I am peyton biased so please I am not getting into a debate here just presenting an article that to me is also from a weird viewpoint on how we as fans feel on awards as this thread will attest

Read more:Renck: Peyton Manning the MVP, Adrian Peterson the NFL's best player - The Denver Posthttp://www.denverpost.com/renck/ci_22308398/troy-e-renck-peyton-manning-mvp-adrian-peterson#ixzz2H19v6iCN

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often agree with you but I don't agree on this. Why google that and get some media fluff? I could also google "Pats and cheating" and get a lot of whoppers that would make Pats fans heads spin.

 

Personally there were times yes I did think the Colts mentally checked out of last season but I am not sure I buy that they intentionally tanked. It was ironic to me since I had this bad feeling going into 2011 if you recall me saying this on another Colts forum. It was before the Manning injury news even hit. I felt like since we gave up on the perfect season in 2009 that many of the players might have lost faith in the coaches and Polian even if they would never say it out loud. I almost felt as if our souls were sucked out of us a bit in 2009 near the end and to get it all back we had to start over maybe. I felt we were becoming broken.......and in 2011 we broke.

 

JMO

 

 

I think you're dead-on with this Jules, and obviously I've caused more of a stir in this thread than intended!

 

Obviously I've done a cruddy job of explaining my thoughts on this. I don't (and never did) think it was all intentional and contrived. I don't believe that, sometime in early September, Irsay sat in a room with Polian and Caldwell and they all decided to go 2-14. I'm not into conspiracies and this is not the NBA, where teams seem to tank regularly despite the lottery draft system. It was really weird for a lot of New England fans last year to not have Manning and the Colts as a foil. I would say, even more so than Pittsburgh, that Indy has been the Patriots' chief AFC rival going back to 2003.

 

What I do believe is that, when things started going downhill, it almost seemed like the organization sort of "accepted it" and, like FireJimCaldwell said very eloquently a page or two back, they did not seem to make the adjustments that needed to be made. I think poor planning got them into the mess in the first place... having a backup like Painter, who they must have known (from practice) could not run the same offense as Manning... etc-etc.

 

Like I said, I've seen some bad, bad teams in New England in my days. I don't think a team like the Colts, who won the most regular-season games in the decade prior in the entire NFL, were as bad as 2-14. Teams don't generally go from being competitive to 2-14 and then right back to competitive like that.

 

At the very least, people have to admit that this was a very atypical situation for an NFL team. Generally they don't fall off a cliff like that and then immediately right the ship. A lot of it is probably confidence and heart, which Indy has plenty of at this point in the 2012 season.

 

And as I've also said, none of it was meant as a criticism. The finagling, regardless of intent, put the Colts in an incredibly enviable situation to be able to go from Manning to Luck like that. It's completely above board, but in so many ways it feels unfair, lol...

 

You know me better than most. I, for one, feel a kinship with Indy fans. Our teams were at the top for so long, it's kind of some twisted version of Stockholm Syndrome. :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know me better than most. I, for one, feel a kinship with Indy fans. Our teams were at the top for so long, it's kind of some twisted version of Stockholm Syndrome. :thmup:

 

I love that, 

 

If u read article I posted above your comment as said I think the writer is nuts even though he picks peyton & u know my bias 

but to say fans dont care about this award , as i ponted out just look at this thread so his viewpoints are as I put in places in article ((( WHA )))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love that, 

 

If u read article I posted above your comment as said I think the writer is nuts even though he picks peyton & u know my bias 

but to say fans dont care about this award , as i ponted out just look at this thread so his viewpoints are as I put in places in article ((( WHA )))

 

LOL, it's true though... it's like Rocky and Apollo for me. :D

 

I would not think it was unjust or cry foul if Manning won the MVP. There are four guys - Manning, AP, Brady, and Rodgers - who, I thought, would be viable winners, and none of them would be a blatantly "wrong choice" in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, it's true though... it's like Rocky and Apollo for me. :D

 

I would not think it was unjust or cry foul if Manning won the MVP. There are four guys - Manning, AP, Brady, and Rodgers - who, I thought, would be viable winners, and none of them would be a blatantly "wrong choice" in my opinion.

 

agree though think Rodgers may have lost a vote as losing last game, and he did fumble on a drive and Vikings scored I think after the recovery & Thus   dropping  to 3rd seed I belive it resulted in by losing would lose him votes just like that last run by peterson to secure easy FG for win would give him votes

 

But u cant go wrong really with any, this was a year to many deserve to be honored each for a myriad of reasons , each with their own unique  story

 

I really hope are multiple tied votes to be fair to all & recognize all achievements

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't tell me the Colts didn't try to beat the Steelers last year week 3 at home, at night. Go watch that game over and our vets tried like crazy.......especially Freeney and Mathis.

 

If you want to say some of our team mentally checked out last year thats fine and I would buy it, but to get an entire organization together "to tank" is easier said then done and people think I am often a conspiracy theorist. I believe some of the wind was sucked out of the sails immediately following the Steelers loss and an 0-3 start.

 

Too many just remember the Saints epic blowout loss. It was at night and everyone saw it. Not as many watched this team week by week and saw them lose plenty of winable games if they had a QB.

 

Now as for who the QB was going to be I think the team messed up never having a proper backup plan for Manning and being too stubborn to adjust without him too.

 

But, who were we going to call last year to save us? Aaron Rodgers was not available. We might have won more games last year with Dan Orlovsky but how the heck did we know he was going to be an UPGRADE.

 

If the Colts were playing to lose last year they certainly flirted with giving away the first pick in the draft going into the final Jags game.

 

Good stuff there!  and the bold part- Who indeed? !!    Dan Orlovsky lost out to Painter in training camp.  It must have been bad too, because they called Kerry Collins first, before inviting Dan back on roster.  Once Collins was concussed, Dan O. got the call, and goal to learn revised playbook.  I think if we had called Dan O. and never called Collins, things would have been quite different.  For sure Orlovsky would have been ready sooner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting opinion I heard from Mel Kiper today.  Mel states that without Andrew luck, the Colts go 2 - 14 again.  He feels Luck was worth 9 wins.  He's a Raven's fan, and we play them Sunday, so maybe he's trying to sparkle Luck up a little in case we take the Ravens down.   ;)

 

As far as Painter not running Mannings system, it is quite possible he could in practice.  I've heard of people who are off the charts good in a full speed practice, but lose their bearings on game day and appear lost.  I think Painter was THAT guy.  Altering the playbook some helped Dan O. quite a bit but I don't feel it would have helped Painter all the much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often agree with you but I don't agree on this. Why google that and get some media fluff? I could also google "Pats and cheating" and get a lot of whoppers that would make Pats fans heads spin.

 

Personally there were times yes I did think the Colts mentally checked out of last season but I am not sure I buy that they intentionally tanked. It was ironic to me since I had this bad feeling going into 2011 if you recall me saying this on another Colts forum. It was before the Manning injury news even hit. I felt like since we gave up on the perfect season in 2009 that many of the players might have lost faith in the coaches and Polian even if they would never say it out loud. I almost felt as if our souls were sucked out of us a bit in 2009 near the end and to get it all back we had to start over maybe. I felt we were becoming broken.......and in 2011 we broke.

 

JMO

Jules I agree with you,the franchise was in this state of demise from Polian JR,and most of all loosing theyre leader PM ,and IMO shows just how valuable he is.Lol how did this thread get here :hmm: and your right they did lose faith,who wouldnt ? Im one of those who watched the whole season,but of course I did as well through Jeff George and all the other bad years,I believe its called loyalty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I do believe is that, when things started going downhill, it almost seemed like the organization sort of "accepted it" and, like FireJimCaldwell said very eloquently a page or two back, they did not seem to make the adjustments that needed to be made. I think poor planning got them into the mess in the first place... having a backup like Painter, who they must have known (from practice) could not run the same offense as Manning... etc-etc.

 

To the bolded, that's painfully obvious. If nothing else, 62-7 demonstrates that quite plainly. 

 

I guess the question is whether you think they consciously decided not to make the right adjustments, and I definitely don't. When Painter came in and played better than most expected him to, Polian spoke of feeling "vindicated," because so many had determined that Painter was a bum. Caldwell fired his defensive coordinator in an attempt to save his job. The coaching staff and management made other moves, personnel wise and beyond, that were attempts and getting something to happen. They were all the wrong moves, and they all demonstrated why Polian and Caldwell needed to go.

 

But I think the record clearly shows that they did make adjustments along the way. Judging the quality of those adjustments is another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irsay is a great owner  and will stop at nothing to get his guy.

His guy was Andrew Luck.

 

If you don't think he had some influence on 'how to get Luck', then you are delusional. Personally, I think it was the single best move by any NFL owner in the history of the NFL.

 

So many NFL analysts agree with the fact that the Colts tanked, its really not even up for debate. Bill parcells is one of the few who spoke about it on National TV, however. Obviously the topic is somewhat Taboo because it implies cheating. I don't believe in cheating...but I do believe in "gaming the game".

 

Its very easy to push one domino down and watch the rest fall, believe me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irsay is a great owner and will stop at nothing to get his guy.

His guy was Andrew Luck.

If you don't think he had some influence on 'how to get Luck', then you are delusional. Personally, I think it was the single best move by any NFL owner in the history of the NFL.

So many NFL analysts agree with the fact that the Colts tanked, its really not even up for debate. Bill parcells is one of the few who spoke about it on National TV, however. Obviously the topic is somewhat Taboo because it implies cheating. I don't believe in cheating...but I do believe in "gaming the game".

Its very easy to push one domino down and watch the rest fall, believe me.

Actually it is up for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irsay is a great owner  and will stop at nothing to get his guy.

His guy was Andrew Luck.

 

If you don't think he had some influence on 'how to get Luck', then you are delusional. Personally, I think it was the single best move by any NFL owner in the history of the NFL.

 

So many NFL analysts agree with the fact that the Colts tanked, its really not even up for debate. Bill parcells is one of the few who spoke about it on National TV, however. Obviously the topic is somewhat Taboo because it implies cheating. I don't believe in cheating...but I do believe in "gaming the game".

 

Its very easy to push one domino down and watch the rest fall, believe me.

 

I've looked around for Bill Parcells comments on the Colts... and there is none to be found.  Could you supply a link that support Bill Parcells saying we tanked 2011 please?

 

Without evidence of some type, it is up for debate- especially when the Colts organization is on public record denying it happened.  The only domino I saw pushed was the FO, coaching staff, and overpaid/injured players out the door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the bolded, that's painfully obvious. If nothing else, 62-7 demonstrates that quite plainly. 

 

I guess the question is whether you think they consciously decided not to make the right adjustments, and I definitely don't. When Painter came in and played better than most expected him to, Polian spoke of feeling "vindicated," because so many had determined that Painter was a bum. Caldwell fired his defensive coordinator in an attempt to save his job. The coaching staff and management made other moves, personnel wise and beyond, that were attempts and getting something to happen. They were all the wrong moves, and they all demonstrated why Polian and Caldwell needed to go.

 

But I think the record clearly shows that they did make adjustments along the way. Judging the quality of those adjustments is another story.

 

 

I honestly don't know. And given that someone will inevitably ask for "proof" that substantiates anything I say here, I think I'm going to just leave with the reassertion that the 2011 Colts were not a "typical" 2-14 team. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've looked around for Bill Parcells comments on the Colts... and there is none to be found.  Could you supply a link that support Bill Parcells saying we tanked 2011 please?

 

Without evidence of some type, it is up for debate- especially when the Colts organization is on public record denying it happened.  The only domino I saw pushed was the FO, coaching staff, and overpaid/injured players out the door.

Of courseI looked before i posted, I'm sure much harder than you "looked". It was on national TV around week 2. Not everything on national TV ends up on the internet.  I saw it, sorry that you didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of courseI looked before i posted, I'm sure much harder than you "looked". It was on national TV around week 2. Not everything on national TV ends up on the internet. I saw it, sorry that you didn't.

Actually, almost everything on TV end up on the internet. Especially accusing teams of tanking games. There is no such link to be found. Maybe you dreamt it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't know. And given that someone will inevitably ask for "proof" that substantiates anything I say here, I think I'm going to just leave with the reassertion that the 2011 Colts were not a "typical" 2-14 team. ;)

 

not sure if conscious move or not , i would hate to throw it on purpose ,  but I just have to agree with u   the colts were not the  usual team  2 & 14 team , they just didnty seem to have the fire in their eyes they do now untill maybe it looked like would be 0 & 16

 

More Lack of good leaderhip, Caldwell was so uninspiring & no Peyton on field to whip them up post bad play 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never have a problem finding links to things that actually exist

I have a good idea....

google "colts tanked the season 2011"

 

then scroll down the 28 pages of articles written by the boston globe, cbs, bleacher report....

read each one....

 

And if you don't like what they said, or don't believe them....

 

WRITE TO THEM and tell them to prove their story. 

 

I didn't write the 28+ pages of articles you will find, but I do believe they have merit.

Edited by shecolt
inflammatory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao.

Just googled "Loch Ness monster real?" Apparently Ol' Nessy actually exists.

Who knew the Internet was always 100% factual?

I need to go rethink some things in my life.......do girls really rule, and guys in fact drool?

So many questions so little time...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...