If The Colts Get To 0-14 Will They Rest Their Starters?

[Jason_]

If Hank Baskett holds onto a ball that hits him square in the chest, it goes down as one of the stupidest calls in SB history. That's how fine the line is. The players should be prepared for an onside kick on every kickoff. That is the whole reason that a few players play 10-15 yards off the 30 on every kickoff.....just in case there is an onside kick. Being taken by surprise is not an excuse here.

It was a gutsy call...I never voiced my opinion as to whether I liked the call or not or whether it was smart or stupid. I also said that no one could blame them for being caught off-guard, that's not the same as saying no one could blame them for not recovering it.

[cranium cramp]

That is highly debatable.

One could ponder any number of scenarios that may have unfolded if we had thrown caution to the wind in pursuit of a trophy-less accomplishment. Maybe Manning's neck gets tweaked in week 16 and we play this surgery game a year ago? Maybe the Colts suffer team wide injury through those two games and go 1 and done? Maybe we go 19-0?

After sitting starters for two games, we came out and won 2 playoff games. So how can you, or anyone else, pretend to offer that the Super Bowl loss had anything to do with rest/rust?

Had we popped one and done after that, then I would fully entertain your revisionist history lesson. Fact is, we won the AFC championship game after taking a pass on perfection, ultimately reaching the foothills of our goal.

The SB loss itself was teetering on a bizarre on-sides kick and a poor read by Manning, which led to a pick 6 for our opponent.

Let us not pretend that we struggled to reach the promised land, only to barf out a poor showing and get blown out.

I would argue that what was accomplished after the resting of players fully vouches for the decision to do so.

Nobody remembers who lost the superbowl other then the team that won it and the team that lost it. Everyone knows how many teams have went 16-0.

On top of that you have Manning wanting to go for the perfect season. If Polian and Irsay owed it to anyone, they owed it to the man that has carried this team for so long. Many will say that it was not just Manning, it was a team effort. WRONG.........If it was truly a team effort this team would not have been as bad as it was before Manning arrived. 1 man may not make a diffrence, 1 Manning has made all the diffrence.

Manning's 3-13 rookie year we saw flashes, Manning's second year 13-3 we saw a fire. Never before had Colts, nay has the NFL seen a QB that "had it". He knows the defense better then the defense knows itself. Manning takes scrubs and makes them look all world until they sign with a new team. E.G. Green, Marcus Pollard.......Heck he makes Blair White look good.

Polian did not owe us 16-0, nor did he owe it to the NFL. However Polian owed that to Manning and that is the part of the entire debacle that burns me deepest. When you owe a man so much and he wants so little you give it to him with no excuses.

Those of us that know Mannings desire for perfection, those of us that understand because we don't watch him play. We watch his attention to detail, his drive and his want for perfection believe that 14-2 with a superbowl maybe meant a lttle less then 16-0 with a superbowl. I for 1 think had he went to 16-0, his drive and want of perfection may have produced a better outcome. An outcome that I would have loved and Manning deserved to have a shot at.

[Jason_]

Nobody remembers who lost the superbowl other then the team that won it and the team that lost it. Everyone knows how many teams have went 16-0.

On top of that you have Manning wanting to go for the perfect season. If Polian and Irsay owed it to anyone, they owed it to the man that has carried this team for so long. Many will say that it was not just Manning, it was a team effort. WRONG.........If it was truly a team effort this team would not have been as bad as it was before Manning arrived. 1 man may not make a diffrence, 1 Manning has made all the diffrence.

Manning's 3-13 rookie year we saw flashes, Manning's second year 13-3 we saw a fire. Never before had Colts, nay has the NFL seen a QB that "had it". He knows the defense better then the defense knows itself. Manning takes scrubs and makes them look all world until they sign with a new team. E.G. Green, Marcus Pollard.......Heck he makes Blair White look good.

Polian did not owe us 16-0, nor did he owe it to the NFL. However Polian owed that to Manning and that is the part of the entire debacle that burns me deepest. When you owe a man so much and he wants so little you give it to him with no excuses.

Those of us that know Mannings desire for perfection, those of us that understand because we don't watch him play. We watch his attention to detail, his drive and his want for perfection believe that 14-2 with a superbowl maybe meant a lttle less then 16-0 with a superbowl. I for 1 think had he went to 16-0, his drive and want of perfection may have produced a better outcome. An outcome that I would have loved and Manning deserved to have a shot at.

How about a 16-0 without even a SB appearance because of injuries sustained in a meaningless game against one of the top defenses in the league? Regardless of what we the fans want or even what Manning wants, this is Irsay's team and he can do whatever he wants with it. He doesn't owe it to anyone to do anything he doesn't feel is in the best interest of his team.

[LUVTHESHOE]

If Hank Baskett holds onto a ball that hits him square in the chest, it goes down as one of the stupidest calls in SB history. That's how fine the line is. The players should be prepared for an onside kick on every kickoff. That is the whole reason that a few players play 10-15 yards off the 30 on every kickoff.....just in case there is an onside kick. Being taken by surprise is not an excuse here.

niether is sitting 12 yards off every receiver for an entire game and

get picked apart by brees, that was another awesome job by coach adjusting on the fly. NOT! but as he

has been know to say we will watch the film and adjust. lol lol lol!!!!

[Steagles]

Baskett is just terrible. HOW do you drop that?!?!? HE, not the Colts or Caldwell, made Payton look like the best coach ever.

[LUVTHESHOE]

How about a 16-0 without even a SB appearance because of injuries sustained in a meaningless game against one of the top defenses in the league? Regardless of what we the fans want or even what Manning wants, this is Irsay's team and he can do whatever he wants with it. He doesn't owe it to anyone to do anything he doesn't feel is in the best interest of his team.

so than why were manning and other starters sliding around in the snow the next week at

buffalo. or playing the entire game in a 42-6 blow out in week 7 vs st.louis. so that

arguement does'nt work. there have been several games that were utter blow outs and you sit and hold your breath

because manning still in taking snaps. maybe just maybe had painter had a few of those snaps he could have more prepared for that fateful jet game. like it or not that decision has alot to do with the way polian, painter and

caldwell are looked at by alot of fans, and that is no fault of painters. and in my opion that wont change until

caldwell is gone.

[Jason_]

so than why were manning and other starters sliding around in the snow the next week at

buffalo.

Every year, once the colts have locked up a playoff spot, the remaining games see the starters play for the first few series and then the backups came in. That's exactly what happened in the Jets game and Buffalo game in '09. The Coaches/FO stuck with their regular game plan so they did the same thing they always do.

or playing the entire game in a 42-6 blow out in week 7 vs st.louis.

What year are you talking about? It couldn't have been '09 otherwise the colts wouldn't have been in a position to go undefeated in week 16. I checked '10 and '08 (even though '08 was a different HC) and still not the game you're talking about. Regardless though, in a meaningful game (ie a regular season game where Colts playoff seed has not been determined), the starters typically play to the end of the game regardless of score.

so that arguement does'nt work.

Well yeah it kinda does. I can't make you see that though

there have been several games that were utter blow outs and you sit and hold your breath

because manning still in taking snaps. maybe just maybe had painter had a few of those snaps he could have more prepared for that fateful jet game. like it or not that decision has alot to do with the way polian, painter and

caldwell are looked at by alot of fans, and that is no fault of painters. and in my opion that wont change until

caldwell is gone. For every fan that hates Caldwell/Polian for pulling the starters there is also going to be one who is thankful they did and avoided taking any unnecessary risks of injury to key personnel. Simply put, you can't please all of the people all of the time. They have to do what they think is best for their team in that given situation without giving in to what some, or even if it were the case, all of the fans want. A coach who makes decisions based on what fans want won't coach for very long.

My comments in red.

[LUVTHESHOE]

My comments in red.

so you were ok with the starters playing in a blizzard,and throwing to wayne

15 times to keep silly streaks alive? all i am saying people get tired of the keep safe excuse

when they go out and make stupid decisions like that. the buffalo game is a question they have never addressed.

[oldunclemark]

The answer to the thread question is ironic..

If Manning is able to play and we are 0-14....of COURSE we hold him out..

..so we bench the MVP when we're 14-0 (in the 3rd quarter) and we bench the MVP when we're 0-14. Its funny when you think abut it.

But I have to agree with 18288...

////The 'he'll get hurt' arguement' is bogus....because we DID play Peyton against the Jets..2 years ago

..we played him and pulled him......We didnt known what we wanted to do....

..and its Polian's franchise..But its Mannings and Waynes and Saturdays, and Brackets and Clarks and Freeney's team.

They earned that right. They are the leaders..

If they wanted to go for 16-0 (and dont even believe they didnt) and you sold tickets based on the fans seeing the star players..play to win... then you most certainly did owe the players and the fans a shot at 16-0.

Remeber that folks drove through a snowstorm that day to see their Colts and then Polian pulls the rug out from under them..

I dont think anyone can EVER say that throwing the 15th game had an effect on the Super Bowl..especially since we led the Super Bowl 10-0

....but this one time...Polian spit in the face of the loyal fans and cheated his players out of a shot at the ultimate regular season achievement because of his egomania...I think he pulled the starters because he KNEW the fans and press wanted him not to and he refused to be TOLD what to do by anyone. Rich and powerful are like that. He a mistake and when he's old and grey he'll admit it.

Like Herm Edwards says 'You play to win the game'

[ColtsLover4ever]

If the colts go 0-14, will people stop posting ridiculous threads? Heck no, people obviously have nothing better to other than complain about something they can't change.

[Jason_]

But I have to agree with 18288...

////The 'he'll get hurt' arguement' is bogus....because we DID play Peyton against the Jets..2 years ago

..we played him and pulled him......We didnt known what we wanted to do....

It wasn't that they didn't know what they wanted to do. Every year, once the colt's playoff seed has been determined, the remaining games have seen the starters play for a few series (usually approximately the whole first quarter) and then they sit the rest of the game. They play that short period in attempt to stay somewhat fresh and maintain chemistry. If you look around the league, most other teams do the exact same thing. I never said whether or not I agreed with this philosophy and frankly I can see arguments for both sides. However, this is pretty standard operating procedure around the league, not just for the Colts.

..and its Polian's franchise..But its Mannings and Waynes and Saturdays, and Brackets and Clarks and Freeney's team.

No, this is Irsay's team. Everyone else from Polian to Pat McAfee are employees of his.

They earned that right. They are the leaders..

This is 100% opinion and I'm not saying that I agree or disagree. My opinion doesn't matter.

If they wanted to go for 16-0 (and dont even believe they didnt) and you sold tickets based on the fans seeing the star players..play to win... then you most certainly did owe the players and the fans a shot at 16-0.

Again this is your opinion. The only thing the players are truly "owed" is the amount of money specified in their contract. Anything else you feel they are owed is merely conjecture.

Remeber that folks drove through a snowstorm that day to see their Colts and then Polian pulls the rug out from under them..

It was their choice to drive through a snowstorm, and anyone who had any knowledge of the Colts tendencies and league tendencies should have expected, or at the very least have been prepared to see the starters play only a portion of the game. Anyone who expected to see the starters for the full game was merely fooling themselves.

I dont think anyone can EVER say that throwing the 15th game had an effect on the Super Bowl..especially since we led the Super Bowl 10-0

If the Colts had lost the first game in the playoffs that year then you would have an argument. But since they had to beat the Ravens (20-3) and the Jets (30-17) to get into the superbowl, you don't.

....but this one time...Polian spit in the face of the loyal fans and cheated his players out of a shot at the ultimate regular season achievement because of his egomania...I think he pulled the starters because he KNEW the fans and press wanted him not to and he refused to be TOLD what to do by anyone. Rich and powerful are like that. He a mistake and when he's old and grey he'll admit it.

If that is how he ran the team then he would have been fired a long time ago.

Like Herm Edwards says 'You play to win the game'

Yes...THE game. The goal of every team in the league every year is to win the superbowl. The Colts did what they felt was necessary to try to achieve that goal.

again, see answers in red

[LUVTHESHOE]

The answer to the thread question is ironic..

If Manning is able to play and we are 0-14....of COURSE we hold him out..

..so we bench the MVP when we're 14-0 (in the 3rd quarter) and we bench the MVP when we're 0-14. Its funny when you think abut it.

But I have to agree with 18288...

////The 'he'll get hurt' arguement' is bogus....because we DID play Peyton against the Jets..2 years ago

..we played him and pulled him......We didnt known what we wanted to do....

..and its Polian's franchise..But its Mannings and Waynes and Saturdays, and Brackets and Clarks and Freeney's team.

They earned that right. They are the leaders..

If they wanted to go for 16-0 (and dont even believe they didnt) and you sold tickets based on the fans seeing the star players..play to win... then you most certainly did owe the players and the fans a shot at 16-0.

Remeber that folks drove through a snowstorm that day to see their Colts and then Polian pulls the rug out from under them..

I dont think anyone can EVER say that throwing the 15th game had an effect on the Super Bowl..especially since we led the Super Bowl 10-0

....but this one time...Polian spit in the face of the loyal fans and cheated his players out of a shot at the ultimate regular season achievement because of his egomania...I think he pulled the starters because he KNEW the fans and press wanted him not to and he refused to be TOLD what to do by anyone. Rich and powerful are like that. He a mistake and when he's old and grey he'll admit it.

Like Herm Edwards says 'You play to win the game'

The one of many times he has spit in our face, and after the jets game if i remember correctly and i quote he wast concerned with what the fans thought. that is horrible. imo

[ColtsLover4ever]

again, see answers in red

You're wasting your time. There's a lot of bitter, spoiled fans here and I'm ashamed to be associated with them.

[ColtsLover4ever]

again, see answers in red

You're wasting your time. There's a lot of bitter, spoiled fans here and I'm ashamed to be associated with them.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

YES lol

[ColtsLover4ever]

The one of many times he has spit in our face, and after the jets game if i remember correctly and i quote he wast concerned with what the fans thought. that is horrible. imo

If you don't like it, stop watching them. Simple. It's not like your opinion matters.

[ColtsLover4ever]

The one of many times he has spit in our face, and after the jets game if i remember correctly and i quote he wast concerned with what the fans thought. that is horrible. imo

If you don't like it, stop watching them. Simple. It's not like your opinion matters.

[Gonzo]

0-16 would be nice, but I think it's more important to have the starters healthy for the offseason.

[LUVTHESHOE]

If you don't like it, stop watching them. Simple. It's not like your opinion matters.

none of OUR opinions matter! it is just a forum to voice them. I did'nt start this thread

just gave my opinion. ignore it if you dont agree with ,no need to hateful.I hate the color green

maybe you like it. I think this team could do a heck of alot better than jim caldwell maybe you

dont. does'nt make either one of us right or wrong.

[oldunclemark]

again, see answers in red

Jason.

In truth.

Like yours.. My opinion does not matter either..(except on this board where I want to hear yours)

Its an old issue and I'm just a fan. Maybe I should leave it alone.

But, for the record' Nobody asked the fans to drive through a snowstorm to see the Colts.? That's wrong in more than one way..

For the record..Yes they did. I dont think its a legal matter but legally when you sell tickets and you hold an event...

You do ask people to come...The jury is not out on that.

Also, ..the Colts did leave a reasonable expectation that they would play to win thegame (like Herm said). To me, that's just what's right and fair. If you are going all subs..say so...and then the fans be dayumed..But dont lie.

But dont fool them. Caldwell said they'd play to win and they didnt. I dont know but I dont think it was his call.

,

Its the difference between an exhibition game and regular season game. They charge difrerent prices..a defacto admisssion of that.

People have sued over this...although I wouldnt.

I would suggest that management owes the players every chance to win, wouldnt you?

An opinion, yes..but a widely held one.../ To deny players a chance to win a regularly scheduled competition where fans paid with

the reasonable assumption that they would go all out to win is wrong in any sport.

..the goal of every team is to win the game that day. Just as you cant win the Super Bowl in week 16 (as you correctly point out) you technically cant lose the Super Bowl in week 16..either

Factually..with respect for your detailed answer..you're wrong there...too.

there is no reasonable assumption that pulling the QB in the 3rd quarter of a game is saving him from serious injury.

Especially a QB whose started every game for a decade. That's emotion. Not fact.

..True. Mr. Irasy owns the team but Mr. Polian has free reign to operate it..and he has done it well.

Mr. Irsay..I would guess...agrees with Mr. Polian's decisions...to a large part...but they are isolated rich men who dont listen to us fans, by their own repeated assertion.

This one time..he spit in the face of many fans...I felt it.

Fire him?. Too much. This was not a firing offense..and his boss had his back.

It was one time..but perception is reality.....and the Colst wont always be a winning team,

I know its not right or wrong..its business.

But, from a sports and business standpoint, he did wrong in my opinion./

..That's not how you treat paying customers or loyal players..or people in general

[ruksak]

Anyone that thought the Colts would play to win that Buffalo game was fooling themselves. The only thing that was accomplished was Dallas and Reggie got their 100 receptions and the Colts made it out of that game without lengthening their injury list.

[Robin]

like we go 0-16 Collins is GOAT

/jk

[luvdacolts67]

Cant stop laughing

[Jason_]

You're wasting your time. There's a lot of bitter, spoiled fans here and I'm ashamed to be associated with them.

Yeah...I know. lol

Jason.

In truth.

Like yours.. My opinion does not matter either..(except on this board where I want to hear yours)

Its an old issue and I'm just a fan. Maybe I should leave it alone.

But, for the record' Nobody asked the fans to drive through a snowstorm to see the Colts.? That's wrong in more than one way..

For the record..Yes they did. I dont think its a legal matter but legally when you sell tickets and you hold an event...

You do ask people to come...The jury is not out on that. No you don't...you ask the fan to pay for the ticket. Once the ticket is sold and they have their money, why would they care one way or another if you actually show up...they still have their money.

Also, ..the Colts did leave a reasonable expectation that they would play to win thegame (like Herm said). To me, that's just what's right and fair. If you are going all subs..say so...and then the fans be dayumed..But dont lie.

But dont fool them. Caldwell said they'd play to win and they didnt. I dont know but I dont think it was his call.

I never said I disagreed with this. Yeah it would be the morally right thing to do but that doesn't mean it will ever happen. The Colts, just like every other team, is always guarded at least to some extent about their intentions, injuries etc. No matter what they said going up to that game, I still hold true that anyone who actually believed the starters would play through the game were fooling themselves. I was just as hopeful for a perfect season that year as anyone but when the starters came out of the game I wasn't surprised.

,

Its the difference between an exhibition game and regular season game. They charge difrerent prices..a defacto admisssion of that.

People have sued over this...although I wouldnt.

I would suggest that management owes the players every chance to win, wouldnt you? To a degree...yes. But at the same time, each team's coaching staff and FO has to sit down at the beginning of the year and decide what their reasonable expectations are for that year. For the Colts in the past decade,that goal has always been a superbowl win because we have had the talent to do it. Winning the superbowl is their ultimate goal so during the course of the season, every decision they make is going to be made in attempt to realize that goal. Sure they could have gone full throttle in 2 meaningless (in terms of playoffs and seeding) games and tried to be the first team in history to go 16-0 during the regular season AND win the superbowl but that wasn't their goal...and again it is their team. They made the decision to do what they felt was best for their team to reach the goal they had set for themselves. I just don't get people who say (obviously not verbatim, but whether they'll admit it or not this is what they're saying) "I voluntarily became a fan of this sport and this team and I voluntarily chose to spend some of my money to buy a ticket so now you owe me". Where does this undeserved sense of self-entitlement that runs so rampant in our society today come from?

An opinion, yes..but a widely held one.../ To deny players a chance to win a regularly scheduled competition where fans paid with

the reasonable assumption that they would go all out to win is wrong in any sport.

..the goal of every team is to win the game that day. Just as you cant win the Super Bowl in week 16 (as you correctly point out) you technically cant lose the Super Bowl in week 16..either

Factually..with respect for your detailed answer..you're wrong there...too.

there is no reasonable assumption that pulling the QB in the 3rd quarter of a game is saving him from serious injury.

Especially a QB whose started every game for a decade. That's emotion. Not fact.

I very much disagree with you here and in fact I think you have it backwards. Saying that he won't get injured because he's never been injured before is emotion. Not allowing him to play does keep him from getting injured in that game...that is fact. If he doesn't play then how can he possibly get injured? That is not, however, to say that he would get injured if he did play. Especially considering his healthy track record to that point, I do agree the risk was minimal, but there was still risk none the less.

..True. Mr. Irasy owns the team but Mr. Polian has free reign to operate it..and he has done it well.

Mr. Irsay..I would guess...agrees with Mr. Polian's decisions...to a large part...but they are isolated rich men who dont listen to us fans, by their own repeated assertion.

This one time..he spit in the face of many fans...I felt it.

Fire him?. Too much. This was not a firing offense..and his boss had his back.

It was one time..but perception is reality.....and the Colst wont always be a winning team,

I know its not right or wrong..its business.

But, from a sports and business standpoint, he did wrong in my opinion./

..That's not how you treat paying customers or loyal players..or people in general

My comments in red. Also please understand, there are many situations, and this is one of them, where I will try to explain why a decision was made...but unless I implicitly say so that does not mean that I agreed with said decision.

[Jason_]

so than why were manning and other starters sliding around in the snow the next week at

buffalo.

I wanted to come back to this point to say that I have no reasonable explanation for why they did this. The only thing I can come up with is that perhaps they feel anytime you can put your players in an adverse situation, you get to see how they respond and they gain experience in doing so. However this is incredibly flimsy but it's the best I could do. If the Colts hadn't been the number 1 seed that year then it could be argued they did it to give the players a taste of the bad weather in case they would wind up having to play in another team's stadium during bad weather, but they were the #1 seed so they had home field advantage through the playoffs and the superbowl hasn't been played in inclement weather in years.

So, while I do think that most of the decisions they make are at the very least for a valid reason (not meaning I agree with every decision but at least I can understand why the decision was made), on the Jets game I do agree with you and I cannot come up with any reason why the starters would have played more than a few plays. Unless there is some league imposed rule that for a player to actually be considered a starter he must play a certain amount of time or a certain number of plays....though I know of no such rule and if this were the case then I would very much disagree with the decision to play the starters.

[OLD FAN MAN]

Since "We don't really care one way or the other about a perfect season. It's just not something we think about." and because "There is no reason to risk getting guys hurt in a game with no bearing on playoff seeding.".

i say rest our "tonys tiny players" in every game it would keep the big guys from hurting them

[buddingvenus]

I hope that's a big IF on the Colts going 0-14. I believe it's anyone's game. Anything can happen. Nothing is guaranteed. When that first quarter starts and the score board reads 0-0, anything can happen. Anyone can get hurt. Hopefully they'll shake off that first loss and come up with a genuine game plan. Atleast that's what I'm hoping.

[mightisright]

No kidding!

Many people seem more transfixed on that 'perfect season' debacle than the fact that we lost the Super Bowl.

That's because we think that it was the whole "play not to lose attitude" instead of taking risks to win that lost us the SuperBowl and that attitude started with pulling our starters at 14-0!

[ruksak]

That's because we think that it was the whole "play not to lose attitude" instead of taking risks to win that lost us the SuperBowl and that attitude started with pulling our starters at 14-0!

....and now people are perhaps gaining an appreciation for the fact that they were even at 14-0 in the first place. I sense greed still looms for many others.

[Jason_]

That's because we think that it was the whole "play not to lose attitude" instead of taking risks to win that lost us the SuperBowl and that attitude started with pulling our starters at 14-0!

That attitude wasn't very apparent when Colts beat the Ravens 20-3 and the Jets 30-17 in order to get to the SB.

[Blue Horseshoe]

That attitude wasn't very apparent when Colts beat the Ravens 20-3 and the Jets 30-17 in order to get to the SB.

They always beat the Ravens, usually by double digits so that is no big deal and they would have beaten the Jets (basically a 7-9 team which only made the playoffs at 9-7 thanks to gutless Bill Polian) in December by double digits had they not quit so that is a big ho-hum also.

[Jason_]

They always beat the Ravens, usually by double digits so that is no big deal and they would have beaten the Jets (basically a 7-9 team which only made the playoffs at 9-7 thanks to gutless Bill Polian) in December by double digits had they not quit so that is a big ho-hum also.

:slaphead:

And I'm suddenly reminded of what ColtsLover4ever said....

You're wasting your time. There's a lot of bitter, spoiled fans here and I'm ashamed to be associated with them.

[mightisright]

And how is it bitter or spoiled to say that given the talent that we've put on the field every year, we should have a better playoff record? We should have gone for greatness in '09 and we should have played that SB to win instead of just trying to control the clock the second half. I haven't had the heart to watch it again but I walked away from that game sawing that we got out-coached and that we gave that one away because we weren't taking risks. If that's spoiled, okay. I'm spoiled. But I'll still root for the colts even when we have a crappy team. But when we have a phenomonal QB and great talent, it is spoiled to want results?

I'm sure there are lots of chargers fans that are in the same boat. They love their team but are frustrated that they can't seem to get the outcomes their talent and diligence deserves. still hate 'em but I can empathize.....

[Jason_]

And how is it bitter or spoiled to say that given the talent that we've put on the field every year, we should have a better playoff record? We should have gone for greatness in '09 and we should have played that SB to win instead of just trying to control the clock the second half. I haven't had the heart to watch it again but I walked away from that game sawing that we got out-coached and that we gave that one away because we weren't taking risks. If that's spoiled, okay. I'm spoiled. But I'll still root for the colts even when we have a crappy team. But when we have a phenomonal QB and great talent, it is spoiled to want results?

I'm sure there are lots of chargers fans that are in the same boat. They love their team but are frustrated that they can't seem to get the outcomes their talent and diligence deserves. still hate 'em but I can empathize.....

What? That wasn't even the argument. The argument has been whether or not the Colts should have played games 15 and 16 in 2009 to win and go for the perfect season. The secondary argument was whether or not those 2 regular season losses affected the superbowl loss, especially considering the 2 playoff WINS in between in order to even get to the superbowl.

And we shouldn't have played the second half trying to control the clock? For the past several years, the Colts have relied on trying to run the ball and complete short to intermediate passes to methodically move the ball down the field. The lack of an effective running game coupled with an OL that wasn't giving Manning more than a few seconds to throw and you pretty much take the long ball out of the game. Sure they were still occasionally able to get big plays but not nearly as often as '05 and '06. So they were basically playing the same type of offense that they had all during the regular season. Oh and if you remember back to the SB win against the Bears, the running game of Addai and (moreso) Rhodes were highly influential in us getting the win. So I guess you could say they were in fact running a ball control offense, but that's the offense they typically run so I don't see this as being a valid argument that they played out of their normal style.

Now don't get me wrong I do wish we had a better playoff record and I think we could have won at least 1 or 2 more superbowls but the fact we didn't I in large part put on Dungy and the defense he built. The only time it worked with above average to good results was the SB run and that was because he finally went out and had Polian get 2 decent DT's in Corey Simon and Booger MacFarland. But once those 2 were lost to injuries he never replaced them. Add on top of that LB's that weighed 230 lbs at most and that leads us to never being able to stop the run. Once teams figured this out we started losing the Time of possession battle horribly and that limited our offense.

At the time Dungy came in I was excited...but I was also in my early 20's and much less knowledgeable about football. I was only considering his success in Tampa and not the failures in Minnesota (yes in Minnesota there was 1 year where they led the league in defense, but they were built very similarly to the colts with small but fast players and come playoffs, time and time again their defense got run over by power running games from teams like the Cowboys and the Giants). Looking back, I rue the day he came here. I know he thought he was doing the right thing by building a defense to play with the lead, but the more teams played against Manning they started finding ways to slow him down...not stop him of course but slow him down. And then we stopped getting out to the big leads and all of a sudden a defense that was built to rush the passer and play in coverage was getting run over. I don't think Dungy was a bad coach...as far as leadership, the ability to teach and mentor players I'm sure are among the best among coaches. It's his Tampa 2 scheme and small-but-fast philosophy that I hate. Evidence of the ineffectiveness of Dungy's defense is, imo, the fact that since he left the coaches and FO have done everything they can to bring in bigger, stronger defensive players.

[mightisright]

What? That wasn't even the argument. The argument has been whether or not the Colts should have played games 15 and 16 in 2009 to win and go for the perfect season. The secondary argument was whether or not those 2 regular season losses affected the superbowl loss, especially considering the 2 playoff WINS in between in order to even get to the superbowl.

Clearly you didn't even read my argument. I just made the case that we should have played games 15 and 16 to go for the perfect season and that those losses affected our mojo! I know there were 2 playoff wins to get to the SB but in the SB we switched to our same old "play it safe" style and it didn't work out for us. And somehow I'm "spoiled" for being frustrated with that.....

[GoColts8818]

You know I think this lives on because people felt so wronged by it that they wanted Bill Polian to pay for it (because he did make himself the face of it) and what they really can't stand is that what the Colts did worked and he didn't have to pay for it. The goal was to keep everyone healthy and have us fresh and ready for the playoffs and the fact we came out and played so well vs. the Ravens and one our first game after a bye ever in Indianapolis means that it worked. I think fans were upset about that which is part of the reason they are so harsh on Polian today. I know we didn't win a Super Bowl but Polian never said if we rest we are going to win a Super Bowl for sure, he just said it would give us our best chance to win a Super Bowl. The whole resting the starters would have shown up in the Ravens game and it seemed to work. The Colts looked very crisp and fresh that night. So again I think fans have such a big deal with it because to them what the Colts did was so wrong that they wanted someone to be punished for it and when Polian made himself the fact of it they wanted him to be punished for it and the fact that what he did worked just doesn't sit well with them. Just my opinion.

I will say this I do think regardless of you feel about it it's time to let it go. I mean if the team, the guys who were directly impacted by it, can get over it and move past it (Peyton Manning's words not mine) and win two playoffs game and get to a Super Bowl I think the fans can a year and a half later. I was as disapointed as anyone else that we pulled our starters vs. the Jets but I really could have cared when we went to the Super Bowl. Like Jason I don't agree with the call but you know what I can understand why the Colts did it and frankly I agree with a lot of Jason has said in this thread. It's time to move past this because no one can go back in time and change it so I would encourage people to make peace with it because it's over now and no amount of living in the past about it is going to change what happened.

[GoColts8818]

They always beat the Ravens, usually by double digits so that is no big deal and they would have beaten the Jets (basically a 7-9 team which only made the playoffs at 9-7 thanks to gutless Bill Polian) in December by double digits had they not quit so that is a big ho-hum also.

and I could just as easily said and we always lose our first playoff game after a bye, we had lost all of them till we played the Ravens. Never take a playoff win for granted, if anything being a Colts fan should teach you winning in the playoffs is a very different animal than winning in the regular season.

That's a might big assumption to say the Jets were a 7-9 team. They were still in the game with the Colts when we pulled our starters so we will never know how that would have turned out. Then they beat the Bengals in the last game of the season and turned around and beat the Bengals again the following week. It's very possiable that they would have beaten the Bengals in the last game had they played their starters. Also, guess what they beat a very good Chargers team to get to the AFCCG. A team we struggle with and a team who managed to beat us in the playoffs when they were 8-8 and we were 12-4 so that alone should tell you records mean nothing in the playoffs.

We've been to two Super Bowls since Peyton's been here and seen more than our fair share of upsets in the playoffs I think that alone would make Colts fans NOT take winning playoff games for granted. I guess I was wrong.

[GoColts8818]

Anyone that thought the Colts would play to win that Buffalo game was fooling themselves. The only thing that was accomplished was Dallas and Reggie got their 100 receptions and the Colts made it out of that game without lengthening their injury list.

Just building off this. I see lots of people say they could have just as easily done that in the Jets agme. They could have but they had very different mind sets in those games. In the Jets game they were playing to try to get a big enough lead so when the time came to pull the starters they could hold on to that lead. Clearly it didn't work out that but that's not my point my point is that they weren't chasing milestones in that game they were playing with a game plan to try to win the game. If Dallas and Reggie could get catches in the Jets game great but it wasn't the focus. The Bills game they were going right after that and weren't really running the real offense. They were going to get Reggie and Dallas their milestones and get them out of there as quick as they could.

[GoColts8818]

Clearly you didn't even read my argument. I just made the case that we should have played games 15 and 16 to go for the perfect season and that those losses affected our mojo! I know there were 2 playoff wins to get to the SB but in the SB we switched to our same old "play it safe" style and it didn't work out for us. And somehow I'm "spoiled" for being frustrated with that.....

and Caldwell was going to coach the Super Bowl the way he did regardless of the Jets game. Had the Jets game impacted him in the Super Bowl he wouldn't have been agresive at the end of the first half vs. the Jets in the AFCCG nor would we have gone for it on fourth down like we did in the Ravens game. It didn't just happen to impact him in the game we lost.

You can blame the Super Bowl loss on a lot of things, Hank Baskett, Dwight Freeny's injury, Peyton's INT, Garcon's drop, Caldwell telling them to play it safe at the end of the first half, kicking a very long field goal in the 4th on a 4th and short. The one thing you can't blame it on is the Jets game that happened it a month before hand.

The fact some fans try so hard to blame it on the Jets game at least to me supports my theory that some fans wanted to see Polian and or Caldwell pay for the Jets game and clearly losing a Super Bowl would be paying for that.

[ReMeDy]

Nice. Here's my take on how it plays out:

I think they will rest their starters for just the last game, then an inspired painter will come in and get his first W as a starter, while also wrecking some poor team's chance of making the playoffs as a wildcard. Caldwell will try to tank it, but stupidly call a timeout that gives curtis time for a hail mary on a 4th down with 8 seconds left; hank basket will catch it for reasons that I can't explain. With a win to our credit, we drop to the 2nd overall pick in the draft as a result--the bengals will get Luck as the first pick, and we will draft a small but fast DE who forever plays small. Quietly, curtis painter will have a framed internet printout of the single win hung in his basement by the pool table, and friends will secretly wonder 15 years later if it is a fake. His wife will later start wearing the "patriots 18-1" T-shirt to mess with him, and a quiet but palpable tension will remain between them due in no small part to the fact that he never cuts his balding blonde hair in some sad effort to hang onto his youth (beer belly notwithstanding).

Sigh.

How ironic would it be if we and another team are both 0-15, and Curtis blows our 1st overall draft chance by achieving a perfect QB rating? The coach tells Painter to tank the game, yet Painter does the opposite. Meanwhile, next season, we go 15-0 and Painter does the exact opposite.