Jump to content

  •  


 
Photo

Manning could win 2 more Superbowls before he retires


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
54 replies to this topic

#1 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:32 AM

This is the first time in half a decade I can relax when watching Manning's games - In his days with Colts it always required him to carry the team all the way to the last minute, even against very mediocre teams. He never had more than 3 seconds to release the ball and his special team or defense kept giving up big plays. When he was with Colts, 3-4 TDs were always needed to win by single digit. Now he is throwing 1-2 TDs a game and still managing to hand the ball to the RBs starting late of 3rd qtr.

 

The last time Manning was not required to carry the team by his own - 2006 playoffs, when he had some defense and a bit of running games. I could see his stats decline but add 2 more SB rings by the end of his career.



Game Rewind: Relive every NFL moment…subscribe to Game Rewind.

#2 ColtsSouljah

ColtsSouljah
  • Member
  • 288 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:42 AM

It was sweet to see Manning's team get a huge win and he "only" threw for around 220 yards.


I drove hours to see them live when they were winning 3 games. I rock our gear every day for weeks during the playoffs. I wear our colors no matter what our record is. I don't turn off the T.V. until the clock reads 0. I rock jerseys in enemy territory. I wear my gear like a flag. I represent. All day. Every day. I am a Colts fan. I am a Colts Souljah. Do you represent?


#3 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:50 AM

It was sweet to see Manning's team get a huge win and he "only" threw for around 220 yards.

 

This is not the situation of SF with Alex Smith or Texans with Matt Shaub, in which the team is decent and the QB can only throw for 220 yds and a couple of TDs. When needed he is still Peyton Manning and can have 4 TDs in less than 30min. The Broncos are the most complete team in NFL now.



#4 Moose Of Woe

Moose Of Woe
  • Member
  • 2078 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

The Broncos are the most complete team in NFL now.

Only when their running game shows up. When it does - look out.

Otherwise, in spite of their secondary and loss last night, I'd say it's the Patriots. They have a lot of #1 to top 5 players in the league at numerous positions. For the Patriots, the flood of pros far outweigh the one con.

#1-3 QB Brady
#1 TE Gronk
#3 TE Hernandez
#1 Slot WR Welker
The O-line is the best in football.
Also on offense Woodhead, Lloyd, and Ridley when he doesn't fumble are all solid.
#1-3 DL Wilfork,
Mayo, Slater and pretty much the rest of entire defensive front is solid.
Aquib Talib (sp)? isn't bad out in the secondary, but the rest is.

#5 MAC

MAC

    "It was a dark and stormy night"

  • Member
  • 4656 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:04 PM

It sounds to me like you are describing 2010, when the team was devastated by injuries and starting to get older. The Colts of 2007-2009 had plenty of games which were just as dominant as yesterday's Denver performance. However I agree that the Denver D is looking impressive and seems to be getting better as the season goes along. There are times where you believe that they could be responsible for a win by themselves. However I remind you that they have only faced three elite QBs all season, and lost all three games. If Brady runs them up and down the field, it will all be back on the offense again - which has been a bit sluggish or eratic for the last several games. (Although it WAS terrific that they were able to run the ball when they needed to for once yesterday. That has not been the case for much of the year.)

 

In short, there are lots of reasons for uncertainty, but they may well be the real deal. I'm optimistic, and couldn't be happier for Peyton. My primary disagreement with your OP may be "why stop at two?" Five-six sounds a lot better.  :P



#6 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:12 PM

My primary disagreement with your OP may be "why stop at two?" Five-six sounds a lot better.  :P

 

I'd love to have more since I have Manning on many of my fantasy teams. But I understand he is not Tom Brady who keeps throwing deep with a 3TD lead.

 

Broncos running games has always been stout. Remeber last year they carried Tebow into the playoff with the running game and the D. McGahee is a better overall RB but he fumbles a lot. Moreno is more explosive but he has not managed the entire pass protection thing. They will need to improve on this as well as a kinda rusty redzone offense.



#7 chad72

chad72
  • Member
  • 8435 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:39 PM

"Could" is the keyword, obviously. Ultimately, it boils down to who comes out of the NFC even if Peyton gets out of the AFC because if you put the Pats or Broncos vs Seahawks or some other scrappy team, there is no guarantee the AFC is going to come out on top 7 times out of 10. In a one game elimination, anything goes.

 

There are a LOT of scrappy teams in the NFC, from top to bottom.



#8 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:57 PM

"Could" is the keyword, obviously. Ultimately, it boils down to who comes out of the NFC even if Peyton gets out of the AFC because if you put the Pats or Broncos vs Seahawks or some other scrappy team, there is no guarantee the AFC is going to come out on top 7 times out of 10. In a one game elimination, anything goes.

 

There are a LOT of scrappy teams in the NFC, from top to bottom.

 

I agree with you that anything could happen in a one game elimination. In this salery cap era any team has play makers and problems. It is almost impossible to have a team dominating on every aspect of the game.

 

NFC has won the last 3 SBs and it has been a better conference in recent years. This year will be just as difficult for AFC to win. 



#9 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:01 PM

Only when their running game shows up. When it does - look out.

Otherwise, in spite of their secondary and loss last night, I'd say it's the Patriots. They have a lot of #1 to top 5 players in the league at numerous positions. For the Patriots, the flood of pros far outweigh the one con.

#1-3 QB Brady
#1 TE Gronk
#3 TE Hernandez
#1 Slot WR Welker
The O-line is the best in football.
Also on offense Woodhead, Lloyd, and Ridley when he doesn't fumble are all solid.
#1-3 DL Wilfork,
Mayo, Slater and pretty much the rest of entire defensive front is solid.
Aquib Talib (sp)? isn't bad out in the secondary, but the rest is.

 

Pats secondary is a big concern, which makes them less complete than the Broncos. They don't have a legit No.1 WR as well. Sunday night they got exposed on all these weaknesses.



#10 Moose Of Woe

Moose Of Woe
  • Member
  • 2078 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:23 PM

Pats secondary is a big concern, which makes them less complete than the Broncos. They don't have a legit No.1 WR as well. Sunday night they got exposed on all these weaknesses.

 

While Lloyd may not be a Fitz per say, he's pretty darn good and makes plenty of circus catches.

 

Throw in the combination of two crazy good TE's plus Welker and the sky is the limit for that offense. That's not even counting the (usually) outstanding pass protection and good run game.

 

The pass protection didn't hold up for the first half last night. When San Fran began rushing 3 and giving Brady all day to throw per the norm in the third I about wanted to rip my hair out. San Fran started getting to Brady again in the end, though. Thank god.

 

Most teams can't (or don't gameplan to) beat NE's line. They try to sit back and cover all of those weapons like a bunch of  fools and get torched all game long. I understand you can't blitz on every down as screens and whatnot can kill you with someone like Welker. Still, why more teams don't go for the head of the serpent so to speak is beyond me.

 

Beat that line, get to Brady, you beat the Patriots. Period. (Assuming one's own offense/QB is not a complete Sanchez)



#11 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:48 PM

While Lloyd may not be a Fitz per say, he's pretty darn good and makes plenty of circus catches.

 

Throw in the combination of two crazy good TE's plus Welker and the sky is the limit for that offense. That's not even counting the (usually) outstanding pass protection and good run game.

 

The pass protection didn't hold up for the first half last night. When San Fran began rushing 3 and giving Brady all day to throw per the norm in the third I about wanted to rip my hair out. San Fran started getting to Brady again in the end, though. Thank god.

 

Most teams can't (or don't gameplan to) beat NE's line. They try to sit back and cover all of those weapons like a bunch of  fools and get torched all game long. I understand you can't blitz on every down as screens and whatnot can kill you with someone like Welker. Still, why more teams don't go for the head of the serpent so to speak is beyond me.

 

Beat that line, get to Brady, you beat the Patriots. Period. (Assuming one's own offense/QB is not a complete Sanchez)

 

Agreed 100% their OL is perhaps the best of the NFL and has been the best for a decade. San Fran pretty much gave Pats the chance to come back by playing conservatively in the 2nd half and not press Brady as much. Brady can be hurried and he looks like a deer in the headlight when facing elite pass rush. Good defense all know they need to play blitz against Brady and rush 3 or 4 and play coverage against Manning.



#12 GoPats

GoPats
  • Member
  • 2141 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:38 PM

Agreed 100% their OL is perhaps the best of the NFL and has been the best for a decade. San Fran pretty much gave Pats the chance to come back by playing conservatively in the 2nd half and not press Brady as much. Brady can be hurried and he looks like a deer in the headlight when facing elite pass rush. Good defense all know they need to play blitz against Brady and rush 3 or 4 and play coverage against Manning.

No disrespected intended here, but what you posted is a common misconception. It always surprises me how many times I see people repeat this information about the "blueprint" for beating Brady, since it is 100% incorrect.

You don't beat Brady by sending extra guys. Send blitzers and he'll find the matchups and will kill you slowly. You beat Brady by getting consistent pressure with no more than four rushers and flooding zones inside the hash marks. That's why only certain teams (teams like the Giants, 49ers, Seattle) seem to have that kind of success against him (because they have the horses up front).

If you don't believe me, do some research of your own. Blitzing Brady is a dangerous gamble.

I also apparently watched a completely different game last night, as I did not see the 49ers playing any recognizable form of the "prevent." They went from playing man to a softer zone, but that's not the same thing, and that's pretty much what any team would do with a four-TD lead (avoid giving up the big play, and allow your opponent to move the ball but make them do it slowly, in multi-play drives).

#13 COLT in J-ville

COLT in J-ville
  • Member
  • 245 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:45 PM

No disrespected intended here, but what you posted is a common misconception. It always surprises me how many times I see people repeat this information about the "blueprint" for beating Brady, since it is 100% incorrect.

You don't beat Brady by sending extra guys. Send blitzers and he'll find the matchups and will kill you slowly. You beat Brady by getting consistent pressure with no more than four rushers and flooding zones inside the hash marks. That's why only certain teams (teams like the Giants, 49ers, Seattle) seem to have that kind of success against him (because they have the horses up front).

If you don't believe me, do some research of your own. Blitzing Brady is a dangerous gamble.

I also apparently watched a completely different game last night, as I did not see the 49ers playing any recognizable form of the "prevent." They went from playing man to a softer zone, but that's not the same thing, and that's pretty much what any team would do with a four-TD lead (avoid giving up the big play, and allow your opponent to move the ball but make them do it slowly, in multi-play drives).

 

Agreed



#14 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:48 PM

I also apparently watched a completely different game last night, as I did not see the 49ers playing any recognizable form of the "prevent." They went from playing man to a softer zone, but that's not the same thing, and that's pretty much what any team would do with a four-TD lead (avoid giving up the big play, and allow your opponent to move the ball but make them do it slowly, in multi-play drives).

 

Agree with you on the man-coverage part. Without Gronk it is going to be very effective against pats offense as you guys just dont have a physicial WR that can beat his coverage.



#15 GoPats

GoPats
  • Member
  • 2141 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:36 PM

Agree with you on the man-coverage part. Without Gronk it is going to be very effective against pats offense as you guys just dont have a physicial WR that can beat his coverage.

Heck yeah, no doubt. Lloyd has some size but he isn't a physical guy.

They miss Gronk as much in the run game as they do in the passing game. He's a devastating blocker for a tight end.

#16 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:43 PM

Heck yeah, no doubt. Lloyd has some size but he isn't a physical guy.

They miss Gronk as much in the run game as they do in the passing game. He's a devastating blocker for a tight end.

 

With a healthy Gronk u guys could have won the last SB. Your coach really needs to learn from his mistakes of playing key players in meaningless games or situations. This year it made no sense to run up the score against the Colts and break Gronks arm. The 2009 team was doomed in the playoff by the Ravens since Welker teared ACL in a meaningless game at Texans. Not smart football. May be due to his arrogance.



#17 Bogie

Bogie
  • Member
  • 1723 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 10:58 PM

He's not going to win another Super Bowl for the rest of his career. He had the chance, and he threw it right to Tracy Porter. Sorry but you guys know it's true. Denver may have the 2nd seed locked up but they haven't played a real team in months.


okv09w.jpg


#18 dw49

dw49
  • Member
  • 3473 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 11:41 AM

The key might be if he has to play cold weather games. This is where arm strength plays a much biigger part in the outcome of games. Amazing how few games Manning has played in windy cold conditions in his 14 year career. He's still a great QB but he doesn't have the ability to drive the ball downfield in bad conditions. 



#19 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:22 PM

The key might be if he has to play cold weather games. This is where arm strength plays a much biigger part in the outcome of games. Amazing how few games Manning has played in windy cold conditions in his 14 year career. He's still a great QB but he doesn't have the ability to drive the ball downfield in bad conditions. 

 

How do you know he can't throw the ball downfield? Maybe it looks like he cannot since in his last couple of seasons with Colts he seldom tried the deep throws but you know Colts OL couldn't hold on for over 3 seconds and the best downfield receiver was Pierre Garcon. This yr he probably has more 20+ completions than his total in 09 and 10.



#20 chad72

chad72
  • Member
  • 8435 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:26 PM

He's not going to win another Super Bowl for the rest of his career. He had the chance, and he threw it right to Tracy Porter. Sorry but you guys know it's true. Denver may have the 2nd seed locked up but they haven't played a real team in months.

 

It all boils down to the Denver D. Peyton is not going to be able to score 25+ points consistently as evident in his playoff history. Broncos' D ability to hold teams in the 17-24 point range is going to be critical for the Broncos to win it all. That, and his running game might be an even more important factor than Peyton's arm and passing offense, IMO. Just my two cents. :)



#21 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:32 PM

It all boils down to the Denver D. Peyton is not going to be able to score 25+ points consistently as evident in his playoff history. Broncos' D ability to hold teams in the 17-24 point range is going to be critical for the Broncos to win it all. That, and his running game might be an even more important factor than Peyton's arm and passing offense, IMO. Just my two cents. :)

 

Comparing with Colts in Manning's era, Denver is much better and has been improving on both their D and running game. They must agree with you since they have been working on these aspects in the past few games.



#22 PrincetonTiger

PrincetonTiger
  • Memb ns
  • 11390 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:41 PM

He can win 2 more but WILL he?


Onward Princeton Forward Princeton

PrincetonTiger77

#23 King Colt

King Colt

    Colt fan for 53 yrs. now!

  • Member
  • 941 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:58 PM

Better ingrediants, better quarterback, Peyton Manning.
"Build The Monster, Then Turn It Loose"

#24 House

House
  • Member
  • 6548 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 01:11 PM

Denver's D is better. But the offense is not better than any Colts O during Peyton's time here IMO.
In another moment, down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world she was to get out again.

#25 Moose Of Woe

Moose Of Woe
  • Member
  • 2078 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:12 PM

Denver's D is better. But the offense is not better than any Colts O during Peyton's time here IMO.

 

Manning now has an O-line that can actually pass protect. That's something he hasn't had since 2006.

 

Manning has a complimentary running game, though it's been wildly inconsistent. That's something else he hasn't had since 2006. Addai had a great rookie season then both he and the run blocking of the O-line fell off a cliff.

 

The receiving corps aren't world beaters, but they're good enough as long as they don't drop the ball/fumble the game away.

 

Manning now has a head coach. Something he hasn't had since Dungy retired.

 

The defense and special teams of the Broncos are both better than anything Manning has ever  had. (Outside of a four game 2006 playoff stretch where the D played lights out)



#26 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:29 PM

Manning now has an O-line that can actually pass protect. That's something he hasn't had since 2006.

 

Manning has a complimentary running game, though it's been wildly inconsistent. That's something else he hasn't had since 2006. Addai had a great rookie season then both he and the run blocking of the O-line fell off a cliff.

 

The receiving corps aren't world beaters, but they're good enough as long as they don't drop the ball/fumble the game away.

 

Manning now has a head coach. Something he hasn't had since Dungy retired.

 

The defense and special teams of the Broncos are both better than anything Manning has ever  had. (Outside of a four game 2006 playoff stretch where the D played lights out)

 

Agreed almost 100%, and I don't think Colts ever had a receiver as talented as Thomas. Wayne might be close but he is not physical and can be covered closely by good conners. What Denver receivers lack is gel with Manning's system and getting on the same page with him. Only the first yr they are already no worse than any other receiving corp in NFL, so watch out next yr when they are more familiar with each other.



#27 Moose Of Woe

Moose Of Woe
  • Member
  • 2078 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:32 PM

Agreed almost 100%, and I don't think Colts ever had a receiver as talented as Thomas.

 

Uhm....Marvin Harrison? Not a beast in size but his hands and route running were second to none. Top 3 receiver to ever play IMO but I'm biased. Even those who don't care for him can't possibly say he's not a top 10 all time WR.

 

Thomas has speed and size, no question. As long as he continues to hold on to the ball he could wind up being something special.



#28 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13135 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:42 PM

He's not going to win another Super Bowl for the rest of his career. He had the chance, and he threw it right to Tracy Porter. Sorry but you guys know it's true. Denver may have the 2nd seed locked up but they haven't played a real team in months.

 

What does any of that have to do with their chances of winning this year?


LET'S HUNT

#29 tonychen

tonychen
  • Member
  • 912 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 03:04 PM

Uhm....Marvin Harrison? Not a beast in size but his hands and route running were second to none. Top 3 receiver to ever play IMO but I'm biased. Even those who don't care for him can't possibly say he's not a top 10 all time WR.

 

Thomas has speed and size, no question. As long as he continues to hold on to the ball he could wind up being something special.

 

For Harrison, there is a reason with his superb stats he was not even mentioned as one of the top receivers by the majority of the media. He almost disappeared completely in Colts earlier losses at Pats, and I really doubt he could survive today's cornerbacks' physical style. Most people outside Colts nation think Harrison is overrated and benefited from having Manning throwing him the ball.



#30 JimJaime

JimJaime
  • Member
  • 536 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 04:08 PM

This is the first time in half a decade I can relax when watching Manning's games - In his days with Colts it always required him to carry the team all the way to the last minute, even against very mediocre teams. He never had more than 3 seconds to release the ball and his special team or defense kept giving up big plays. When he was with Colts, 3-4 TDs were always needed to win by single digit. Now he is throwing 1-2 TDs a game and still managing to hand the ball to the RBs starting late of 3rd qtr.

 

The last time Manning was not required to carry the team by his own - 2006 playoffs, when he had some defense and a bit of running games. I could see his stats decline but add 2 more SB rings by the end of his career.

Very Possible, but the Broncos D I still have little respect for they have one great player on the D line and against good QB's (no flacco is proving he is average not good.) they will fold. So in order for him to win even one he will need to carry the team in the playoffs.



#31 House

House
  • Member
  • 6548 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 04:11 PM

Manning now has an O-line that can actually pass protect. That's something he hasn't had since 2006.

Manning has a complimentary running game, though it's been wildly inconsistent. That's something else he hasn't had since 2006. Addai had a great rookie season then both he and the run blocking of the O-line fell off a cliff.

The receiving corps aren't world beaters, but they're good enough as long as they don't drop the ball/fumble the game away.

Manning now has a head coach. Something he hasn't had since Dungy retired.

The defense and special teams of the Broncos are both better than anything Manning has ever had. (Outside of a four game 2006 playoff stretch where the D played lights out)
Sure as a whole they are a complete team. I never argued that. I was speaking specifically to offensive weapons.

Their line is quite good, but he doesn't have Tom Brady time in the pocket, though arguably he is making the line look good. I mean he made our line look serviceable for the past 3 years lol.

The run game is good as well, but there aren't many games I look at that being the reason the Broncos won this year. Peyton is still the key component. Though its nice for his own psyche to not have to feel all the pressure is on him nonstop.

Strictly speaking of receivers, I think it is the least talented he has played with since his early years. I would take Harrison, Wayne, and Collie (when he was healthy) over any of his weapons there. With the exception being Thomas I believe is better than Collie. I would take Harrison and Wayne any day over Thomas though. Thomas. Tamme? Not better than prime Dallas IMO.

I'm not saying they are awful either. But his offensive talent isn't off the charts is all I'm saying.

However, I fully agree that the team as a whole is probably more complete than any he had as a Colt.
In another moment, down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world she was to get out again.

#32 House

House
  • Member
  • 6548 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 04:17 PM

For Harrison, there is a reason with his superb stats he was not even mentioned as one of the top receivers by the majority of the media. He almost disappeared completely in Colts earlier losses at Pats, and I really doubt he could survive today's cornerbacks' physical style. Most people outside Colts nation think Harrison is overrated and benefited from having Manning throwing him the ball.

Most people would be wrong lol.

Harrison was/is an all time great. Jerry Rice was catching balls from Montana and Young. Doesn't make him not a great receiver because who his QB was.
In another moment, down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world she was to get out again.

#33 chad72

chad72
  • Member
  • 8435 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 05:33 PM

Very Possible, but the Broncos D I still have little respect for they have one great player on the D line and against good QB's (no flacco is proving he is average not good.) they will fold. So in order for him to win even one he will need to carry the team in the playoffs.

 

They have to play the Texans and/or Pats in the playoffs, and if the D can pass those tests, then they will have a strong case. Until then, questions will always be there. :)



#34 SupermanLuck12

SupermanLuck12
  • Member
  • 2473 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 06:00 PM

If the Colts get bounced out of the playoffs.. I'll be rooting for #18 all the way.
"In Grigson We Trust!"

#35 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13135 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:23 PM

For Harrison, there is a reason with his superb stats he was not even mentioned as one of the top receivers by the majority of the media. He almost disappeared completely in Colts earlier losses at Pats, and I really doubt he could survive today's cornerbacks' physical style. Most people outside Colts nation think Harrison is overrated and benefited from having Manning throwing him the ball.

 

Whether he was overrated or not, he was still better than Demaryius Thomas, no?

 

And whatever media wouldn't put him in the top ten receivers of all time are pretty dense, if you ask me. He has top ten numbers and record-setting seasons. Third in receptions, sixth in yards, fifth in touchdowns, fifth in yards per game... I don't know how you make a list that goes past five that doesn't have Marvin Harrison on it. He's a unanimous top ten.

 

Lastly, how do you ding Harrison for having Manning throwing him the ball, while praising Thomas? Thomas' numbers for 2012 far exceed his 2010 and 2011 numbers, combined. Doesn't he benefit from having Manning throwing him the ball? Unlike Thomas, Harrison was actually a proven commodity pre-Manning. Of course he was better with Manning; everyone was. That's why the quarterback is so important.


LET'S HUNT

#36 Yehoodi

Yehoodi
  • Member
  • 1400 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:45 PM

I think that it was great the PM was a FA last year thereby allowing him to freely pick his team of choice . . . athlo I do think that the colts FO would have traded PM to a team which could of given him the best chance at winning a ring, just like what the Briuns did with Ray Bourque . . . interestingly, both teams are from Colorado - the Avs and Broncos . . .

I think that Denver was a great fit for PM, he is not in the same conference as is brother, on a team in a weak division, has a great D, was 7-4 with Tebow, has a stud WR in Thomas and a solid role player in Decker, and Tamme and Stokley to a mix and the O is doing well . . .

I think PM is in good position, from a team support standpoint, to win a ring . . . but as we have always seen luck and bad bounces can kill a playoff run . . . alas, football is a one game takes all per round . . . PM is in good shape, we'll just have to wait and see how the chips fall . . .

#37 GoPats

GoPats
  • Member
  • 2141 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 09:43 AM


Even when you're great and things are rolling, it's very, very hard to win Super Bowls. I think us Pats fans have learned that the hard way after being spoiled from 2001-2004. The road there is tough, and then when you get there everything has to come together.

#38 chad72

chad72
  • Member
  • 8435 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 09:51 AM

Even when you're great and things are rolling, it's very, very hard to win Super Bowls. I think us Pats fans have learned that the hard way after being spoiled from 2001-2004. The road there is tough, and then when you get there everything has to come together.

 

Yep, Colts fans do need a lot of reminders on that statement. They probably think SBs are handed out like candy in a store. Whether Peyton's playoff record is 9-10 or 12-7, it would all be the same for Colts fans if the SB record was 1-1.

 

Of course, fans are going to envious when Big Ben and Eli strike it rich the years they do make the playoffs and go 2-0 in their first 2 SBs. I do feel that from a fan point of view, they'd rather stink it up and draft lower than going one-and-done in the playoffs. I can't blame them completely based on the end result but then, you dont even have a puncher's chance if you dont make the playoffs on the other hand. Ultimately, fans need to realize that complete teams and good coaching make the difference in the playoffs where margins of victory are not huge, and then a few lucky bounces too (ask Eli about his luck when his team's 3 fumbles were all recovered by the Giants in the recent SB, Eli is the only one whose luck/pluck comes close to matching Brady's luck/tuck/pluck in the playoffs and Couglin's coaching somewhat evened out Belichick, IMO). :)

 

Plus matchups matter too - Steelers never had to go through Brady in any of their SB wins or appearances, Peyton never had to go through Chargers for any of his SB appearances. Only Brady has gone through Big Ben, Peyton, and the Chargers all in the playoffs. That is a testament to coaching to quickly adapt game plans when plan A or even plan B does not work against a particular opponent. The Kryptonite matchup for Brady unfortunately has been the Giants. Matchups matter too, folks.



#39 GoPats

GoPats
  • Member
  • 2141 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 10:06 AM

The Kryptonite matchup for Brady unfortunately has been the Giants. Matchups matter too, folks.

Great post, and this part... painfully true, LOL!

I was actually excited last year, despite the match-up problems, that they got a second shot at the Giants in the Super Bowl. I was hoping for revenge, vindication, whatever you want to call it. But the Giants just have the right mix of pass rushers and physical defenders to stop the Patriots.

#40 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11941 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 04:10 PM

Manning now has an O-line that can actually pass protect. That's something he hasn't had since 2006.

 

Manning has a complimentary running game, though it's been wildly inconsistent. That's something else he hasn't had since 2006. Addai had a great rookie season then both he and the run blocking of the O-line fell off a cliff.

 

The receiving corps aren't world beaters, but they're good enough as long as they don't drop the ball/fumble the game away.

 

Manning now has a head coach. Something he hasn't had since Dungy retired.

 

The defense and special teams of the Broncos are both better than anything Manning has ever  had. (Outside of a four game 2006 playoff stretch where the D played lights out)

Don't forget DC Jack Del Rio either who has the men under his command hungry for chaos, anarchy, & blood & he has the horses in Von Miller & Derek Wolf to pull it off every single down on the field.  :thmup:


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu






COLTS TICKETS!

Join the Season Ticket Wait List!

Sign up today
Game Rewind: Indianapolis Colts

Recent Status Updates

View All Updates