Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Why Peyton Manning Can Become The G.O.A.T.


Restored

Recommended Posts

On the Pats point, the team was not at a mid-point when Brady took over. In fact, they had suffered through one of the lowest periods in their history when a very green Pete Carroll took over the team in 1997 after Parcells and Belichick left for the Jets.

In the three years that Carrol was HC the team went from AFC champs in 1996 to 10-6 record in 1997 and a divisional round exit to the Kordell Steward led Steelers at home; the team went 9-7 in 1998 and fourth place in the division with a wild card loss to Jags; in 1999 they finished 8-8 and out of the playoffs. 2000 is when Belichick took over and the team went 5-11 its worse record since 1992 when the team went 2-14 with Hugh Millen as the QB. In 2001, the Pats began the season with two losses to the Jets and Bengals (two of the worst teams that season), when Brady took over. Once Brady was inserted the team went 14-3 winning his last 9 games en route to the SB.

I have mentioned this before up here but Michael Holley wrote one of the best football books of all time called "Patriot Reign" which details the Patriots championship years and how Belichick build those champ teams. Here is the editorial description for the book:

"When Bill Belichick arrived in New England, the Patriots were a laughingstock, an organization with a losing record and a roster of overpaid, underperforming players. So how did a head coach with a questionable record transform this team, garner three Lombardi trophies in four years, and -- with the Pats' 2005 Super Bowl win over the Philadelphia Eagles -- cement the team's place as an NFL dynasty?" http://www.amazon.com/Patriot-Reign-Belichick-Coaches-Champion/dp/B000HWYRGO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379245499&sr=8-1&keywords=patriot+reign

Holley spends a couple of chapters detailing the type of mess the Patriots were in when Belichick took over in 2000. Most people think Brady took over a good team because the Pats were in the SB in 1996 but it is a myth. Carroll had bascially signed terrible players and in the process put the team in major cap trouble that Bill had to climb out of. Hence, the 5-13 record before Brady came in.

I understand what your saying but if you are what your record says you are, the pats were a mid level team for the most part during the years you listed. 9-7 and 8-8 means your team is average. The Colts on the other hand were terrible for nearly the entire decade outside of a couple playoff appearances in 1995 and 1996 under Jim Harbaugh and Teddy Marchibroda. To put it in relatable terms, Manning essentially had to do in his first four years what Brady never did. And that is endure huge team spread growing pains and a lack luster coaching staff at the top and on defense. You bring up 2000 as a rebuilding year like it counts for Brady as a season when he hardly played.

Ill agree that Bellichek built those teams up, but please don't think they were a bottom feeder team like the Colts were. It's easier to build a house that's already half-finished then having to start from the ground up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 289
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I understand what your saying but if you are what your record says you are, the pats were a mid level team for the most part during the years you listed. 9-7 and 8-8 means your team is average. The Colts on the other hand were terrible for nearly the entire decade outside of a couple playoff appearances in 1995 and 1996 under Jim Harbaugh and Teddy Marchibroda. To put it in relatable terms, Manning essentially had to do in his first four years what Brady never did. And that is endure huge team spread growing pains and a lack luster coaching staff at the top and on defense. You bring up 2000 as a rebuilding year like it counts for Brady as a season when he hardly played.

Ill agree that Bellichek built those teams up, but please don't think they were a bottom feeder team like the Colts were. It's easier to build a house that's already half-finished then having to start from the ground up.

I think what makes the FA.cap era so interesting is that teams can turn around so quickly so I don't see where the Colts being bad in the late 80's/early 90's effects Manning in 1998. In just his second year, 1999, he won double digits in games and was the second seed. Same for Brady. 1996 mine as well have been decades ago compared to the state of the team in 2000/2001. I think both the Colts and Pats did that quick of a turn around precisely because they had the guy at the helm to build the team around but more importantly cover up the poorer parts of the team. Remember Belichick was not the "genius" until Brady arrived. He was a below .500 HC who had only made the playoffs once in six years with a 1-1 record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could very well happen, Luck has all the tools and a great head on his shoulders.  Hes a special player and will only get better.  It makes sense why the Colts would tank an entire season to get someone of his caliber ;)

Polian's best piece of work. Drafting Painter.....we didn't even have to throw any games.....Painter playing his best was good enough to get us Luck..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The niners are better than the Broncos. They were last year and they are this year too. The Broncs only look as good as they do offensively because of Manning. Decker is not a good WR. They have no run game unless you count the RBs that fumble for him. And the defense? Not even close to the niners especially with Miller being out.

 

 

Orange highlight  Thus, The Goat.  ;)

 

Blue highlight   Decker was only a Good WR when with the Pats,  I see.    :hmm:  :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polian's best piece of work. Drafting Painter.....we didn't even have to throw any games.....Painter playing his best was good enough to get us Luck..

The only thing is that we had QB ( Orlowsky ) and he could have one us some games but WE Sucked For Luck instead of playing him sooner than they did. So in my opinion that could betaken as throwing games to get Luck. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Manning went to niners last year, does he lose his first playoff game?

How about his arm? Any issues playing in 60's degrees vs. one of the coldest days in the year last year in Denver?

Lastly, if Manning was on the niners this year, do they lose any games? I say no.

The niners are better than the Broncos. They were last year and they are this year too. The Broncs only look as good as they do offensively because of Manning. Decker is not a good WR. They have no run game unless you count the RBs that fumble for him. And the defense? .

I bet BB would love to have decker right about now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decker has only played with the Broncs Gramz.

 

Yes, Peyton is great. Never said he wasn't. Just not the goat. :thmsup:

haha  haha   Wow,  you are right.   :lol:   I was reading Decker and thinking Welker.   haha  too funny  

Thanks for calling me on it,  and for what it's worth, I agree with you about Decker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think I need to clarify something…,  I’m NOT suggesting Irsay isn’t filthy rich.  That the Colts aren’t sound financially.     All I’m saying is that from time to time the Colts might have cash flow problems.  Life as a small market team.   Nothing wrong with that.  The Colts do this (The “0” singing bonus) for a reason.  It benefits them.  And I think it’s smart business.   That’s all.   
    • I don't believe any of this post-hoc spin. He took less to play home. And even if we did believe it - OK... he did take less. What about the 100 other FAs we could have gotten?      This is exactly it... it feels like Ballard is not proactive... he's grabbing to the status quo and holding onto it for dear life. Like the status quo has actually given us anything to brag about? The Texans let go of one of their best defensive linemen... to replace him with a better one. The Chiefs let go of one of their best receivers... to replace him a better one... Those are teams that are not happy with what they had(and they were better than us) and tried to actually improve. Could that backfire? Sure. But at least they are trying to compete. What are we trying for?    I wasn't the biggest fan of the idea of giving record setting contract to Sneed while also giving up significant draft compensation too. IMO you should only do that for elite players and as good as Sneed is IMO he's not quite at that level. But with that said -yes, there aren't many high level FAs remaining on the market. Because while other teams were busy chasing the high level FAs, Ballard was busy giving 14M contract to a backup nose tackle and resigning his PED implicated 31 year old starting nose tackle 40M contract.  I wouldn't hold my breath quite honestly. With the OL there was precedent of them being great previously. With this DL there really hasn't been. We've been at the bottom of the league in creating pressures and affecting the QB for years. And the personnel will be the same more or less. A lot of people putting a lot of hope into the new DL coach. I liked that hire too, but you have to give the guy something to work with and apart from Buckner the rest of the group has never been more than... solid, and in a lot of cases much less than solid.    Yep... it always comes back to this... hoping our draft picks will pan out. The problem with that of course is that over the long term most teams in the league have about the same success rate in the draft. And while other teams use all avenues to improve their team(draft, trades, FA), it seems like Ballard has resigned himself to the draft. He will draft and live or die by it. He's just too stuck in his ways and too stubborn to make any significant changes to his approach.  That's the problem with Ballard. It's never exactly doom and gloom. I am never worried with him that this team will be horrible and hopeless. I worry that it will be mediocre... forever! Which it has been. He gives you just enough hope for your to think "maybe this year... maybe this guy will get better... maybe this draft pick will pan out", but in reality we are just treading water.    Yeah, Sneed could have been good for this defense... oh well... 
    • He turned out to be very good, but at the time of the pick, I thought we could have selected other players, as we were in desperate need of defensive players. But Addison played very well, better than I expected.
    • You don’t like Jordan Addison?   I thought he had a very nice rookie season for the Vikings?   
    • Before Werner Houston took Dwayne Hopkins and after Werner Minn took Rhodes.   Werner was the turd between two very good players, one a potential Hall of Famer.  
  • Members

    • Solid84

      Solid84 6,063

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IinD

      IinD 4,436

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DoubleE Colt

      DoubleE Colt 309

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 18,662

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Boss7894

      Boss7894 177

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 20,791

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • GoColts8818

      GoColts8818 16,849

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Superman

      Superman 20,074

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TomDiggs

      TomDiggs 1,635

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 16,967

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...