Are the Colts Top 10?

[IndyTrav]

So your calling out posters on the board for not giving what you call quality, intelligent discussions, but there's tons of quality and intelligent discussion in this thread already. I don't understand why you'd see the need to antagonize a few people you don't agree with when you could engage posters who have thrown down some meat. And I don't mean to antagonize you, I just don't get it, and the whole "blind homer" thing is a lowest common denominator type one-liner that isn't really any better than "We are the Colts!" JMO

I went back through and counted a handful of "Def top 10" "No Injuries 12-4" and an additional sentence, mostly related to games played 2 seasons ago...Im not picking on anyone or 'calling them out'.My expectation of reason for belief shouldnt be considered antagonizing..

Very true. It's trite and cliched, but football is a game of inches. And with a stop on special teams, we probably win that game. One play. Jets might have been the better team, but I think that would hold true even if we got that special team stop and won the game. I don't think it matters that they're not afraid of us, as I don't think any team is afraid, and I certainly don't think we lost because we're afraid of them.

Matter of fact, fear works in a lot of different ways. Rex Ryan held the dogs back, contrary to his every instinct and what he's done throughout his career as a defensive playcaller, because he didn't want to give Manning blitz looks. That fear, if you want to call it that, helped them win the game. Especially when you contrast that matchup with the AFCCG in 2009. Just an aside.

Metaphorical fear silly. The auroa, the "we have that teams #" factor. The unknown intangibles if you will. Certain teams do certain things to other things, its the whole package. The Jets are not one of those teams. Us and Houston (hopefully still), that the 'fear'. Us and Denver back in the day. The 'fear'. Whatever you wanna call it.

Many of the receivers you mentioned had significant injuries as they got older. Some of them were never as good as Reggie. Some of them were burners, and lost their speed. I think the fact that Reggie is a technician as opposed to a speedster could prolong his career. Marvin was still at the top of the game before he got hurt, and it's a "who knows" situation with him. But yeah, everybody gets old. But Reggie hasn't suffered any significant injuries, nor does he get hit with any regularity. He's a smart receiver who relies on his technical skills more than his physical abilities, and he has shown no signs of slowing down. I think it's a super stretch to say that his age is a possible reason that the Colts aren't a top ten team in the NFL.

The only one who had a significant injury was Coles, and he was 30. Marvin and Holt and Bruce IMO are the best comparisons. Bruce was 33, Marvin 35, Holt at 31. That dreaded, Past results indicating future results thing, I know. But something to chew on.

So, in so many words, you'd probably put the Colts in the top ten if you were to break it down team by team yourself, no? That's why I don't get the reply. I think the only reason we didn't perform better last year was the injuries and a few bad bounces (Collie's fumble in the opener against the Texans cost us big time, and a win there might set some things different throughout the year).

Hmm, just off the top of my head, in order and I can be swayed.

1. GB

2. PITT

3. NE

4. NYJ

5.PHI

6.NO

7. ATL

8. BALT

9. Here is where I run into problems. IND,HOU,DAL,NYG,KC,CHI,TB and a sneaky CLE? I just dont know.

[BOTT]

Really? You think so? Our inability to stop the run would surely be assisted Dwight shot a gap rather than swim move himself out of 85% of plays. Im sure you've seen it a thousand times, but thats what one magical sack does, it makes people forget that the guy was getting butchered for the last 6 qts. Obviously Dwight is an excellent player, one we are lucky to have, but he is absolutely horrendous at helping defend the run. I would 100% take 2 Robert Mathiss over 2 Freeneys. Esp. from a GM stand point.

Yea, we started 3-4, and had an amazing run to finish the season. Of course I remember, I also clearly remember the 3-4 part b/c of a weakly lead Offense, nearly all of whom will be the starters this year, only 3 years older, some coming off injury, in a very weird NFL off-season.

And yes, we will all be seeing a lot of Tamme this year, how is that even a question? The guy caught 67 passes in 10 games. Two TE sets out the kazoo, and he'll only have progressed more this offseason. Clarks clearly the starter for now, but don't dismiss the Peytons security blanket for 10 games last year, 7 rec a game for the last 3 games, all of which we needed to win. An aging star gets injured, young guy comes in and performs well in his absence. What generally happens in situations like this?

i actually agree with most of what u have to say about freeney. not so much about dc and tamme....dallas is much better and tight ends tend to play quite well into their mid 30's.

[21isSuperman]

i feel the cowboys have been held back by lackluster coaching the last several years. the same can be said of san diego.

considering the colts hired caldwell, maybe i shouldn't be throwing stones.....

If I remember correctly, Caldwell was a candidate for the Cowboys head coaching job when Parcells left.

[21isSuperman]

Really? You think so? Our inability to stop the run would surely be assisted Dwight shot a gap rather than swim move himself out of 85% of plays. Im sure you've seen it a thousand times, but thats what one magical sack does, it makes people forget that the guy was getting butchered for the last 6 qts. Obviously Dwight is an excellent player, one we are lucky to have, but he is absolutely horrendous at helping defend the run. I would 100% take 2 Robert Mathiss over 2 Freeneys. Esp. from a GM stand

Personally, I think Freeney is very underrated against the run. People like to hype him up as a wick pass rusher, which he is, but they also forget about how good he is at stopping the run too. I don't have any stats or anything to back it up, but from what I've seen, Freeney has been solid in run defense.

[BOTT]

If I remember correctly, Caldwell was a candidate for the Cowboys head coaching job when Parcells left.

that had to be the rooney rule....

[BOTT]

Personally, I think Freeney is very underrated against the run. People like to hype him up as a wick pass rusher, which he is, but they also forget about how good he is at stopping the run too. I don't have any stats or anything to back it up, but from what I've seen, Freeney has been solid in run defense.

really...i think he is awful against the run. the only time i see him make a tackle is when he does a spin move and accidentally runs into the running back. the rest of the time his looping wide and the running back running thru a gaping hole. i could be wrong..not like im a coach watching tape

[21isSuperman]

really...i think he is awful against the run. the only time i see him make a tackle is when he does a spin move and accidentally runs into the running back. the rest of the time his looping wide and the running back running thru a gaping hole. i could be wrong..not like im a coach watching tape

Yeah, me too. I could be very wrong, I watch the games once on TV, maybe watch the highlights, but then I'm done. I don't watch tape again and analyze every play. For me, it's just a feeling that he's a solid run stopper.

[Moncrief]

@Coltswarriors

How did you make that banner/signature thing with dwight on it?

Does anybody know how to make/get those banners? Because i saw one probably 1 or 2 years back it had Clint Session on it and it said Clint"Tackling" Session. If so let me know much appreciated

[Moncrief]

I would rank the Colts in the upper echelon of the top 10 teams somewhere around 8 give or take for the simple fact that our star players are getting up there in age, we haven't found any studs(unless you count Collie a stud) in awhile and we have yet to solve the offensive/defensive line problems.

Teams can push and shove our undersized defense around all day with ease. Why is it we only play run D(or solid D in general) when were on the brink of missing the playoffs. We take out our best run stuffing defensive tackle against the run first Jets team and see what happened, they run it for 169 yards and 2 touchdowns on 38 attempts. That's a 4.4 ypc. We gave up 10 first downs by the run. They started a drive in the 3rd quarter that would carry on over to the 4th quarter and last 9:54. If we get the right men upfront our linebackers and defensive backs and they would actually be able to play there job and not get injured as often because they won't have Maurice Jones-Drew running full steam ahead at them. He would have to bounce it out to the outside or just keep running into the middle looking for a whole. Whenever the free agency period starts we should really try and make a run for signing Barry Cofield or Brandon Mebane.

Our offensive line problems as far as you and me know, aren't solved. Having a rookie protect our Hall of Fame quarterback's blindside leaves me feeling a little uncomfortable. Add in the fact that Saturday is 36 years young and this could possibly be his last year playing with the Colts, is regressing in strength and being pushed around and back into our backfield by nose tackles. We'll see how Castonzo does when(Mario Williams)a player is going 115% trying to get to Peyton.

Thank goodness we have Peyton to cover up for there faults but he himself cannot do it alone.

[Superman]

I went back through and counted a handful of "Def top 10" "No Injuries 12-4" and an additional sentence, mostly related to games played 2 seasons ago...Im not picking on anyone or 'calling them out'.My expectation of reason for belief shouldnt be considered antagonizing..

"Def top 10" and "No Injuries 12-4" does not equal top five.

Your expectation of reason for belief isn't the reason I called your post antagonizing. It was the blind homer/ignorant label you placed on everything who thinks the Colts will be better than you expect them to be. You intimated this in your original post, where you inferred that because this is the Colts website that people will be unable to look at them objectively. And that's nonsense. Expecting the Colts to be a 12-4 team isn't blind homerism.

Metaphorical fear silly. The auroa, the "we have that teams #" factor. The unknown intangibles if you will. Certain teams do certain things to other things, its the whole package. The Jets are not one of those teams. Us and Houston (hopefully still), that the 'fear'. Us and Denver back in the day. The 'fear'. Whatever you wanna call it.

It doesn't exist. Any team that we were able to beat consistently wasn't afraid of us. We just had matchup advantages and got some breaks. The Colts weren't afraid of the Patriots back in the day, they were just better. This metaphorical fear is a figment of fans' imaginations. It doesn't exist on the football field.

The only one who had a significant injury was Coles, and he was 30. Marvin and Holt and Bruce IMO are the best comparisons. Bruce was 33, Marvin 35, Holt at 31. That dreaded, Past results indicating future results thing, I know. But something to chew on.

Injuries ended Torry Holt's career. Same for Marvin, really. Isaac Bruce had nagging issues for many years, but still was productive as a 32 year old, and it wasn't until he got hurt the year later that he really fell off. And like I said before, he was a speedster. Reggie isn't. It's different. Every receiver falls off after a while, and it's going to happen with Reggie. I just don't think he's going to fall off this year, and I don't consider his eventual decline as a major factor in our prospects for 2011.

Hmm, just off the top of my head, in order and I can be swayed.

1. GB

2. PITT

3. NE

4. NYJ

5.PHI

6.NO

7. ATL

8. BALT

9. Here is where I run into problems. IND,HOU,DAL,NYG,KC,CHI,TB and a sneaky CLE? I just dont know.

I could pick your list apart just like you're being critical of placing the Colts in the top ten (or even the top five). Putting the Texans, Cowboys, Giants, Bucs and Browns in the same category as the Colts and Bears is high comedy, if you ask me, considering all we have are projections even before free agency. Any list has problems at this point. But saying the Colts, with a solid foundation and a winning pedigree, don't belong in the top third of the NFL is just wild to me.

[IndyTrav]

"Def top 10" and "No Injuries 12-4" does not equal top five.

Your expectation of reason for belief isn't the reason I called your post antagonizing. It was the blind homer/ignorant label you placed on everything who thinks the Colts will be better than you expect them to be. You intimated this in your original post, where you inferred that because this is the Colts website that people will be unable to look at them objectively. And that's nonsense. Expecting the Colts to be a 12-4 team isn't blind homerism.

Saying there 12-4 isn't blind homerism. Saying they will be because they have in the past IS. And a majority of reasonings seem to be drenched in 2008, 2009.

It doesn't exist. Any team that we were able to beat consistently wasn't afraid of us. We just had matchup advantages and got some breaks. The Colts weren't afraid of the Patriots back in the day, they were just better. This metaphorical fear is a figment of fans' imaginations. It doesn't exist on the football field.

Not the literal 'fear' or the emotion of being 'afraid', the certain unknown untangibles that take place during a game between two teams that play often. Unknown mental intangibles are absolutely not a figment of fans imaginations. You don't think Houston was relieved to beat us last year? The 'here we go again moments' in certain games.

Injuries ended Torry Holt's career. Same for Marvin, really. Isaac Bruce had nagging issues for many years, but still was productive as a 32 year old, and it wasn't until he got hurt the year later that he really fell off. And like I said before, he was a speedster. Reggie isn't. It's different. Every receiver falls off after a while, and it's going to happen with Reggie. I just don't think he's going to fall off this year, and I don't consider his eventual decline as a major factor in our prospects for 2011.

Yes injuries did end there careers, there ages during those injuries were 30,31,33,35. Reggies age, 32/33.

I could pick your list apart just like you're being critical of placing the Colts in the top ten (or even the top five). Putting the Texans, Cowboys, Giants, Bucs and Browns in the same category as the Colts and Bears is high comedy, if you ask me, considering all we have are projections even before free agency. Any list has problems at this point. But saying the Colts, with a solid foundation and a winning pedigree, don't belong in the top third of the NFL is just wild to me.

Yes, a solid foundation. Aging, and coming off injury, but hopefully a strong foundation. Those teams I listed, aren't relying on 'hopefully'. They have those same pieces in place, only younger, and not coming off injury, and not with a pedigree which other teams crave to take. Feel free to pick that list apart but of those teams, listed 1-8 above the Colts, they all have a better defense, run game, and special teams. The only thing they don't have is 18.

[ViriLudant]

Personally, I think Freeney is very underrated against the run. People like to hype him up as a wick pass rusher, which he is, but they also forget about how good he is at stopping the run too. I don't have any stats or anything to back it up, but from what I've seen, Freeney has been solid in run defense.

I completely disagree. I've seen teams run at him hundreds of times. He spins himself out of position many times.

I would absolutely love to see him as an OLB in a great 3-4; man, that would be awesome.

[Superman]

Saying there 12-4 isn't blind homerism. Saying they will be because they have in the past IS. And a majority of reasonings seem to be drenched in 2008, 2009.

You said earlier that past results can predict future results. The Colts won 12 games 7 years in a row, and the primary reason they didn't last year was injuries. Manning is still playing, and there's no reason to believe that he won't be able to continue playing at a high level. Same thing for the other guys you mentioned. Again, they'll eventually slow down and be less effective, but I'll wait for evidence that that's occurring before I start factoring that into my projections. The fact that the Colts have been a winning team for so long is evidence that they know how to put a good product on the field. That's worthy of consideration.

Not the literal 'fear' or the emotion of being 'afraid', the certain unknown untangibles that take place during a game between two teams that play often. Unknown mental intangibles are absolutely not a figment of fans imaginations. You don't think Houston was relieved to beat us last year? The 'here we go again moments' in certain games.

You keep reframing this. All I'm saying is that no one is afraid of any other team in the NFL. There's a mutual respect among competitors, and when one team has a hard time beating the other, it's probably because they aren't good enough, not something psychological. Football is a simple game. If you lost, it's because you didn't play well enough, not because the other team wasn't scared of you.

Yes injuries did end there careers, there ages during those injuries were 30,31,33,35. Reggies age, 32/33.

So are you predicting that Reggie is going to be injured and fall off as a result of it? That seems a lot more arbitrary than assuming that he'll continue to play every game and catch 100 passes a season. Even if he slows down due to age, he'll still be productive because of his skill set. And if he suffers an injury, then we'll have to replace him as our #1 receiver. But as of now, there's no indication that Reggie can't continue to do what he's been doing for the past several years, even though he'll be 33 in November. Receivers in good health don't just suddenly fall off the map. I'm not worried about Reggie for 2011.

Yes, a solid foundation. Aging, and coming off injury, but hopefully a strong foundation. Those teams I listed, aren't relying on 'hopefully'. They have those same pieces in place, only younger, and not coming off injury, and not with a pedigree which other teams crave to take. Feel free to pick that list apart but of those teams, listed 1-8 above the Colts, they all have a better defense, run game, and special teams. The only thing they don't have is 18.

The Packers and Saints have trouble running the football, just like we do. Even the Steelers just got back on track with their running game last year, after two or three seasons of subpar rushing. We probably have the worst kick return game in the NFL, so no argument there, but we're not the only good team in the NFL with a troubled run game.

And the fact that they don't have Peyton Manning is a significant consideration. He's not going to guarantee us a 12 win season, as we just saw, but he is pretty special.

Either way, my point was just that projecting the Colts as a top ten or even a top five team is not a radical idea. You started the thread for discussion, and then snapped at people who thought differently than you do.

For my money, I'd put the Packers, Steelers and Patriots in the top three, and then I have a conglomerate that would round out 4-12 with negligible differences between them all, and I'd put us probably in the middle of that pack. And again, this is all before free agency and the preseason, and there are trades and tons of player movement yet to take place in the coming weeks, so that list is ever changing. But at the end of the day, I can't imagine free agency moving the Colts out of my preseason top ten.

[noah larson]

my list, if all teams were healthy.

1.Packers

2.Steelers

3.Saints

4.Jets

5.Colts

6.Patriots

7.Ravens

8.Falcons

9.Eagles

10.Chargers

[braveheartcolt]

my list, if all teams were healthy.

1.Packers

2.Steelers

3.Saints

4.Jets

5.Colts

6.Patriots

7.Ravens

8.Falcons

9.Eagles

10.Chargers

Noah, Noah, Noah, what are you doing? You MUST give quality intelligent reasons for your ratings, or your post cannot be allowed and it may be removed. Could you re-post, using at least 500 words explaining each team's rating, with an additional 1000 words for your overall assessment.

This should be a pretty simple task, considering the nature of the original question. If you are not sure about the rational to be used, or what we are defining the top ten as, use a simple comparison method, like what are your top ten favourite foods.

Please also be smug and arrogant.

Oh, and if you contradict yourself a few times that may help.

Thanks,

IndyTrav's Agent and Forum Moderator Elect

[IndyTrav]

Noah, Noah, Noah, what are you doing? You MUST give quality intelligent reasons for your ratings, or your post cannot be allowed and it may be removed. Could you re-post, using at least 500 words explaining each team's rating, with an additional 1000 words for your overall assessment.

This should be a pretty simple task, considering the nature of the original question. If you are not sure about the rational to be used, or what we are defining the top ten as, use a simple comparison method, like what are your top ten favourite foods.

Please also be smug and arrogant.

Oh, and if you contradict yourself a few times that may help.

Thanks,

IndyTrav's Agent and Forum Moderator Elect

As clarification you can only use reasonings based solely on good feelings and high optimism.

Reasonings that I will accept for your beliefs:

1. We are the Colts

2. We have Peyton

3. They have done it in the past.

4. They were hurt last year so they should be good this year.

If you fail to meet these requirements I will be required to post purely hypothetical situations in which some players will get hurt, others will not come back healthy, and the general lack of explosion on the roster, and the emergence of the rest of the league. which of course will be met with cheers and agreement from all of my fellow posters.

Thanks

IndyTrav (important enough for an agent, sweet)

[braveheartcolt]

As clarification you can only use reasonings based solely on good feelings and high optimism.

Reasonings that I will accept for your beliefs:

1. We are the Colts

2. We have Peyton

3. They have done it in the past.

4. They were hurt last year so they should be good this year.

If you fail to meet these requirements I will be required to post purely hypothetical situations in which some players will get hurt, others will not come back healthy, and the general lack of explosion on the roster, and the emergence of the rest of the league. which of course will be met with cheers and agreement from all of my fellow posters.

Thanks

IndyTrav (important enough for an agent, sweet)

Ah, I missed the part where the Colts weren't allowed to get better, whilst the rest of the league can.

Let's just use the Vegas line for the SB. That should work...

[IndyTrav]

Ah, I missed the part where the Colts weren't allowed to get better, whilst the rest of the league can.

Let's just use the Vegas line for the SB. That should work...

O, I think we def. Got better this offseason. I'm really pumped to see AC, and if he can man handle, and with that size, he should. But on our team only a few guys are capable of still 'growing' and those guys are the really important ones.

Speaking of odds, I had been looking for some more recent ones, I've found anywhere from 18:1 to 9:1 having us ranked at 11 tied w Dallas and Chi, but then all the way in 3rd with NE GB. I tried bodog but didn't feel like jumping thru the hoops. What ones are you using?

[braveheartcolt]

O, I think we def. Got better this offseason. I'm really pumped to see AC, and if he can man handle, and with that size, he should. But on our team only a few guys are capable of still 'growing' and those guys are the really important ones.

Speaking of odds, I had been looking for some more recent ones, I've found anywhere from 18:1 to 9:1 having us ranked at 11 tied w Dallas and Chi, but then all the way in 3rd with NE GB. I tried bodog but didn't feel like jumping thru the hoops. What ones are you using?

We are joint 6th at 16-1.

Disagree re 'growing'. We can grow at WR - Garcon can easily improve, Collie can become a great (health permitting), and even Blair can upgrade. Our O-line looks more than capable of growing, which in addition will spring Brown and Carter. Safety? No Francisco means improvement, and our DT's can't get worse. Tyron and Powers will get better, and our DE's are the best of breed. Angerer? I'm sure he'll improve. Tamme and Clare - say no more.

Perhaps QB is our weak spot....oh, hang on a minute...

[IndyTrav]

We are joint 6th at 16-1.

Disagree re 'growing'. We can grow at WR - Garcon can easily improve, Collie can become a great (health permitting), and even Blair can upgrade. Our O-line looks more than capable of growing, which in addition will spring Brown and Carter. Safety? No Francisco means improvement, and our DT's can't get worse. Tyron and Powers will get better, and our DE's are the best of breed. Angerer? I'm sure he'll improve. Tamme and Clare - say no more.

Perhaps QB is our weak spot....oh, hang on a minute...

Who they have us joined with? Where'd you find that?

Our defense is our defense. Its always going to be average, I'm not squre they're could be a whole lot of improvement until we move away from cover 2. It had a good run, but its my opinion that in today's NFL you can't afford to offer yardage to prevent larger gains. Just my perspective.

I think Garçon can upgrade but how far do you project him to go? He can be a 2, but I just can't picture him being a 1 on a consistent enough basis, and to beat the NFLs top corners is a hard task. Collie is the biggest question of them all, because I really like what I see in Collie, quick burst, nice hands, good routes, and he runs well after the catch. I think of Collie as our wild card this year. Hisq injuries are just so mysterious. The nature in which he took the hits etc all factor into him coming back. I'm hoping for the best. As for the run game, once again I think our approach to running is what needs changed, not ness. That we can't run. Obviously our new blockers will help but stretch left, stretch right, dive right, dive left, isn't the approach thats going to garner a bunch of yards in the first place. Or keep an aggressive def at bay.

QBs not going to be a problem if all is well, and we hope it is, and TE shouldn't be a problem, and Collie shouldn't be a problem, and our OL should be better. I'm just nervous about all the 'shoulds' and 'hopefullys'. Not that all the other NFL teams don't have questions, they most certainly do, I just feel ours are a little greater, and involving some very important positions for a team who relys on Offensive greatness to win a majority of football games.

[coltfaninnewyork]

when you factor in we were a hair from winning that playoff game to the jets,the amount of players who should be healthy this year{clark,collie,powers}plus the infuse of our draft talent i like our chances.

[IndyTrav]

From everything I've found, Vegas has us right around the 10-12 range.

http://www.betvega.com/super-bowl-odds/

http://www.footballlocks.com/nfl_futures_odds.shtml

[alfred0498]

While manning is in the team we will be

[Coffeedrinker]

Colts are a Top 5 team. They were a Top 10 last year with multiple, key players on IR and/or missing significant time. 90% healthy they are a top 3.

[Moose Of Woe]

With Manning/Freeney and the rest of the starters healthy, sure. Right around 8-10.

I'd put: NE, PIT, BAL, GB, NYJ all ahead of the Colts easily with another 5 more or less in the same ballpark. (Yes we always seem to beat BAL but they're a better team overall IMO)

Unfortunately we have _zero_ depth. If even a few of our starters go out the performance impact on our team is massive. Manning and Freeney are the big 2.

Life as we've seen without Freeney flat out sucks. No Free= no D. Thankfully we haven't seen life without Manning but that might change if he's not ready come opening day. -_-

Some other high impact players, particularly Clark, also help make the team look better than it truly is overall. Our offense is far more limited without captain versatility at TE. Wayne is another one...but as good as he is (and Collie up and coming) Clark is a notch above them as far as importance to the O's production.

So again, healthy we're very good. Take a few starters away (or either Manning/Free) and we're mediocre to poor. I shudder to think what we'd look like without Manning AND Free at the same time. Hello Oakland...

If we had special teams that look like they deserve to see an NFL field, and are 100% healthy, we might be top 3 in the NFL. Throw in some run blocking/a run game in general and we'd be #1.

[indy_nick]

With Manning/Freeney and the rest of the starters healthy, sure. Right around 8-10.

I'd put: NE, PIT, BAL, GB, NYJ all ahead of the Colts easily with another 5 more or less in the same ballpark. (Yes we always seem to beat BAL but they're a better team overall IMO)

Unfortunately we have _zero_ depth. If even a few of our starters go out the performance impact on our team is massive. Manning and Freeney are the big 2.

Life as we've seen without Freeney flat out sucks. No Free= no D. Thankfully we haven't seen life without Manning but that might change if he's not ready come opening day. -_-

Some other high impact players, particularly Clark, also help make the team look better than it truly is overall. Our offense is far more limited without captain versatility at TE. Wayne is another one...but as good as he is (and Collie up and coming) Clark is a notch above them as far as importance to the O's production.

So again, healthy we're very good. Take a few starters away (or either Manning/Free) and we're mediocre to poor. I shudder to think what we'd look like without Manning AND Free at the same time. Hello Oakland...

If we had special teams that look like they deserve to see an NFL field, and are 100% healthy, we might be top 3 in the NFL. Throw in some run blocking/a run game in general and we'd be #1.

If you take away a select fore players from any team i'm pretty sure those statements can go for any team.

[Moose Of Woe]

If you take away a select fore players from any team i'm pretty sure those statements can go for any team.

Not like Indy. We literally have no alternative for Peyton or Free alone and lack depth in every aspect of the game aside from WR. No team in this league can go from contenders to pretenders as quickly as us when they lose a player or two.

The Patriots lost "the best player in the game today" and were that close to making the playoffs several years back. If Cassel had settled in sooner, they probably would have made it in.

The Pack lost a crap ton of players last season and won the Superbowl.

Depth depth depth. Next man up or what have you. Some teams have it (and good coaching) in abundance. Sadly we're the polar opposite of that as we're substantially lacking in both fields.

[OnlyLocalTeamEverLiked]

From everything I've found, Vegas has us right around the 10-12 range.

http://www.betvega.com/super-bowl-odds/

http://www.footballlocks.com/nfl_futures_odds.shtml

betvega.com has Indy as either 10 or 11. footballlocks.com has Indy as a top 3

[IndyTrav]

Here we are a month later, a few preseason games, and some significant roster changes, has any of that jeopardized the Colts standing as a Top 10 team?

[jvan1973]

With Peyton yes...

Without.. no

[JimJaime]

jvan

I agree 100% it all depends on #18 health.

[12>18]

With all the offseason moves by the various teams in the top 15, I would say if the Colts are a top ten team, even with Peyton, they are #10. Moose of Woe couldn't have put it any better. The Colts are seriously lacking depth at most key positions. And this year, even if completely healthy, it's gonna be a tough run.

[Rblake]

I put us around #8, with the usual suspects.

[SanAntonioColt]

Fairly simple question. I personally have them tied @ 10 with a few other teams. This being the Colts forum, Im sure to get blasted and called a hater, but I call it how I see it, and this team doesn't seem to do anything particularly well.

In no order: Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Jets, Chargers, Eagles, Packers, Saints, Falcons.

Tied with: Texans, Buccs, Chiefs.

No reason to hate you Trav. It all depends on a healthy Peyton. With him, we are definitely a top 10 team; without him we are not a top 20 team. We are probably about a 3-win team if Peyton is not able to play at his usual standard of excellence.

[JoKeR]

Well the top 10 (which has to included the Colts and Pats) are all tied for 10th. No team is above 10 at this point:)

I was just about to say are at the same level as most of these teams and better then some of them. Ravens are a good team but we have their number.

I get the feeling alot of you are starting to doubt your team, the Colts have made some significant upgrades from last year. Manning maybe out the 1st 2 games but don't be too discouraged.

[Blue Horseshoe]

With Manning they are a top tier team.

Without they are very flawed.

[IndyTrav]

Sweet Sweet Sweet vindication.

[sfergson727]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone who viewed this season with open eyes can consider the Colts a top ten team. Even with Manning back, the holes have been exposed. We are rebuilding, we ARE NOT a top ten team at the moment. We WILL be again, soon, but we are not going to be top ten next season. An objective person can see this plain as day.

If Caldwell remains.....we'll be hard pressed to make the top 20.

Now, perhaps I misunderstood...If we are talking top 10 franchises in NFL history, then yes, I think we would be in the top ten.

[husker61]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone who viewed this season with open eyes can consider the Colts a top ten team. Even with Manning back, the holes have been exposed. We are rebuilding, we ARE NOT a top ten team at the moment. We WILL be again, soon, but we are not going to be top ten next season. An objective person can see this plain as day.

If Caldwell remains.....we'll be hard pressed to make the top 20.

Now, perhaps I misunderstood...If we are talking top 10 franchises in NFL history, then yes, I think we would be in the top ten.

this is a thread from the beginning of the year.

[SilentHill]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone who viewed this season with open eyes can consider the Colts a top ten team. Even with Manning back, the holes have been exposed. We are rebuilding, we ARE NOT a top ten team at the moment. We WILL be again, soon, but we are not going to be top ten next season. An objective person can see this plain as day.

If Caldwell remains.....we'll be hard pressed to make the top 20.

Now, perhaps I misunderstood...If we are talking top 10 franchises in NFL history, then yes, I think we would be in the top ten.

We fielded a worse team the year before and we went 10-6

Manning makes any team he is on a top 10 team if he plays.