What if the Colts beat the Texans at Houston...

[coltsgoodin]

WHAT IF?? Thats the big question because let's say it does happen and on top of that when we get to the final game of the season which, by the way is the Texans, the seeding is locked up for the Texans, Do you think the Texans would still rest players or would they not want ot get beat twice by us?? That would be a huge gut blow if you asked me going into the playoffs...

[cjwhiskers]

Hey, the Jags almost did it...IF we ended up beating the Texans which will be insanely tough, but absolutely not impossible, the team wouldn't make much of it. Just another game bringing them closer to playoffs. The media however would have a field day. And I still think they would sit their players last game.

[The Peytonator]

I'm not so certain they'll have it locked up by then. Pats could run the table and that would include a win over Houston. If New England wins out, Houston would have to play that last game to hold the #1 seed, regardless of if we beat them or not. I hate seeing teams rest their starters when they have the bye locked up....all it does is kill your buzz/mojo, and more often than not you come out flat 3 weeks later when it really counts. See Packers last year, and Colts every year before that.

[Superman]

I'm not so certain they'll have it locked up by then. Pats could run the table and that would include a win over Houston. If New England wins out, Houston would have to play that last game to hold the #1 seed, regardless of if we beat them or not. I hate seeing teams rest their starters when they have the bye locked up....all it does is kill your buzz/mojo, and more often than not you come out flat 3 weeks later when it really counts. See Packers last year, and Colts every year before that.

Except 2009.

I never bought that argument.

[Andy]

I'm not so certain they'll have it locked up by then. Pats could run the table and that would include a win over Houston. If New England wins out, Houston would have to play that last game to hold the #1 seed, regardless of if we beat them or not. I hate seeing teams rest their starters when they have the bye locked up....all it does is kill your buzz/mojo, and more often than not you come out flat 3 weeks later when it really counts. See Packers last year, and Colts every year before that.

Dont worry about Houston. Remember last year, against the Titans, they went for the win. That's why they tried the 2 point conversion, to win the game, even though they could have made the PAT and go to OT.

[The Peytonator]

Except 2009.

I never bought that argument.

Yes, 2009 was the lone exception, but nobody would argue that we had regular one-and-done playoff appearances, and nobody would argue that we rested our starters quite often at the end of a season.

[coltso11]

People need to stop talking about the Texans resting their starters being the only way we can win. We can beat them with their starters, theyre not as strong as they were at the beginning of the season. every team has a 50/50 shot at winning no matter what, plus its a division game so both teams will play tougher.

[cmgww]

2009, the Colts played it a bit different and kept the starters in the infamous Jets game and the Buffalo game , just long enough to get some reps in (and get a few records, but let's not go down that road)...big difference than in past years where they rested for darn near a month. But I never bought into it either. In 2008 we had to play until the end and still got beat. 2005 was an anomaly and I think Dungy's son dying really affected the team more than any of them would ever admit. The rust didn't help, but it wasn't the biggest reason they lost IMO

[The Peytonator]

I don't know the state of Jonathan Joseph's injury, but if he's out that sure does help.

[Jules]

Then we party. :disco:

[The Fish]

Then we party. :disco:

I'll bring the chips!

[The Fish]

Yes, 2009 was the lone exception, but nobody would argue that we had regular one-and-done playoff appearances, and nobody would argue that we rested our starters quite often at the end of a season.

The right thing was done, and would be done by 99/100 teams. The Pats and the Colts suffered the same fate on "perfect" runs. Regular season stuff isn't that important once the postseason starts. I'll never get the attitude that us fans were cheated of anything. Never.

[deedub75]

We're going on a 5 game winning streak and the Texans are going on a 5 game losing streak!

[throwing BBZ]

If Luck doesn`t start using the short game... our Luck will run out.

[CR91]

I'm not so certain they'll have it locked up by then. Pats could run the table and that would include a win over Houston. If New England wins out, Houston would have to play that last game to hold the #1 seed, regardless of if we beat them or not. I hate seeing teams rest their starters when they have the bye locked up....all it does is kill your buzz/mojo, and more often than not you come out flat 3 weeks later when it really counts. See Packers last year, and Colts every year before that.

packers didnt really lose their mojo the wrs just kept dropping passes

[scorptile]

if the colts beat houston both times i see the colts winning the division. i doubt the texans are gonna beat the pats. the only team i think could beat the pats is baltimore. if we end up the 5th seed and everyone where they already are i can see us in the superbowl possibly. and before you say oh your crazy!!! i predicted at the beginning of the preseason the colts going 10-6 and no one believed me. now look where we are at two losses away from my prediction. but if we win out then no one will see 13-3 coming which would beat our comeback record with manning and with a rookie no doubt. could we be the superbowl champs this season? i think that is a yes if things fall teh way i think they will. the question is do we go to houston or to baltimore which im thiking houston and if the texans wins both games i think the colts just might knock them off their pedistals then face the ravens in the afc championship game. and to play atlanta is the superbowl hehe could possibly be eheh ;)

[GoColts8818]

It would be a very nice win if they get it.

[Tark The Shark]

If that happened, it would be like beating the Packers except multiplying it by 5.

It would solidify our playoff chances.

It would solidify Luck's season as remarkable.

It would solidify Grigson's chances of winning GM of the year.

I would love to beat Houston at Houston, but with our recent road woes against top tier teams, I don't think it is very likely.

[Superman]

Yes, 2009 was the lone exception, but nobody would argue that we had regular one-and-done playoff appearances, and nobody would argue that we rested our starters quite often at the end of a season.

I'm sure you've considered the many and varied angles of this debate. I know I have. Both of us have taken this one for a spin multiple times. I just don't think there is a valid correlation between our playoff losses and our end of season strategy.

I would prefer to see us play it out, for the most part, but I understand the decision to minimize risk of injury. If I were the GM or coach, I would probably make a similar decision, with respect for the situation. There's no way I would have shut it down in 2009, but that decision didn't affect the team's ability to roll through the AFC playoffs, with relative ease, by the way.

[JWF]

Ill go streaking and promptly to jail.

[chad72]

I do think, playing a practice in full pads during the bye week before the playoffs in 2009 helped our starters a lot, offensive and defensive. We came out firing pretty well against a stout Ravens D and solid run O who just beat the Pats and thought Peyton would always lose after a bye week. Ironically, the coach this time was Caldwell, and I never heard Dungy doing that.

Back to the original question, I will cross the bridge when it comes. The Lions game is more winnable than the Texans road game and if we beat Detroit, the Texans games could end up being moot points, IMO.

[The Peytonator]

I'm sure you've considered the many and varied angles of this debate. I know I have. Both of us have taken this one for a spin multiple times. I just don't think there is a valid correlation between our playoff losses and our end of season strategy.

I would prefer to see us play it out, for the most part, but I understand the decision to minimize risk of injury. If I were the GM or coach, I would probably make a similar decision, with respect for the situation. There's no way I would have shut it down in 2009, but that decision didn't affect the team's ability to roll through the AFC playoffs, with relative ease, by the way.

Agreed on all counts. I definitely see the merits of resting (you'd have to be a fool not to), but I don't like completely taking the foot off the gas, save for a token possession to keep Manning's streak alive. In 2009 we had the fortune of playing Baltimore, a team that we had owned with relative ease in the preceding few years, and we were far more dominant that year than we had been in past years.

[oldunclemark]

WHAT IF?? Thats the big question because let's say it does happen and on top of that when we get to the final game of the season which, by the way is the Texans, the seeding is locked up for the Texans, Do you think the Texans would still rest players or would they not want ot get beat twice by us?? That would be a huge gut blow if you asked me going into the playoffs...

What if Santa Claus came on Thanksgiving instead of Christmas??

[bayone]

I'm not so certain they'll have it locked up by then. Pats could run the table and that would include a win over Houston. If New England wins out, Houston would have to play that last game to hold the #1 seed, regardless of if we beat them or not. I hate seeing teams rest their starters when they have the bye locked up....all it does is kill your buzz/mojo, and more often than not you come out flat 3 weeks later when it really counts. See Packers last year, and Colts every year before that.

always hated that strategy essp as us Colts also rested most starters after 1 or 2 series of last game as well as when had a bye

[lollygagger8]

I think we beat them at home (starters or not) and will give them a handful at Texas, but they will still come out with the win. IMO.

I also think the scheduler needs punched. Making two teams play each twice in 3 weeks is pretty stupid.

Side Note:

Luck needs to perfect the pump fake so when JJ Watt jumps 7 feet in the air on the first pump, he'll have a better throwing lane for the actual throw.

[oldunclemark]

lets beat Detroit and Tennesse and then we wont have to beat Houston...

[FanFromtheWasteland]

pigs will fly

[coltsgoodin]

What if Santa Claus came on Thanksgiving instead of Christmas??

He didn't so I guess that means the Colts will win out, finishing 12-4 giving us a number 2 or 3 seed which means we get a home wild card game at the very least. Super Bowl win this year!!!

[BuildtheMonster1285]

Dont' forget, that 1-13 Colts team last year beat the Texans

[Superman]

Dont' forget, that 1-13 Colts team last year beat the Texans

...

with a third string, 5th round quarterback, missing several starters on defense (including one of the best pass rushers in the league), and in a home game.

I think we can throw the results of that Week 16 win out the window. I don't think it's relevant, so long as Matt Schaub is healthy. The Texans are much better now than they were a year ago.

As a side note, I hope we don't get this ridiculous late season barrage of divisional contests again next season. This is the third year in a row that we've finished our schedule with three out of our last four games being divisional games. Enough already, NFL, we get it. Polian isn't here anymore; we're not going to pull our starters if we're 14-0 again.

[NewColtsFan]

As a side note, I hope we don't get this ridiculous late season barrage of divisional contests again next season. This is the third year in a row that we've finished our schedule with three out of our last four games being divisional games. Enough already, NFL, we get it. Polian isn't here anymore; we're not going to pull our starters if we're 14-0 again.

I'm afraid the backloaded schedule is here to stay. There were too many unimportant games in the final weeks.

Teams complained. TV Networks complained. Fans complained.

Honestly, I'm not sure why you're complaining? What difference does it make to you? Sorry, I don't understand your view on this?

[southwest1]

WHAT IF?? Thats the big question because let's say it does happen and on top of that when we get to the final game of the season which, by the way is the Texans, the seeding is locked up for the Texans, Do you think the Texans would still rest players or would they not want ot get beat twice by us?? That would be a huge gut blow if you asked me going into the playoffs...

The Texans wanna crush the Colts ever chance they get. They rest no veterans even if the division title is secured for Houston. Little brother always wants to kick big brother's caboose. Payback for all the years #18 derailed their team's playoff hopes & dreams. This is where the Colts offensive line worries me. DC Wade Phillips is bringing the heat & JJ Watt is coming. Count on it!

From 1 Badger Alumni to another, mayhem, determination, & tenacity is in our college blood baby!

[Superman]

I'm afraid the backloaded schedule is here to stay. There were too many unimportant games in the final weeks.

Teams complained. TV Networks complained. Fans complained.

Honestly, I'm not sure why you're complaining? What difference does it make to you? Sorry, I don't understand your view on this?

No one can control which games are important, not even the schedulers. Just because it's a divisional game doesn't make it important, just like the games at the end of the season last year. They were important to Colts fans because we were 0-13, but not to anyone else. Not outside of a morbid curiosity over whether we'd fail to win a game or not. Our Week 17 loss to the Texans didn't matter, not even to the Texans, as they already had their playoff seeding locked up. You can't really "backload" a schedule.

And this schedule that we've had in 2010 and 2011 at the end of the year (and this year as well) is unique to the Colts. Not many other teams have three divisional games in the last four weeks, and I'm pretty sure no other team has had that overloaded closing schedule in the last three seasons. Last year, our final three were divisional games. I don't even really mind that, but having Houston twice in three weeks is really unnecessary, and is rare in the NFL, especially at the end of the season. The Steelers and Ravens don't play each other twice in the last three weeks of the season; the Giants and Cowboys don't; the Chargers and Broncos don't; the Saints and Falcons don't. As a matter of fact, I think all of those matchups have already happened twice this season, and it's Week 13.

This is something the NFL saddled the Colts with because they didn't like how we shut it down in 2009. I don't like how we shut it down in 2009 either, but you can't force a team to play for a win in a game they don't care about. If we had divisional games at the end of 2009, we still wouldn't have kept playing, because our seeding was locked up. And if Houston's seeding is locked up by Week 17, they won't push hard just because they play a divisional rival. Like I said, you can't make unimportant games important just by making them divisional games.

Personally, I would rather have our divisional games spread out over the course of the season. It would be nice to have already played every team in the division once already, and then be able to use the second game as a measuring stick for our team's progress (or the other team's progress). It's not a gigantic deal, but enough already. Make our schedule the same way you make everyone else's, and stop trying to force us into "important" games at the end of the season.

[Indyboy757]

If the Texans loss one game before facing us and we win every game before facing them and lets just say we sweep them and win both games, what would that mean as for the playoff seeding with the Texans being the #1 seed?

[SteelCityColt]

If we beat the Texans at home, then you might as well say we're favorite to beat them at home given how the season has shaken out so far. If we sweep them then the division isn't out the question but will still be tough.

I do however also think if beat them in Texas this is the event that triggers the Big Crunch.

[Warhawk]

And this schedule that we've had in 2010 and 2011 at the end of the year (and this year as well) is unique to the Colts. Not many other teams have three divisional games in the last four weeks, and I'm pretty sure no other team has had that overloaded closing schedule in the last three seasons. Last year, our final three were divisional games. I don't even really mind that, but having Houston twice in three weeks is really unnecessary, and is rare in the NFL, especially at the end of the season. The Steelers and Ravens don't play each other twice in the last three weeks of the season; the Giants and Cowboys don't; the Chargers and Broncos don't; the Saints and Falcons don't. As a matter of fact, I think all of those matchups have already happened twice this season, and it's Week 13.

This is something the NFL saddled the Colts with because they didn't like how we shut it down in 2009. I don't like how we shut it down in 2009 either, but you can't force a team to play for a win in a game they don't care about. If we had divisional games at the end of 2009, we still wouldn't have kept playing, because our seeding was locked up. And if Houston's seeding is locked up by Week 17, they won't push hard just because they play a divisional rival. Like I said, you can't make unimportant games important just by making them divisional games.

This is just silly, especially claiming that the NFL is trying to get back to at the Colts for 2009. In 2011, the Colts, Dolphins, Browns, Titans, Giants, Cowboys, Falcons, Panthers, 49ers, and Seahawks all had 3 divisional games in their final 4, and probably half of the rest of the teams had divisional games for their last 2 games of the season. This year the Colts, Raiders, Packers, Bears, and Seahawks have 3 of their last 4 in the division, and lot of teams finish with 2 straight division games or 2 of their last 3.

No, the Colts are not being singled out by the league for some kind of ridiculous "retribution."

[oldunclemark]

WHAT IF?? Thats the big question because let's say it does happen and on top of that when we get to the final game of the season which, by the way is the Texans, the seeding is locked up for the Texans, Do you think the Texans would still rest players or would they not want ot get beat twice by us?? That would be a huge gut blow if you asked me going into the playoffs...

What Wonder Woman ate nothing but Wonder Bread.......? would she be toast?

[oldunclemark]

What if Wonder Woman ate nothing but Wonder Bread.......? would she be toast?

[Superman]

This is just silly, especially claiming that the NFL is trying to get back to at the Colts for 2009. In 2011, the Colts, Dolphins, Browns, Titans, Giants, Cowboys, Falcons, Panthers, 49ers, and Seahawks all had 3 divisional games in their final 4, and probably half of the rest of the teams had divisional games for their last 2 games of the season. This year the Colts, Raiders, Packers, Bears, and Seahawks have 3 of their last 4 in the division, and lot of teams finish with 2 straight division games or 2 of their last 3.

No, the Colts are not being singled out by the league for some kind of ridiculous "retribution."

The NFL did this in response to what the Colts did in 2009, and they were very vocal about it at the time. It's not a figment of my imagination; it's not a boogey man.

And what I said previously is that I'm pretty sure no other team has had three out of four divisional games each of the last three years. I haven't scoured all the schedules for the last three years, but I'm pretty confident that's the case.

It's not unique to the Colts, and we don't even have it the worst. The Packers have four of their last five in the division. But this is something that the NFL started doing because they wanted the last games of the season to have more importance. And maybe that will hold true once in a while. It's still mathematically possible for the Week 17 game to decide who wins the division. And that's good for the league, for networks, for advertisers, and even fans.

I just don't like having three of our last four being divisional games, and I certainly don't like playing the same team twice in three weeks at the end of the season. If the Texans somehow fall out of the top two seeds, we could wind up playing them a third time in the wild card round. That's silly.

[JoKeR]

WHAT IF?? Thats the big question because let's say it does happen and on top of that when we get to the final game of the season which, by the way is the Texans, the seeding is locked up for the Texans, Do you think the Texans would still rest players or would they not want ot get beat twice by us?? That would be a huge gut blow if you asked me going into the playoffs...

That would be awesome but I don't know what the Texans would do. Sit maybe, they've had a history of star players getting injured.