Is it an indictment on the Colts that......

[coltsva]

good luck/bad luck is simply a way to rationalize a guy not making the play, or another guy making a play.

 

 

[Dark Superman]

Good coaching and tough defenses always killed the Colts back in the Manning era.

Even with home field advantage, our defense always killed us.

[ColtRider]

On February 4, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Flash said:

The issue, to me, isn't between between Manning/Colts vs Manning/Broncos. In roughly the same time span, Elway built a much better team than Grigson has. The Broncos had the best offense (all-time great) a few years back and now they have arguably the best defense in the league. Fantastic job by Elway.

 

It's no secret -- surround your talented QB with a great defense and you will win championships, ala Broncos, Panthers, Seahawks, Patriots, Ravens, 49'ers, Packers, etc... Great QBs will make the offense work.

 

Give Luck a great defense and he'll make it to the Superbowl.

 

 

This post by Flash needs to be said "ad nauseam". Especially the last sentence, and I'll add three words on the end of it ... and WIN repeatedly! 

[theanarchist]

On 2/4/2016 at 8:36 PM, Derakynn said:

Pretty sure literally everyone on this forum has said that Manning hardly ever had a defense while he was here. Nothing new. 

Im not totally disagreeing with you. The defenses that Manning played with in Indy were anywhere from below average to just down right bad. But, Manning and the ineffectiveness of the offense has to take some of the blame for playoff losses.

 

1999 vs Tenn: Manning- 19/42 227 yards no td's or int's = 19-16 loss

 

2000 vs miami: Manning- 17/32 194 yards 1 TD no int's = 23-17 loss (lets not forget that the defense gave up 200 yards rushing to Miami of all teams and that Vanderjagt pulled a Ray Finkle to win it in regulation I believe).

 

2002 vs Jets Manning1 14/31 137 yards and 2 int's = 41-0 loss

 

2003 Manning plays incredible in the first two games of the playoffs however vs New England: Manning- 23/47 237 yards 1 TD and 4 Int's = 24-14 loss

 

2004 again drubbing Denver and then running into NE with a 27/42 1 TD 20-3 loss

 

I've never been one to criticize Manning personally. Most of these games were games where the entire offense sputtered, he was under pressure and the offense was forced to play catch up and was reduced to a predictable passing game and was forced to make risky throws. So, basically my opinion of the early Manning years was that yes, for the most part the defense was not good however when it came to playoff failures the offense was not without it's blame.

[chad72]

On 2/6/2016 at 1:37 PM, theanarchist said:

Im not totally disagreeing with you. The defenses that Manning played with in Indy were anywhere from below average to just down right bad. But, Manning and the ineffectiveness of the offense has to take some of the blame for playoff losses.

 

1999 vs Tenn: Manning- 19/42 227 yards no td's or int's = 19-16 loss

 

2000 vs miami: Manning- 17/32 194 yards 1 TD no int's = 23-17 loss (lets not forget that the defense gave up 200 yards rushing to Miami of all teams and that Vanderjagt pulled a Ray Finkle to win it in regulation I believe).

 

2002 vs Jets Manning1 14/31 137 yards and 2 int's = 41-0 loss

 

2003 Manning plays incredible in the first two games of the playoffs however vs New England: Manning- 23/47 237 yards 1 TD and 4 Int's = 24-14 loss

 

2004 again drubbing Denver and then running into NE with a 27/42 1 TD 20-3 loss

 

I've never been one to criticize Manning personally. Most of these games were games where the entire offense sputtered, he was under pressure and the offense was forced to play catch up and was reduced to a predictable passing game and was forced to make risky throws. So, basically my opinion of the early Manning years was that yes, for the most part the defense was not good however when it came to playoff failures the offense was not without it's blame.

 

Yep. It highlighted our mistake of building around Peyton and the offense while we should have been building our trenches to play defense and be able to run the ball in the AFC where most of the heavyweights played outdoors. 

 

Manning wised up as time went on in taking checkdowns, but special teams continued to play havoc with starting field position still. One constant about those elite playoff teams like Steelers, Patriots during their stretch is they rarely gave up much in terms of field position with easy returns against them.

[jet1968]

A couple of those years a "drunk * kicker" cost the Colts wins.

 

Really never did have formidable defense.

[Jason_]

On 2/4/2016 at 9:30 AM, Tsarquise said:

And let's not forget that the Broncos have not even won a Super Bowl with Manning yet and they wont be winning on Sunday.

 

 

 

you were saying?

[lollygagger8]

Geesh, this is going to be a long off season

[Traines]

8 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

you were saying?

[Live and let live]

On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 9:09 PM, AustinnKaine said:

Peyton hasn't even broken 2,500 yards this season. To me, it is clear that the Denver Bronco's success this year has mainly come from their talented defensive front and back end. The point you are making here doesn't really have any merit considering the Broncos could be in the same position with Osweiler starting the entire season. 

 

 

He missed six and one half games. That is the reason he didn't get to 3,000 yards. That is all that he needs to do on this team.

[mahagga73]

On 2/4/2016 at 8:27 PM, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

The fact the Colts didn't do enough to tighten up the defense is well documented.  Irsay has basically lamented this in his comments.

[Live and let live]

Just now, mahagga73 said:

The fact the Colts didn't do enough to tighten up the defense is well documented.  Irsay has basically lamented this in his comments.

A pity that those comments basically blamed Peyton for not getting to enough Super Bowls.

[Tsarquise]

1 hour ago, Jason_S said:

 

you were saying?

They won; I was wrong.

 

Because of the panthers fumbles, an egregiously bad call and bad special teams play, they indeed won. With out turn overs, their offense never even scored a touchdown. Aside from their defense, they were utterly horrible.

 

It feels like I'm on a freaking Broncos message board... My God...

 

Can we all get back to being Colts fans again?

[Jason_]

7 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

They won; I was wrong.

 

Because of the panthers fumbles, an egregiously bad call and bad special teams play, they indeed won. With out turn overs, their offense never even scored a touchdown. Aside from their defense, they were utterly horrible.

 

It feels like I'm on a freaking Broncos message board... My God...

 

Can we all get back to being Colts fans again?

 

don't know about anyone else, but I never stopped being a Colts fan.  However, if the Broncos offense was utterly horrible, then how do you classify Carolina's? 

[Traines]

7 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

don't know about anyone else, but I never stopped being a Colts fan.  However, if the Broncos offense was utterly horrible, then how do you classify Carolina's? 

I never stopped being a Colts fan either.

 

13 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

They won; I was wrong.

 

Because of the panthers fumbles, an egregiously bad call and bad special teams play, they indeed won. With out turn overs, their offense never even scored a touchdown. Aside from their defense, they were utterly horrible.

 

It feels like I'm on a freaking Broncos message board... My God...

 

Can we all get back to being Colts fans again?

Admit that you're wrong, then proceed to follow it up with a bunch of excuses for the Panthers and why they lost.  Peyton played for the Colts for a decade and a half, why would you think that people are not going to be excited and pulling for him?  Broncos didn't play a perfect game and didn't have to, they were the better team, and won, fair and square.  And again, I am still a Colts fan.

[jvan1973]

42 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

They won; I was wrong.

 

Because of the panthers fumbles, an egregiously bad call and bad special teams play, they indeed won. With out turn overs, their offense never even scored a touchdown. Aside from their defense, they were utterly horrible.

 

It feels like I'm on a freaking Broncos message board... My God...

 

Can we all get back to being Colts fans again?

No one stopped being colts fans

[Tsarquise]

Just now, Traines said:

I never stopped being a Colts fan either.

 

Admit that you're wrong, then proceed to follow it up with a bunch of excuses for the Panthers and why they lost.  Peyton played for the Colts for a decade and a half, why would you think that people are not going to be excited and pulling for him?  Broncos didn't play a perfect game and didn't have to, they were the better team, and won, fair and square.  And again, I am still a Colts fan.

They won, but it definitely wasn't because of anything Manning did, which is who everyone was rooting for; not that it matters.

 

I thought the Panthers were the all round better team and I don't think I was wrong about that...

 

The Panthers offense actually marched down the field and scored a touchdown; something that the Broncos offense couldn't do. The game was so close, a couple of plays swing the entire game; for example if the the ref rules that Panthers pass a catch early in the game, (which was clearly a catch.) the whole tone of the game could have been different. 

 

I think if they played again the Panthers would win. 

 

 

[Tsarquise]

16 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

No one stopped being colts fans

Okay, I wasn't being serious... I was being facetious; I know you guys are Colts fans. 

 

Maybe I should have asked if we can we stop being passionate Denverapolis Broncolts fans?

Is that a little more accurate?

 

But, root for whomever you'd like, for however long you'd like.

 

Just tired of feeling like I am on a Broncos board. 

[Tsarquise]

1 hour ago, Jason_S said:

 

don't know about anyone else, but I never stopped being a Colts fan.  However, if the Broncos offense was utterly horrible, then how do you classify Carolina's? 

They were more efficient than Denver's... They actually marched down the field and scored a touchdown with out the aide of a turnover, if i remember correctly.

 

The Panthers had more total net yards; more total net passing and rushing yards and converted more third downs than the Broncos...

 

So i would classify them as better.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2016020700/2015/POST22/panthers@broncos#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000634998&tab=analyze

[dgambill]

On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 8:27 PM, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

No. Lets be real...Peyton was great for a young qb...he played right away and was pretty good...but back then the NFL wasn't set up for young qbs to win right away. Peyton was the protégé. The rules were different..it was harder for offenses. It wasn't necessarily the Colts fault or Peytons that they lost early on (to a dynasty no less). After about the first 5 years the Colts and Peyton were ready and good enough to compete for SBs. I don't hold the Colts or Peyton really responsible those early learning years. After about 2004 on I think you could say Peyton was in his prime and it was expected of him and the staff etc to get it done. During that time of about 6 years we got to 2 and won 1. Not Brady like but not bad either....and of course Denver had Peyton that was close to prime and got him to 2 in 4 years. Sure they built a better team around him but that was a team of stars on their first contracts...able to bring in big name free agents. During Peytons prime...it was a team of stars on their second contracts (Harrison, Wayne, Freeney, James, Sanders, etc...a lot of guys taking a big portion of the salary and even now those rookie wage scale helps a ton over what we could have built if we say had Peyton on a Luck wage scale along with Marvin and Edge and Dwight etc etc. imagine the other players we could have brought in during those years like say in 02,03,04. It was a different league and its hard to compare front offices. Clearly John Elways vision has paid off..and their early rd draft evaluations have played well too but its a different era...I wish we won more SBs of course...but we had a SB caliber team several years there...just had some bad games at bad times and to play through a dynasty as well. 

[chad72]

30 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

The game was so close, a couple of plays swing the entire game; for example if the the ref rules that Panthers pass a catch early in the game, (which was clearly a catch.) the whole tone of the game could have been different. 

 

 

That is what everyone is saying for Panthers' excuses.

 

Well, what I personally saw was the ball hitting the ground and the WR still not having control of the ball till after he rolled over. If Cotchery secured it earlier, it would have been a catch. If you are going to the ground, we know the Dez Bryant rule and the Megatron rule.

 

I know you don't care for the Broncos or their blogs or their forums, but this is one place where I could find a freeze shot of that "incomplete catch" which I felt was correctly called. In fact, I would have been more concerned if Mike Carey called it incomplete and as always, the "expert" Mike Carey on TV was wrong.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2016/2/8/10945910/super-bowl-50-no-that-was-not-a-catch

 

It does make a reference to the source which is here:

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/clutch-encounters/2016/clutch-encounters-super-bowl-50

 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Live and let live said:

A pity that those comments basically blamed Peyton for not getting to enough Super Bowls.

 

They didn't.

[2006Coltsbestever]

20 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

Okay, I wasn't being serious... I was being facetious; I know you guys are Colts fans. 

 

Maybe I should have asked if we can we stop being passionate Denverapolis Broncolts fans?

Is that a little more accurate?

 

But, root for whomever you'd like, for however long you'd like.

 

Just tired of feeling like I am on a Broncos board. 

How about them Broncos, ok I am just joking with you when I say that but I am glad Peyton got ring #2 because now nobody can call him a choke. Don't worry about his Colts status, his win wont affect his legacy here. He will come back for the Ring of Honor and I bet he signs a 1 day contract here and retires a Colt. If I am wrong you can come back and tell me so, how's that sound?

[Tsarquise]

5 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

That is what everyone is saying for Panthers' excuses.

 

Well, what I personally saw was the ball hitting the ground and the WR still not having control of the ball till after he rolled over. If Cotchery secured it earlier, it would have been a catch. If you are going to the ground, we know the Dez Bryant rule and the Megatron rule.

 

I know you don't care for the Broncos or their blogs or their forums, but this is one place where I could find a freeze shot of that "incomplete catch" which I felt was correctly called. In fact, I would have been more concerned if Mike Carey called it incomplete and as always, the "expert" Mike Carey on TV was wrong.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2016/2/8/10945910/super-bowl-50-no-that-was-not-a-catch

 

From that angle, which i dont ever remember seeing, it looks like it hits the ground, but it also looks like he has possession; he has it in his hand. Who knows what a catch is... It's up for interpretation. It doesn't matter though; it was ruled incomplete. But the game was close; it could have gone either way and just because the Broncos won, I don't believe they were the better team. 

 

And for what it's worth, DVOA stats back my opinion up. 

 

But much to my disdain, the Broncos won.

 

I was wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, wrong.

 

And this thread is being derailed, so I'm going to stop. 

[Tsarquise]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

How about them Broncos, ok I am just joking with you when I say that but I am glad Peyton got ring #2 because now nobody can call him a choke. Don't worry about his Colts status, his win wont affect his legacy here. He will come back for the Ring of Honor and I bet he signs a 1 day contract here and retires a Colt. If I am wrong you can come back and tell me so, how's that sound?

I won't need to, because you'll know it... It's not like you won't know... Lol

[dgambill]

43 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

They won, but it definitely wasn't because of anything Manning did, which is who everyone was rooting for; not that it matters.

 

I thought the Panthers were the all round better team and I don't think I was wrong about that...

 

The Panthers offense actually marched down the field and scored a touchdown; something that the Broncos offense couldn't do. The game was so close, a couple of plays swing the entire game; for example if the the ref rules that Panthers pass a catch early in the game, (which was clearly a catch.) the whole tone of the game could have been different. 

 

I think if they played again the Panthers would win. 

 

 

Manning was a game manager for sure. He didn't win it for them but he didn't go out and have 5 or 6 turnovers and lose it either like two other MVP candidates did in the post season this year in Russell Wilson and Carson Palmer did. Peyton did his part. Sure even just one of those TDs in the redzone would have likely changed this game from a competitive to a safe win he did drive the ball down the field right off the bat to set the tone and also answered Carolina right back in the second half to answer back as well with a fg. Those fg drives were important. He had a bad pick that cost points I will consede. He wasn't vintage Peyton Manning but he also wasn't Brian Hoyer either. He managed the game very well from the line of scrimmage and did what he was called no to do. Don't take chances down the field and play it safe. He completed the plan of attack as called on. Nothing wrong with that.

 

Another valuable point but this SB likely would not have been possible without Peyton Manning. Just him being on the team opened up a go for broke approach to free agency and also having a caliber qb of Peyton's stature allowed John Elway to attract free agents like Ware, Sanders, Talib etc. Peyton has had a huge impact on the growth of several players on the team as we have read many times as they admit he helped them be more professional, learn their craft even better, hold them accountable. Peyton's effect on this team is very likely uncalculble. The SB was a great performance..but in the playoffs he made the plays he needed to when he needed them. Early on he set the tone against New England to put them behind and put pressure on them to score and he made a great drive and some throws against Pittsburgh too....cut the drops in that game and that might have been a vintage PM performance that game honestly. Just the confidence he brought to the offense and checking to plays even the offsides he causes it helps that offense. Saw it against SD. He didn't have to do it all...but sometimes someone is the glue...sometimes someone is that strength that inspires others to play better....that Peyton Manning effect was real...and even though that offense was sorely underwhelming (especially that OL) Peyton was able to get enough out of it to allow the special part of that team to shine (the DEFENSE).

 

Peyton wasn't THE reason they won....but he I honestly in my heart don't think if Peyton was not on that team they would have won it all....and definitely wouldn't have been a SB team 2 of the last 4 years. That's my opinion...might not be popular but I believe it to my core.

[jskinnz]

19 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

They were more efficient than Denver's... They actually marched down the field and scored a touchdown with out the aide of a turnover, if i remember correctly.

 

The Panthers had more total net yards; more total net passing and rushing yards and converted more third downs than the Broncos...

 

So i would classify them as better.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2016020700/2015/POST22/panthers@broncos#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000634998&tab=analyze

 

Dear God...

 

Who freaking cares if you would classify them as better?  That means nothing.  The fact Denver has scoreboard and not by the hair on their chins either.  By any reasonable definition, that means Denver was better.  

[chad72]

Just now, Tsarquise said:

From that angle, which i dont ever remember seeing, it looks like it hits the ground, but it also looks like he has possession; he has it in his hand. Who knows what a catch is... It's up for interpretation. It doesn't matter though; it was ruled incomplete. But the game was close; it could have gone either way and just because the Broncos won, I don't believe they were the better team. 

 

And for what it's worth, DVOA stats back my opinion up. 

 

But much to my disdain, the Broncos won.

 

I was wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, wrong.

 

And this thread is being derailed, so I'm going to stop. 

 

That is the thing. The replay was viewed from the "ground helped him secure the catch" angle. If his hand was entirely underneath the ball, it would have been a no brainer and a catch. 

 

It got to a point where the Panthers' D-line was beating the Broncos' OL to a pulp and Peyton was just glad to hand it off or punt, I felt. They were just playing not to lose in the 4th qtr., the Broncos, and hoping Cam would make a mistake or a turnover would happen vs that ferocious pass rush, which ended up happening.

[Tsarquise]

 

7 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Dear God...

 

Who freaking cares if you would classify them as better?  That means nothing.  The fact Denver has scoreboard and not by the hair on their chins either.  By any reasonable definition, that means Denver was better.  

Dear God...

 

Jason S asked me how I would classify the Panthers offense compared to Denvers... Read...

 

So, I guess Jason S cares.

[Tsarquise]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

That is the thing. The replay was viewed from the "ground helped him secure the catch" angle. If his hand was entirely underneath the ball, it would have been a no brainer and a catch. 

 

It got to a point where the Panthers' D-line was beating the Broncos' OL to a pulp and Peyton was just glad to hand it off or punt, I felt. They were just playing not to lose in the 4th qtr., the Broncos, and hoping Cam would make a mistake or a turnover would happen vs that ferocious pass rush, which ended up happening.

 

Yep, that's pretty much what happened.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

 

Dear God...

 

Jason S asked me how I would classify the Panthers offense compared to Denvers... Read...

I thought both QB's played sub par but Peyton made less mistakes. Cam crapped the bed on the big stage! Both Defenses showed up but Denver's Defense is one of the best of all-time and scored the 1 Defensive TD to set the tone like I did predict they would.

[Live and let live]

26 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

They didn't.

OK. I think that is the way a lot of people took it. I certainly did. I have heard from others who felt that way. But, you have been around a long time so I will defer to your judgement. Perhaps I got it wrong.

[dgambill]

4 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

 

Dear God...

 

Jason S asked me how I would classify the Panthers offense compared to Denvers... Read...

That was a top 5 offense clearly...and Denver's wasn't...but in this game....Denver's offense was better. They didn't turn the ball over inside their own 10 twice...the redzone ints wash out...basically Denvers offense put together 3 scoring drives and Carolina's 2. Carolina might have moved the ball more but that doesn't mean they were the better offense on Sunday. Sometimes punting is a good offense too....sometimes just changing field position is important. All I know is Denvers offense started the game with points and finished....and Carolinas offense started it turning it over and giving up points and ended it doing the same. I think Denver out performed Carolina in all phases. The defense outplayed Carolinas (although Carolina's played very very well), Denvers offense outplayed Carolina's (3 scores to two, less turnovers, controlled the clock) and special teams (better punting, returns, and fg accuracy). Honestly Carolina completely got outplayed. They had their shots but they just simply didn't execute....and Denver's defense was so good that even a great game by Carolina's wasn't enough to overcome it. Had Denver got behind perhaps their offense would have played to catch up (like Carolina's)...taken more chances and gained more yardage. Fact was the play calling and the design of the game plan and the fact that Denver scored first and answered every Carolina score meant Denvers offense was asked to play a different game then Carolina's....and I think they were more successful in fulfilling their game plan then the Panthers were easily....so no...Denver's offense was better on Sunday.

[southwest1]

21 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

 

Dear God...

 

Jason S asked me how I would classify the Panthers offense compared to Denvers... Read...

If you wanna make the argument that the Panthers assembled a better roster on paper that's 1 thing, but like any SB, it's about execution on the field & Miller, Ware, Ward, Daniels, Sanders, Wolfe, Talib, Manning, & Anderson did just enough to pull it out. 

 

Let's not play semantics or word games shall we. Denver won 24-10. That's all anybody will ever remember a decade from now. 

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, Tsarquise said:

They won, but it definitely wasn't because of anything Manning did, which is who everyone was rooting for; not that it matters.

 

I thought the Panthers were the all round better team and I don't think I was wrong about that...

 

The Panthers offense actually marched down the field and scored a touchdown; something that the Broncos offense couldn't do. The game was so close, a couple of plays swing the entire game; for example if the the ref rules that Panthers pass a catch early in the game, (which was clearly a catch.) the whole tone of the game could have been different. 

 

I think if they played again the Panthers would win. 

 

 

Well lucky for the panthers they will get a chance next year

[jvan1973]

17 minutes ago, Live and let live said:

 Perhaps I got it wrong.

You did

[jskinnz]

49 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

 

Dear God...

 

Jason S asked me how I would classify the Panthers offense compared to Denvers... Read...

 

So, I guess Jason S cares.

 

I am pretty confident that he asked so he could see the nonsensical response you would come up with.  And you more than obliged.  

 

Thank you.  You are the gift that keeps on giving.

[RomanianColtsFan]

Actually Peyton went to 2 Super Bowls in 4 years with the Colts too. It's just that it took longer for everything to come together.

[Jason_]

25 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

I am pretty confident that he asked so he could see the nonsensical response you would come up with.  And you more than obliged.  

 

Thank you.  You are the gift that keeps on giving.

 

^ this

[Myles]

Amazing what having a good defense allows you to do.    With the Colts Manning was forced to do everything possible to score on each possession.   With Denver, he could just manage the game.   The best thing Manning did Sunday was not forcing plays and accepting 3 and outs at some points.   Going with a draw play on 3rd and long was a great call with Denvers defense.