Anyone else worried?

[Trueman]

Is anyone worried or concerned that we look like we're mimicking the Polian/Dungy era a little too much?

 

I for one wasn't excited to hear that we're going back to the 4-3 cover 2 and the Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style. I'd rather mimic Denver's 4-3 , than ours of old.

 

I dunno, maybe Ballard is the key difference in building a different Colts era. I love that guy , and I believe in him. I just don't want it to be predictable and soft. I want some nasty and some complexity to our defence. 

 

Just curious to hear your guys thoughts. 

[GoColts8818]

The Colts had more wins in decade than any other team in NFL history under Polian and Dungy.  Since the Colts have had three none winning seasons in a row no I am not worried.

[Devildog]

Nah. Not worried at all. I would be more worried if we mimic Grigson/Pagano's Build The Monster.... lol

[Tsarquise]

My god, it just blows my mind how Colts fans could have problems with the Colts being the Colts, or should I say mimicking their most successful history; their glory days. 

[Trueman]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

The Colts had more wins in decade than any other team under Polian and Dungy.  Since the Colts have had three none winning seasons in a row no I am not worried.

 

Yeah, I figured I'd get some responses like this. 

 

Without getting into a big argument, I'll just say that Dungy and more importantly Polian should thank Peyton for almost all of that.

[GoColts8818]

7 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Yeah, I figured I'd get some responses like this. 

 

Without getting into a big argument, I'll just say that Dungy and more importantly Polian should thank Peyton for almost all of that.

And Peyton should thank them for putting a good team around him because he didn’t do it all by himself.  One player, even one as great Peyton, doesn’t do it all by himself.  If you look at Peyton before Dungy got here he wasn’t the Peyton we know and love.  The Colts were regressing as a team having gone 13-3, 10-6, and then 6-10.  Peyton himself had yet to win a playoff game and had a real turnover problem and wasn’t the TD machine he would become.  Peyton has credited Dungy for teaching him the hardest lesson he had to learn as a QB which was punts and incompletions weren’t the worst things that could happen on offense.  It’s not a mistake that once Dungy got here the Colts never won fewer than 10 games under him only winning less than 12 once and that was his first year and Peyton’s numbers sharply improved and he became the alltime great player we remember.  

 

Polian gave him great players like Edge, Saturday, Wayne, Freeney, Mathis, Bethea, and Adam.  It was the defense and running game that carried Peyton to their Super Bowl win.  

 

So the narative that Peyton carried Dungy and Polian is a false one.  They were equal partners.  All three of them delievered that decade of greatness which is why all three of them will be in the Hall of Fame with some other friends.

[jshipp23]

6 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Yeah, I figured I'd get some responses like this. 

 

Without getting into a big argument, I'll just say that Dungy and more importantly Polian should thank Peyton for almost all of that.

And Dwight Freeney, Robert Mathis, Bob Sanders, Jeff Saturday, Tarik Glenn, Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison, Dallas Clark, and Reggie Wayne etc..Lots of pro bowlers , Hall of Famers, Future Hall of Famers...just saying..Better coaching and could have been 3 or 4 Super Bowls..

[TdungyW/12]

20 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Is anyone worried or concerned that we look like we're mimicking the Polian/Dungy era a little too much?

 

I for one wasn't excited to hear that we're going back to the 4-3 cover 2 and the Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style. I'd rather mimic Denver's 4-3 , than ours of old.

 

I dunno, maybe Ballard is the key difference in building a different Colts era. I love that guy , and I believe in him. I just don't want it to be predictable and soft. I want some nasty and some complexity to our defence. 

 

Just curious to hear your guys thoughts. 

Why be worried?

[Trueman]

4 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

My god, it just blows my mind how Colts fans could have problems with the Colts being the Colts, or should I say mimicking their most successful history; their glory days. 

 

Because we underachieved with, in my opinion, the best QB ever. 

 

Looking back at that time fondly is natural and justified, but to suggest we didn't make massive mistakes based on limiting principles and philosophies would be denying the truth.

 

I get that Grigson and Pagano's era was so bad that reverting back to the past seems like a logical decision, but I don't think it is. 

 

Like I said, maybe Ballard will value different positions/dispositions  and maybe he'll just flat out be better at evaluating talent . Maybe that will prove to be the difference. 

 

But if going down the exact same path is the plan , I don't like it. 

 

 

 

[Trueman]

2 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

And Peyton should thank them for putting a good team around him because he didn’t do it all by himself.  One player, even one as great Peyton, doesn’t do it all by himself.  If you look at Peyton before Dungy got here he wasn’t the Peyton we know and love.  The Colts were regressing as a team having gone 13-3, 10-6, and then 6-10.  Peyton himself had yet to win a playoff game and had a real turnover problem and wasn’t the TD machine he would become.  Peyton has credited Dungy for teaching him the hardest lesson he had to learn as a QB which was punts and incompletions weren’t the worst things that could happen on offense.  It’s not a mistake that once Dungy got here the Colts never won fewer than 10 games under him only winning less than 12 once and that was his first year and Peyton’s numbers sharply improved and he became the alltime great player we remember.  

 

Polian gave him great players like Edge, Saturday, Wayne, Freeney, Mathis, Bethea, and Adam.  It was the defense and running game that carried Peyton to their Super Bowl win.  

 

So the narative that Peyton carried Dungy and Polian is a false one.  They were equal partners.  All three of them delievered that decade of greatness which is why all three of them will be in the Hall of Fame with some other friends.

 

Lol, what's Polian's Colts record without Peyton? How'd Caldwell(an average coach)  do when Dungy retired?

 

How'd Peyton do when he left the nest?

 

When Ray Lewis came out and said the Colts are a poor team without Peyton , what did you think? " Nah, we have Polian and Dungy!"

 

You put any other QB on that team and we aren't anything close to what you remember. 

[buccolts]

On one hand, we were one SuperBowl win better than I thought we'd be when drafting Manning.

On the other hand, it was one of the most successful runs during my Colts fandom, and a fun ride.

So, I'm not going to worry about it.

 

And, if we do have to relive that horror, how is that going to effect you?

[Trueman]

1 minute ago, buccolts said:

On one hand, we were one SuperBowl win better than I thought we'd be when drafting Manning.

On the other hand, it was one of the most successful runs during my Colts fandom, and a fun ride.

So, I'm not going to worry about it.

 

And, if we do have to relive that horror, how is that going to effect you?

 

"Relive that horror" ... alright man.

 

 I'm just going to wait for a non-predictable response.

[GoColts8818]

Just now, Trueman said:

 

Lol, what's Polian's Colts record without Peyton? How'd Caldwell(an average coach)  do when Dungy retired?

 

How'd Peyton do when he left the nest?

 

When Ray Lewis came out and says the Colts are a poor team without Peyton , what did you think? " Nah, we have Polian and Dungy!"

 

You put any other QB on that team and we aren't anything close to what you remember. 

Polian went to three straight Super Bowls and took the Panthers to the NFC title game in only their second season of existence without Peyton.  He did just fine without Peyton.  

 

Dungy never had a losing season including taking over a Bucs team that was maybe the biggest joke in sports when he took over and reached an NFC title game.  Again his track record without Peyton was already pretty good.  

 

How did Peyton do before Dungy got here?  His teams never won a playoff game and had gone 3-13, 13-3, 10-6, and 6-10.  So they were a .500 team that was regressing.  

 

Was Peyton Manning the best player on the Colts?  Without question.  I am not denying that.  What I am saying is that it’s a mistake to discount Polian and Dungy’s roles too.  There is reason both are in the Hall of Fame and when all three got together they produced the team that had more wins in a decade than any other team in NFL history.  They had three Hall of Farmers in Polian, Dungy, and Manning running the ship.  

 

Back to your original point, would I go back to that even if it didn’t have as much post season success as most would have liked after the last three years?  Heck yes.

[Trueman]

9 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Polian went to three straight Super Bowls and took the Panthers to the NFC title game in only their second season of existence without Peyton.  He did just fine without Peyton.  

 

Dungy never had a losing season including taking over a Bucs team that was maybe the biggest joke in sports when he took over and reached an NFC title game.  Again his track record without Peyton was already pretty good.  

 

How did Peyton do before Dungy got here?  His teams never won a playoff game and had gone 3-13, 13-3, 10-6, and 6-10.  So they were a .500 team that was regressing.  

 

Was Peyton Manning the best player on the Colts?  Without question.  I am not denying that.  What I am saying is that it’s a mistake to discount Polian and Dungy’s roles too.  There is reason both are in the Hall of Fame and when all three got together they produced the team that had more wins in a decade than any other team in NFL history.  They had three Hall of Farmers in Polian, Dungy, and Manning running the ship.  

 

Back to your original point, would I go back to that even if it didn’t have as much post season success as most would have liked after the last three years?  Heck yes.

 

Dungy never had a losing season? Do you mean specifically with the Colts? Otherwise you might want to fact check.

 

Polian and Dungy are both solid . Do I think they cost us SB's? I do.

 

I think Luck has the potential to be one of the greatest ever. I'd like him to win more than Peyton and for us to not make the same mistakes.

 

I knew there'd be push back , but I expected a little more interesting discord. 

 

The past ethos/philosophy was MUCH better than arguably the worst GM in the league and arguably one of the worst head coaches. No disagreement there.

 

But to suggest there isn't room to analyze Peyton/Polian's era under a critical lense is nonsense. 

 

 

[Maniac]

If it gets it away from the football we played under Chuck then I don't really mind who we "mimic"

[GoColts8818]

12 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Dungy never had a losing season? Do you mean specifically with the Colts? Otherwise you might want to fact check.

 

Polian and Dungy are both solid . Do I think they cost us SB's? I do.

 

 

You are correct he had one losing season that slipped my mind.  His first season in a 13 year career.  He would only miss the playoffs one other time in his career.  Any coach would sign up for that career record.

 

you know what cost the Colts Super Bowls?  The offense not showing up in playoffs.  Of the Colts 10 playoff loses with Manning they scored the following:

 

16

17

0

14

3

18

24

17

17

16

 

Now for a team built around the QB there isn’t really a way to blame the lack of offensive production in the playoffs without the QB sharing some of it too.  When the offense played well in the playoffs with Manning they would win.  When it didn’t they didn’t. That’s not just a head coach and GM problem.

 

Did the Colts have flaws under Polian, Dungy, and, Manning?  Of course but all NFL teams have them.  It was still good enough to produce more wins in decade than any other team in NFL history.  Most people would be thrilled if the Colts could get back to that.  However, I think it will be hard to do.  Not because of the system but because it’s hard to get a Hall of Fame GM, Head Coach, and QB all at the same time.  That was the golden era of Colts football and it’s not likely to be repeated.  

[Trueman]

We lost because of our offence? 

 

You really want to simplify it to that? You gotta be kidding me.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 hour ago, Trueman said:

Is anyone worried or concerned that we look like we're mimicking the Polian/Dungy era a little too much?

 

I for one wasn't excited to hear that we're going back to the 4-3 cover 2 and the Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style. I'd rather mimic Denver's 4-3 , than ours of old.

 

I dunno, maybe Ballard is the key difference in building a different Colts era. I love that guy , and I believe in him. I just don't want it to be predictable and soft. I want some nasty and some complexity to our defence. 

 

Just curious to hear your guys thoughts. 

 

I love the direction that I think our Offense will be taking.

 

As far as the Defense I'm not a fan of Tampa 2, if thats what we are getting?

 

There are different versions of the  4-3 so we have to wait and see what they implement.

[GoColts8818]

18 minutes ago, Trueman said:

We lost because of our offence? 

 

You really want to simplify it to that? You gotta be kidding me.

You think saying the offense deserves some of the blame for the playoff loses when they averaged less than 20 points a game in those games is unreasonable when they were built around being a high powered offense?

[Jackie Daytona]

1 hour ago, Trueman said:

 

Because we underachieved with, in my opinion, the best QB ever. 

 

Looking back at that time fondly is natural and justified, but to suggest we didn't make massive mistakes based on limiting principles and philosophies would be denying the truth.

 

I get that Grigson and Pagano's era was so bad that reverting back to the past seems like a logical decision, but I don't think it is. 

 

Like I said, maybe Ballard will value different positions/dispositions  and maybe he'll just flat out be better at evaluating talent . Maybe that will prove to be the difference. 

 

But if going down the exact same path is the plan , I don't like it. 

 

 

 

It's the * off Atlanta Braves Syndrome.......  stop crying over that period in history,.... be glad, excited, and hopeful, that our team has an owner, the most important person to a team, really, that has worked in football his entire life, knows when to stay out of the way, and wanrs to win more than anything.....  

[Jackie Daytona]

Truman is my favorite President.  Trueman is my least favorite new poster....

[LJpalmbeacher2]

12 minutes ago, Trueman said:

We lost because of our offence? 

 

You really want to simplify it to that? You gotta be kidding me.

 

Like it was said above, Peyton's offense didn't show up in numerous playoff games.

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

Truman is my favorite President.  Trueman is my least favorite new poster....

 

Thanks man. I'm such an awful guy.

[Trueman]

8 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I love the direction that I think our Offense will be taking.

 

As far as the Defense I'm not a fan of Tampa 2, if thats what we are getting?

 

There are different versions of the  4-3 so we have to wait and see what they implement.

 

Well, this is the thing , if it's Tampa 2 and we do the same thing as we did under Dungy, I'm not gunna be happy. But we'll see what happens.

[Jackie Daytona]

5 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Thanks man. I'm such an awful guy.

lol nah, and welcome, I just tend to be slightly optimistic, though  I am a realist at heart...... no worries here brother, just a slight jab, hope you enjoy posting here, and all the convo's to come!

[Trueman]

9 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

You think saying the offense deserves some of the blame for the playoff loses when they averaged less than 20 points a game in the games they lost is unreasonable?  

 

Those stats ( game scores) are beyond simplistic, self-serving and devoid of context . Nor do they consider the symbiotic nature of defence/offence/special teams/running/time of possession etc

 

Newsflash : having an elite defence matters. Which is what I'm talking about...

 

I could easily flip those stats and say we only had one win without scoring at least 20 (ravens). And had to score 38 points twice just to win.

 

Whereas Brady/Belichick have 4 wins of 20 or under scored. 7 wins of 24 points or less. 11 wins of scoring 24 or less combined. Many of those being close games.

 

How many did we have scoring less than 24 ? 3. And none of them were close scores. (9 points was the closest margin).

 

 

[Finball]

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

Was Peyton Manning the best player on the Colts?  Without question.  I am not denying that.  What I am saying is that it’s a mistake to discount Polian and Dungy’s roles too.  There is reason both are in the Hall of Fame and when all three got together they produced the team that had more wins in a decade than any other team in NFL history.  They had three Hall of Farmers in Polian, Dungy, and Manning running the ship. 

 

Polian would probably have made the Hall anyway but Dungy wouldn't have without Manning. Manning would have without Dungy.

[BOTT]

I think you are jumping the gun a bit.  Not sure what "Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style" means.

 

The main problem with the Polian/Dungy era was how they built the defense.  i don't see Ballard bringing in 280lb defensive tackles and 216lb linebackers.

[Trueman]

25 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

lol nah, and welcome, I just tend to be slightly optimistic, though  I am a realist at heart...... no worries here brother, just a slight jab, hope you enjoy posting here, and all the convo's to come!

 Thanks, it's going to take me a while to understand each poster's general tone. 

 

I believe in the direction we're going too, I just feel the Tampa 2 is a mistake. I want us to have a good/great defence for Andrew. 

 

I think Ballard is a total stud , and I hope he values things that Polian didn't. That's all. 

[Trueman]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

I think you are jumping the gun a bit.  Not sure what "Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style" means.

 

Yes, you do. 

 

 

[BOTT]

Just now, Trueman said:

 

Yes, you do. 

 

 

Thanks for the insight

[Trueman]

6 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Thanks for the insight

Hana alright :

 

Did Polian recommend him?

Did he not work with Polian on and off the field?

Did Polian not tell him he'd be a Head Coach one day?

Does he not check the boxes of a prototypical "Polian guy"?

 

That all I mean. This is the kind of coach Polian would hire if he was still in charge. Aka going down the "old path".

 

I'm not saying he's a bad hire. Far from it. Just that it's another example of us mimicking the previous regime.

 

 

[Jackie Daytona]

22 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Those stats ( game scores) are beyond simplistic, self-serving and devoid of context . Nor do they consider the symbiotic nature of defence/offence/special teams/running/time of possession etc

 

Newsflash : having an elite defence matters. Which is what I'm talking about...

 

I could easily flip those stats and say we only had one win without scoring at least 20 (ravens). And had to score 38 points twice just to win.

 

Whereas Brady/Belichick have 4 wins of 20 or under scored. 7 wins of 24 points or less. 11 wins of scoring 24 or less combined. Many of those being close games.

 

How many did we have scoring less than 24 ? 3. And none of them were close scores. (9 points was the closest margin).

 

 

Oh sweet jesus.......  analytics at 2 AM or later.   I may be the only one here who digs on this lol

[Jackie Daytona]

15 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Yes, you do. 

 

 

Polian hired what, 2 coaches here?  

[csmopar]

[Nadine]

4 hours ago, Trueman said:

I just don't want it to be predictable and soft

 

I'm sure Ballard and Reich are trying to avoid this.  I would think most teams are.

[crazycolt1]

I see both sides of this debate.

We had some great years with Peyton but have little hardware to show for it.

Yes Polian built some great teams but when you put his teams up against teams that were built to win super bowls they fell short.

[LockeDown]

Ballard is not Polian and Reich is not Dungy and Luck is not Peyton.  That is one reason it isn't the same. 3 reasons actually. Polian liked offense and   Ballard likes defense.  Dungy knew defense and Reich knows offense.  Peyton was not athletic and Luck is extremely athletic.  

 

Also, don't forget.  The Patriots had a lot to do with blocking our road to the SB.  Maybe best coach of all time, schemed against us very well.  Legally and illegally. Then there is Bob Sanders. Arguably the  Best defensive guy in the league when he was healthy.  Pittsburgh couldn't win a SB without Troy P. And we couldn't win without Bob S. 

[coltsfan77]

My two cents are this!! I agree with the OP. We had great regular seasons with the old regime, but some shortcomings in the post season. As wonderful as the regular seasons were, we still left some championships on the table. I get where some say became better after Dungy but also you have to credit the QB also in the fact of maturing and putting the work in. I feel Manning with the work ethic he had would have succeeded a lot of that on his own. As far as going back to 43 d and cover 2, I  get it. Do not want to see more bend but don't break defenses. It puts to much pressure on the O to score every drive. It may be great exchanging 3 for 7, but it also limits the offenses time of possession.  During those glory days our defense put tons of pressure on our offense about every game. Manning did more with fewer possessions than any QB in the league and maybe ever. Do not want to put Luck through that. Just hoping this d is not like the ones we had but one with multiple formations and attacks, rather than wait and tackle. Other than our ends, there was not attack on cover 2.

[UKColt13]

You mean the era where we had almost no losing seasons and went to the SuperBowl twice?

 

As long as we’re more responsible with the Oline and defense, I’m not worried.