Polian's Superbowl Record

[jskinnz]

Let me put it this way to all of you haters. If Polian retires or gets fired, get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years.

Who ever the next GM will be, he will not even sniff a SB. He will fall into the category of those hundreds upon hundreds of GM's that never came close.

What we have in Polian is a rarity, he has the ability to take teams to SB's. He has done it and will continue to do it.

So good luck with whoever gonna be our next GM. You all will be saying how u wish u had Polian back.

Get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years.

I am one who is on the side of Polian but this post is simply over the top. Polian will retire eventually and his loss will send the Colts into 20 years of the NFL abyss? Do you have lottery winning #'s too?

[IndyTrav]

Let me put it this way to all of you haters. If Polian retires or gets fired, get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years.

Who ever the next GM will be, he will not even sniff a SB. He will fall into the category of those hundreds upon hundreds of GM's that never came close.

What we have in Polian is a rarity, he has the ability to take teams to SB's. He has done it and will continue to do it.

So good luck with whoever gonna be our next GM. You all will be saying how u wish u had Polian back.

Get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years.

You are absurd. Haters? Get a clue. Instead of flapping your gums and slamming your digits into a keyboard why don't you take the time to do some research? All this 'Polian is a rarity' is pure poo. Keep pointing to his record and how hard it is blah blah blah but the fact of the matter is SEVEN gms have won MULTIPLE championships in the Polian Era. I'm not a SB or bust kinda guy, but Polian has had 2 HoF QBs, one of which is arguably GoAT, and he won 1. Gibbs won 2 with no QBs. McKay and Newsome both won 1 without a single QB.

Bills been great, and we appreciate all he's done for us, but 12 years is a long time, and frankly it's just time to pursue other options.

[Fatboyslim11]

Oh shut it already....Polian is far from perfect, but all you armchair GMs think you could do better?? Whining about the one and dones? Go root for Cleveland! They haven't made the playoffs in a decade. Go cheer for the current Bills. GTHO with this crap. BP isn't "running this franchise into the ground." We are without the GOAT QB who is the biggest game changer in the NFL. Last year the Colts lost darn near everyone BUT Manning and still won 10 games. This year without him they are dead in the water.

As for his SB record....well you have to get there first. Look at the Bills teams. One missed kick from a SB win, and the rest were against FAR SUPERIOR NFC TEAMS. The Bills are/were a small market team in the AFC, which back then was being dominated by the NFC. They stood no chance against those Jerrah Jones Dallas team (best teams $$ could buy, then it came time to pay the piper and Dallas fell off the map). Those Bills teams were good enough to win the AFC, but had little to no shot against the NFC. How many years did the NFC win the Super Bowl in the 80s-90s? Like 10 straight?? His Bills teams were pre/start of free agency, when teams could stockpile talent (well teams with $$ like SF, Dallas, Washington). The fact the Bills even made the SB 4 times is amazing.

As for the Colts, yes, they could have done better. But as they say, football is a game of inches, decided by PLAYERS and COACHES. In 2003-2004 we were beat by better Pats defenses. In 2005, Dungy's son's death cast a pall over the team that they couldn't shake, and they still almost won. Nick Harper doesn't cut back inside and he goes for six and the Colts advance and probably take the title. That team was stacked. In 07 they were missing Freeney, and Harrison's fumble changed momentum big time (would have been 14-0 instead of the Bolts getting the ball back and tying it up). In 2008, the Colts had to travel to 8-8 San Diego despite being 12-4 (still hate that rule), and a missed block on 3rd and 2 gave the Chargers new life. They convert that 3rd and 2, game over. In 2009, well we all know the story there (Garcon, Baskett, pick six). Last year they were lucky to make the playoffs with all the injuries.

So, one terrible season and Polian is all of a sudden the worst GM ever. I agree that he's missed on some recent draft picks. I get that. But you spoiled fans just irritate me. Playoffs since 1999 except for 2001, a SB win and another appearance, perennial pro bowlers, Manning....

And I agree that this team was too dependent on Manning. That has been an organizational flaw. But who knew? And don't give me the hindsight crap. Peyton missed ONE meaningful snap his entire career dating back to high school. Don't start on the "we should've drafted a capable backup talk." It's 20/20 hindsight talk.

So, if you are like the writers at Stampede Blue and are bashing Polian, just leave. I am getting tired of this crap. Go ask the Browns/Seahawks/Raiders if they'd trade our decade for theirs. And get back to me with your response. Sure the old man is backing out the door. And if they retain Caldwell/Coyer I will join right in with the rest of you. But for now, this terrible season is all about the loss of Peyton. Plain and simple. Today's game was case in point. Painter overthrowing guys, throwing picks, underthrowing an open Collie on the 2 pt conversion attempt, poor reads...It all comes back to Manning.

Tsk, tsk, yet another rant

If you are so afraid on any discussions concerning the team and Polian that is not 100% drink the blue Kool-Aid positive, too bad. I will not be as childish as you to say if you don’t like it leave and become a fan of another team. Since you seem to think the Colts approach and record over the past decade (I should say regular season only record - our playoff record is terrible) is the only criteria to judge this team that is another excuse. I would take the overall success of the Patriots, Steelers, Giants, etc. over our last decade regular season record.

There are posts in this thread on this board to show just how many different GMs had had teams to go to the Super Bowl. There are at least 17 different GMs to have done so. So Polian is not unique and it is not rare for a GM to have a team in the Super Bowl. Polian was the GM of the Bills prior to the implementation of free agency, when teams could draft and essentially keep a player bound to that team for his entire playing career. During Polian tenure the Bills went 0-3 in the Super Bowl with players he drafted. Dallas built their great teams of the 1990s primarily through the draft not free spending free agency. Irvin was drafted in 1988; Aikman in 1989 and the core of the team through the Herschel Walker trade to the Vikings (in return for 10 draft picks). No one is saying spend like a drunken sailor in free agency but you can instantly improve your team through the selective use of Free Agency.

All these injuries and the could've, would've, should've" is the same old tired excuse is what I keep hearing about as a defense for Polian teams failure throughout his career. The good teams don't come in and say "Could've." They get it done! All right? It's that simple! I'm tired of hearing "Could've, should've, would've." (paraphrasing here)! That's why we aren’t good enough yet! 'Cause we're saying "Could've" and we aren’t. That has certainly been the case with of lot of Polian failures.

No one said Polian was the worst GM ever. Spoiled fan!? I think not. I have been a Colts fan since the 1960s and have seen great, good, bad and worse Colts teams during different seasons and different eras to include the Polian regime. Yes, this is a terrible season with a good chance we may go 0-16. A big part of it IS Polian’s fault. To not have a viable backup plan in place in case Manning was injured is almost criminal. Also to have tied up so much of the salary cap over the years to so few players and leaving the rest of the roster largely populated with less than NFL caliber players was/is a dumb thing to do and it has led to the worst special teams in the NFL. This and other things (refusal to use free agency, horrible coaching, bad drafting, nepotism…etc.) HAS led to this “terrible” season and Polian bears a huge part of the responsibility and should be held accountable.

Not that it matters much in the overall scheme of fandom but I have been a Colts fan for over 40 years and I can’t and won’t cheer for any other team. Can’t say I won’t continue to voice my opinion, though, and if you don’t like it, too bad. I sometimes wonder if the people that say if you don’t like it become a fan of another team really get what is a fan and - I'll close with this - By your rambling tirade you don't know what a Colts fan is. You really don't know, because you don't know how much we really like the Team despite its flaws. You don't know. You really don't know. You think you know, but you don't know. And you never will. (Sorry Jim Mora for paraphrasing that last bit).

[GoPats]

The Bills' teams of the early '90s were loaded with talent... just loaded. Any GM's job is primarily done between February and August. If those Bills teams or the '09 Colts lost Super Bowls because of a lack of talent, that's one thing. But having watched every Super Bowl that Polian's teams have lost, I'm strongly of the opinion that each team was simply beaten by other teams that executed better at critical moments of those games. That's not really on the GM, is it?

I do think the current season, however, is on him. The obvious lack of depth, especially in terms of having a capable back-up for Manning, is easy to see in hindsight. But that's the whole point... someone who is a GM is expected to have foresight.

[billpolianx]

bill polian has had his time ,sometimes you just move on and moving on doesn't include having one of your sons take over it's not there business they're running it is jim irsays

[dn4192]

I doubt there is any other GM in the NFL either now or in the past with the winning % for their teams that Bill Polian has had throughout his career. I think when you look at his overall body of work you will see a GM with a incredible knowledege of the game and what it takes to win. I am not sure how Jim Irsay views him, but I got to believe that he isn't one to overreact to one bad season and will sit down with both Polians and Caldwell at season end and see what direction they see for the club.

[IndyTrav]

I doubt there is any other GM in the NFL either now or in the past with the winning % for their teams that Bill Polian has had throughout his career. I think when you look at his overall body of work you will see a GM with a incredible knowledege of the game and what it takes to win. I am not sure how Jim Irsay views him, but I got to believe that he isn't one to overreact to one bad season and will sit down with both Polians and Caldwell at season end and see what direction they see for the club.

Since 86 there have been 4gms who had a better win % and won SBs.....,,

[dn4192]

Since 86 there have been 4gms who had a better win % and won SBs.....,,

Okay who?

[IndyTrav]

Okay who?

Belicheck, vanisi, Gibbs, Colbert, polian, wolf, beake.

In order.

[dn4192]

Belicheck, vanisi, Gibbs, Colbert, polian, wolf, beake.

In order.

When did Belicheck become a GM? Also I know Gibbs was a coach, but was he also the Redskins GM? Not sure who Vanisi or Colbert are or what teams they were GM's for and such. Are you going overall wins/losses or just playoffs/SB?

[Corndog]

Fact: Polian builds perennial playoff, and championship contending teams. No other GM can claim to present that with any measure of consistency.

Fact: The players and coaches decide the results on the field. If they can win in the regular season, but not the post-season, that's on them. That's their failure to prepare.

There is a measure of scouting a GM can perform. Why don't you show me where they are able to decide if a player is more post season or regular season? That's the dumbest claim if all time. A player can play, or not. Someone has to lose playoff games. There's no additional weeks to change personnel, make adjustments, etc.

If other GM's were more competent, they would be in the same position the Colts are in every year. Manning didn't win that Super Bowl by himself; in fact, his numbers were rather mediocre that entire post season.

So the Steelers and Patriots aren't constantly in contention and don't regularly make the playoff appearances? Green Bay isn't set up to be a constant playoff contender for years to come? The difference is these teams probably won't make the playoffs without their star QB(actually the Steelers might), but they could all come close. It's called building a great team and not just drafting five great players and calling it quits.

[dn4192]

So the Steelers and Patriots aren't constantly in contention and don't regularly make the playoff appearances? Green Bay isn't set up to be a constant playoff contender for years to come? The difference is these teams probably won't make the playoffs without their star QB(actually the Steelers might), but they could all come close. It's called building a great team and not just drafting five great players and calling it quits.

You don't put up the winning seasons year in and year out by just drafting 5 great players and calling it quits.

[Blue Horseshoe]

You don't put up the winning seasons year in and year out by just drafting 5 great players and calling it quits.

Polian has whiffed on every draft since 2006 and hired incompetent coaches.

Exactly what has he done to win year in and year out?

Manning is carrying him along with the rest of this hollow team.

[GoPats]

When did Belicheck become a GM?

The Patriots do not have a GM. It is, for all intents and purposes, Belichick. He makes all decisions... what players to draft, free agents, contracts, hiring coaches, etc.

I don't believe that was the case for him in Cleveland. But in NE, Bill is ruler of all he surveys!

[dn4192]

The Patriots do not have a GM. It is, for all intents and purposes, Belichick. He makes all decisions... what players to draft, free agents, contracts, hiring coaches, etc.

I don't believe that was the case for him in Cleveland. But in NE, Bill is ruler of all he surveys!

Isn't the present GM of the Chiefs the former GM or butt't GM of the Pats? Also looking at the defense of the pats over the past couple of seasons you have to wonder if Bill hasn't lost it a bit...

[dn4192]

Polian has whiffed on every draft since 2006 and hired incompetent coaches.

Exactly what has he done to win year in and year out?

Manning is carrying him along with the rest of this hollow team.

Wiffed on every draft since 2006? This whiffed grade is coming from what publication?

[Blue Horseshoe]

Wiffed on every draft since 2006? This whiffed grade is coming from what publication?

Which draft contradicts it?

[dn4192]

Which draft contradicts it?

I am just asking what draft experts have stated teh Colts drafts from 2006 till now were all busts? Were there busts in each of those drafts...sure no team hits a homerun in every draft every year. I have no seen or read of any publication that reviews NFL drafts of the Colts striking out in all aspects of each draft since 2006. If it's out there I would like to read it and see what their justification is...

[GoPats]

Isn't the present GM of the Chiefs the former GM or butt't GM of the Pats? Also looking at the defense of the pats over the past couple of seasons you have to wonder if Bill hasn't lost it a bit...

No. Scott Pioli's official title was "Personnel Director" I believe. He's a longtime pal of Belichick so I would guess it was a cooperative effort, but since the day he came to New England, Belichick has had the final say on all matters related to the football operation.

Pioli left in 2009, so if you look at the last three NE drafts... those are the ones Belichick ran without him. Their worst drafts, IMO, were 2006, 2007, and 2008. Beginning in '09, they started getting better again. Not saying it was Pioli's fault or anything... I think, even for the experts, the draft is a bit of a crapshoot.

[Superman]

The Bills' teams of the early '90s were loaded with talent... just loaded. Any GM's job is primarily done between February and August. If those Bills teams or the '09 Colts lost Super Bowls because of a lack of talent, that's one thing. But having watched every Super Bowl that Polian's teams have lost, I'm strongly of the opinion that each team was simply beaten by other teams that executed better at critical moments of those games. That's not really on the GM, is it?

You don't mind if I co-sign that, do you pal? This just simply makes sense. Like-minded souls have been saying things like this for many moons now. Glad to see an outside voice repeat it. Again.

[IndyTrav]

You don't mind if I co-sign that, do you pal? This just simply makes sense. Like-minded souls have been saying things like this for many moons now. Glad to see an outside voice repeat it. Again.

It's not that those teams weren't untalented, but my whole argument is this myth of how 'hard' it is to be consistently successful. This myth that Bill is the only one who can do what he does, has gotten so far blown out of proportion, it's taken a life of it's own. As I mentioned 7 GMs have won multiple Super Bowls since Bill became a GM. And I'm just not sure how we can continually mentions Bills successful regular season consistency, while continuing to ignore his consistent failure in the playoffs. We can't hold one on a pedestal and ignore the other. It's all or nothing. Obviously the game of football doesn't adhere to these, but the law of averages would say Polian in 26yrs, with 2 HoF QBs would come away with more than 1 ring.

[Buck Showalter]

Wiffed on every draft since 2006? This whiffed grade is coming from what publication?

0-11 season

look at those drafts, how many drafted players are even still on the team....

[deedub75]

0-11 season

look at those drafts, how many drafted players are even still on the team....

You can't reason with this guy. He said he was glad the team was losing so he could get cheap tix to the games now.

[dn4192]

0-11 season

look at those drafts, how many drafted players are even still on the team....

A pattern of poor drafting will be reflected in repeated poor seasons, not 1. So if we have another losing season next year and again in 2013 you might be right, but A losing season when you are not at 100% healthy at key positions does not equal horrible drafts since 2006.

As for # of players from those drafts still on team, I would wonder how many of those drafted players are still in the league. That would provide a better basis to how good or bad the draft was. A player you draft may not end up fitting your system but is suceesful in another teams.

Of all the players drafted by the Colts since 2006 what % is still on the team and what % is still in the league and what % is no longer in football and how do those match up with other franchises. Come up with those numbers and then you can be able to say if the drafts were good or bad.

[dn4192]

It's not that those teams weren't untalented, but my whole argument is this myth of how 'hard' it is to be consistently successful. This myth that Bill is the only one who can do what he does, has gotten so far blown out of proportion, it's taken a life of it's own. As I mentioned 7 GMs have won multiple Super Bowls since Bill became a GM. And I'm just not sure how we can continually mentions Bills successful regular season consistency, while continuing to ignore his consistent failure in the playoffs. We can't hold one on a pedestal and ignore the other. It's all or nothing. Obviously the game of football doesn't adhere to these, but the law of averages would say Polian in 26yrs, with 2 HoF QBs would come away with more than 1 ring.

Winning the Superbowl involves more then just talent, there is luck involved also, that is why it is better to evaluate a Gm's or players or even coaches success based off the regular season. On any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone, a team consistantly having winning seasons and division titles, to me shows true success.

[deedub75]

Winning the Superbowl involves more then just talent, there is luck involved also, that is why it is better to evaluate a Gm's or players or even coaches success based off the regular season. On any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone, a team consistantly having winning seasons and division titles, to me shows true success.

You can argue in favor of Polian all you want. The bottom line no GM considered to be a great GM would allow his team to go winless no matter what key player goes down. Manning going down is not the sole reason we are winless. A winless season is not an aberration. This thing has been building for years just like a volcano and it finally erupted. Everyone knew that the way team is built means that we couldn't win without Manning. How could Polian not know this? Colts have been called the Indianapolis Peyton Mannings for years now. Polian has had years to at least get a capable backup QB just in case Manning got injured. When Manning had his second surgery that should have been a red flag that we needed to get a capable backup as soon as FA opened up. Polian dropped the ball on this one.

[Gonzo]

I'm not ready to throw Polian under the bus yet. I think this team is much better then the record indicates, we've just executed poorly almost every game. If Caldwell gets credit for anything it's consistency. If he fails to fire Caldwell he and his son will be on thin ice.

6 conference championships is nothing to sniff at though. The Bills and Panthers have done very little since he left.

[Superman]

It's not that those teams weren't untalented, but my whole argument is this myth of how 'hard' it is to be consistently successful. This myth that Bill is the only one who can do what he does, has gotten so far blown out of proportion, it's taken a life of it's own. As I mentioned 7 GMs have won multiple Super Bowls since Bill became a GM. And I'm just not sure how we can continually mentions Bills successful regular season consistency, while continuing to ignore his consistent failure in the playoffs. We can't hold one on a pedestal and ignore the other. It's all or nothing. Obviously the game of football doesn't adhere to these, but the law of averages would say Polian in 26yrs, with 2 HoF QBs would come away with more than 1 ring.

I don't know what myth you're talking about. I don't know of anyone saying that Bill Polian is the only person who can build a good team. You're promoting a viewpoint that no one really has.

I don't care whether Polian is the GM or not. I just don't think postseason failures are the GM's fault. I think the GM builds a team, and if that team is good enough to get to the playoffs, then the bulk of the responsibility at that time is with the coaching staff and the players. Perhaps you can point to a failure here or an oversight there on the part of the front office that cost a team a postseason win, but in reality, we left games out on the field. Going back to 2003, we had teams that were good enough, we just failed to get the job done. I don't blame the GM for those failures. The entire idea of Bill Polian having postseason failures or Super Bowl failures is kind of crazy to me. The GM's job is to build a team good enough to get there. It's the job of the coaches and players to win once that happens. A GM doesn't build a team good enough to get to the Super Bowl but not good enough to win the Super Bowl. I think that's insane.

[Superman]

You can argue in favor of Polian all you want. The bottom line no GM considered to be a great GM would allow his team to go winless no matter what key player goes down. Manning going down is not the sole reason we are winless. A winless season is not an aberration. This thing has been building for years just like a volcano and it finally erupted. Everyone knew that the way team is built means that we couldn't win without Manning. How could Polian not know this? Colts have been called the Indianapolis Peyton Mannings for years now. Polian has had years to at least get a capable backup QB just in case Manning got injured. When Manning had his second surgery that should have been a red flag that we needed to get a capable backup as soon as FA opened up. Polian dropped the ball on this one.

A backup quarterback has been the least of our worries over the years. And even a so-called "capable" backup quarterback wouldn't have salvaged this season for us. 6-10 is only better than 0-16 (which we're not yet) in name. Realistically speaking, if you're going to be bad, you might as well be the worst, and reap the benefits. I don't want us to be 0-16, and I hate that we're 0-11. I'm not advocating tanking games. I'm just saying I don't know why people are making a big deal out of a backup quarterback, when this team is built around Peyton Manning.

It's like a movie I saw a couple years ago, I can't remember which. A guy somehow had a gun built that was connected to his DNA or something like that. Only he could fire it. That's the Colts over the last few years, which is good and bad. Realistically speaking we should have had a contingency plan, and our defense should have been better, and on and on. But you replace Manning with an average backup quarterback -- going rate is $3 or $4 million a year, for someone who wouldn't have played at all over the past several years -- and you're still not a good team. So stop harping on not having a backup quarterback. If you're going to complain about something, complain about the defense and the offensive line, which have needed serious help for at least three seasons. Complain about a coaching staff that has flat-out refused to fix basic things that hurt our team's chances of winning. You fix those things, and we could realistically be 6-5 right now even with Curtis Painter.

So you can see that I can be critical of the front office. I'm not giving them a pass in this debacle of a so-called season. I just don't care at this point, whether we win a game or not. It would suck to have 0-16 on your record as a franchise, but we already have 1-15, so who cares? We have several 3-13 seasons. End of the day, being a bad team is being a bad team. At least this season is going to bring some fundamental changes that should have been made already.

[IndyTrav]

I don't know what myth you're talking about. I don't know of anyone saying that Bill Polian is the only person who can build a good team. You're promoting a viewpoint that no one really has.

I don't care whether Polian is the GM or not. I just don't think postseason failures are the GM's fault. I think the GM builds a team, and if that team is good enough to get to the playoffs, then the bulk of the responsibility at that time is with the coaching staff and the players. Perhaps you can point to a failure here or an oversight there on the part of the front office that cost a team a postseason win, but in reality, we left games out on the field. Going back to 2003, we had teams that were good enough, we just failed to get the job done. I don't blame the GM for those failures. The entire idea of Bill Polian having postseason failures or Super Bowl failures is kind of crazy to me. The GM's job is to build a team good enough to get there. It's the job of the coaches and players to win once that happens. A GM doesn't build a team good enough to get to the Super Bowl but not good enough to win the Super Bowl. I think that's insane.

"Let me put it this way to all of you haters. If Polian retires or gets fired, get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years." Is a good example of what I was refering to. 20 years? in 26 years 41 GM's made the SB. Its obvious it can be done by others, some of whom never even had a legitimate QB, much less 2 HoF.

Once again, you attribute the regular season to the GM, but fail to give credit for the playoffs, good or bad. How is it the regular season is on the GM, but the playoffs come down to coaching/scheme? Is it not the same team? I think its very telling that a team in a historically weak division could continually make the playoffs in the regular season but once we start playing truly high caliber teams we generally lose. THAT is what I attribute to the GM.

And on a slightly different route, its my opinion, that more and more its looking like the drafting of a single player in 1998 has greatly distorted the impact of nearly every other member of this orginization, GM included. How much is hard to say, and probably not quantifiable, but very, very real.

[dn4192]

You can argue in favor of Polian all you want. The bottom line no GM considered to be a great GM would allow his team to go winless no matter what key player goes down. Manning going down is not the sole reason we are winless. A winless season is not an aberration. This thing has been building for years just like a volcano and it finally erupted. Everyone knew that the way team is built means that we couldn't win without Manning. How could Polian not know this? Colts have been called the Indianapolis Peyton Mannings for years now. Polian has had years to at least get a capable backup QB just in case Manning got injured. When Manning had his second surgery that should have been a red flag that we needed to get a capable backup as soon as FA opened up. Polian dropped the ball on this one.

I believe that both the coaches and Polian believed Painter was that backup. They made the wrong call it happens. As we see now with other teams losing their starting QB's, it is near impossible to find a good reliable backup QB in this league. It is the toughest position to play and only a handful can do it on a successful level.

[Superman]

"Let me put it this way to all of you haters. If Polian retires or gets fired, get ready to not even come close to a SB for the next 20 years." Is a good example of what I was refering to. 20 years? in 26 years 41 GM's made the SB. Its obvious it can be done by others, some of whom never even had a legitimate QB, much less 2 HoF.

I work with a guy who routinely says silly things that you don't even take seriously. I read the comment you're alluding to, and brushed it off. Maybe I'm exaggerating by saying that "no one" feels that way. What I should say is that the majority of people who defend Polian -- particularly with regard to postseason records -- don't think that he's the only good GM in the history of the world. The comment you're quoting is crazy talk. Most people don't feel that way. Hope we're on the same page now.

Once again, you attribute the regular season to the GM, but fail to give credit for the playoffs, good or bad. How is it the regular season is on the GM, but the playoffs come down to coaching/scheme? Is it not the same team? I think its very telling that a team in a historically weak division could continually make the playoffs in the regular season but once we start playing truly high caliber teams we generally lose. THAT is what I attribute to the GM.

We're a team that has beaten every single team in the NFL, period. Go back to 2005: We spank the Steelers in the regular season, and then, two months later, we're not good enough to beat them in the playoffs? No. We took too long to adjust to their pass rush, and then we failed to convert the tying field goal. Go back to 2003: We're good enough to rout the Broncos and the Chiefs, but we're suddenly deficient against the Patriots? It would help to acknowledge that those Patriots teams were really doggone good, but the reason we lost is because we couldn't stop turning the ball over. We give Manning credit for the Colts' success, which he deserves a great measure of, but when he throws four interceptions in a playoff game, we're blaming Bill Polian? I can't get with that. Same thing with the Super Bowl: I don't blame Bill Polian for Peyton Manning throwing the game-clinching interception. I blame everyone involved in the ridiculous defensive gameplan, and since Polian co-signed it in his postgame comments, include him, but that's on Caldwell and Coyer, really. In 2007, we lost to the Chargers because Freeney and Mathis were out, and Dungy and Meeks refused to bring extra rushers, and Kenton Keith dropped a pass that wound up being intercepted, and Marvin Harrison fumbled the ball away. We were good enough to go 13-3, but now it's Polian's fault that we did stupid things on the field and made silly coaching decisions? I don't agree with that. (You're going to say that Polian should have gotten us a third pass rusher; I'd counter with the fact that most teams don't even have two elite pass rushers, some don't even have one, and it's not Polian's fault that both of ours got hurt that year.)

Blame Polian for 2008. We wasted the draft that year, and our offensive line was a mess (which is crazy since we drafted THREE interior linemen that year, none of them making a positive impact). We let Jake Scott leave (which was kind of Polian's fault, but not really), and we resigned Ryan Lilja, who didn't even make it on the field. Give him some of the blame for 2010, since he blamed the offensive line for the Super Bowl loss and then did nothing to improve the offensive line (it actually got worse). But with all the injuries, it's hard to really blame him for the 10-6 season and the playoff loss.

I'm just going through all of this because I think it's relevant to the debate over Polian's blame for our postseason record. I don't think putting together a team that wins 12 games 7 years in a row is a failure, and I don't think it's reasonable to say that once that team gets into the playoffs that it's all of a sudden not good enough to win against the best teams in the NFL. We routinely beat those teams in the regular season, and we've even beaten them in the playoffs. People say we lose to physical teams in the postseason, but no one was more physical in 2009 than the Ravens and Jets, and we took every punch they mustered, beat them back, and sent them home. Then we lost to the finesse Saints, mostly due to a stupid defensive scheme.

Polian has made mistakes, and if you erase some of those mistakes, maybe we do better in the playoffs over the years. But every GM makes mistakes. Mixed in there is a team that has top five players at several positions, and has for several years. Hindsight GMs unfairly judge decisions made by the front office. Polian said in the Polian Corner "I’ll leave that projecting to the people who project for a living and don’t have to answer for their projections." That's armchair/hindsight GMs and coaches, who have the benefit of saying "we should have drafted Beanie Wells instead of Donald Brown," two years later. I never liked the Donald Brown pick, not because he was disappointing in his first two seasons, but because I don't think you draft a running back in the first round when you're a pass first team and running back is the easiest position to fill on your offense. I just don't think it's reasonable or fair to say "see, that move didn't work out, that's why Bill Polian needs to be fired."

And on a slightly different route, its my opinion, that more and more its looking like the drafting of a single player in 1998 has greatly distorted the impact of nearly every other member of this orginization, GM included. How much is hard to say, and probably not quantifiable, but very, very real.

Agreed, to an extent. Peyton Manning didn't make Dwight Freeney a great pass rusher, and he didn't make Bob Sanders a great safety. On and on. Manning is great, and I don't think there's ever been anyone as important to his team as he is to the Colts. Not only that, but he's handled the responsibility and the pressure and the scrutiny very well.

Bill Polian still has a track record outside of Peyton Manning. He has the Bills and the Panthers on his resume, and he did a fine job in both places. Neither team has been good since he left. Manning has made his job easier, no doubt. He's made everyone's job easier.

[BIGugly]

Rusting is a mistake. The year we didn't rust, the year we won it all.....

[IndyTrav]

I work with a guy who routinely says silly things that you don't even take seriously. I read the comment you're alluding to, and brushed it off. Maybe I'm exaggerating by saying that "no one" feels that way. What I should say is that the majority of people who defend Polian -- particularly with regard to postseason records -- don't think that he's the only good GM in the history of the world. The comment you're quoting is crazy talk. Most people don't feel that way. Hope we're on the same page now.

We're a team that has beaten every single team in the NFL, period. Go back to 2005: We spank the Steelers in the regular season, and then, two months later, we're not good enough to beat them in the playoffs? No. We took too long to adjust to their pass rush, and then we failed to convert the tying field goal. Go back to 2003: We're good enough to rout the Broncos and the Chiefs, but we're suddenly deficient against the Patriots? It would help to acknowledge that those Patriots teams were really doggone good, but the reason we lost is because we couldn't stop turning the ball over. We give Manning credit for the Colts' success, which he deserves a great measure of, but when he throws four interceptions in a playoff game, we're blaming Bill Polian? I can't get with that. Same thing with the Super Bowl: I don't blame Bill Polian for Peyton Manning throwing the game-clinching interception. I blame everyone involved in the ridiculous defensive gameplan, and since Polian co-signed it in his postgame comments, include him, but that's on Caldwell and Coyer, really. In 2007, we lost to the Chargers because Freeney and Mathis were out, and Dungy and Meeks refused to bring extra rushers, and Kenton Keith dropped a pass that wound up being intercepted, and Marvin Harrison fumbled the ball away. We were good enough to go 13-3, but now it's Polian's fault that we did stupid things on the field and made silly coaching decisions? I don't agree with that. (You're going to say that Polian should have gotten us a third pass rusher; I'd counter with the fact that most teams don't even have two elite pass rushers, some don't even have one, and it's not Polian's fault that both of ours got hurt that year.)

Blame Polian for 2008. We wasted the draft that year, and our offensive line was a mess (which is crazy since we drafted THREE interior linemen that year, none of them making a positive impact). We let Jake Scott leave (which was kind of Polian's fault, but not really), and we resigned Ryan Lilja, who didn't even make it on the field. Give him some of the blame for 2010, since he blamed the offensive line for the Super Bowl loss and then did nothing to improve the offensive line (it actually got worse). But with all the injuries, it's hard to really blame him for the 10-6 season and the playoff loss.

I'm just going through all of this because I think it's relevant to the debate over Polian's blame for our postseason record. I don't think putting together a team that wins 12 games 7 years in a row is a failure, and I don't think it's reasonable to say that once that team gets into the playoffs that it's all of a sudden not good enough to win against the best teams in the NFL. We routinely beat those teams in the regular season, and we've even beaten them in the playoffs. People say we lose to physical teams in the postseason, but no one was more physical in 2009 than the Ravens and Jets, and we took every punch they mustered, beat them back, and sent them home. Then we lost to the finesse Saints, mostly due to a stupid defensive scheme.

Polian has made mistakes, and if you erase some of those mistakes, maybe we do better in the playoffs over the years. But every GM makes mistakes. Mixed in there is a team that has top five players at several positions, and has for several years. Hindsight GMs unfairly judge decisions made by the front office. Polian said in the Polian Corner "I’ll leave that projecting to the people who project for a living and don’t have to answer for their projections." That's armchair/hindsight GMs and coaches, who have the benefit of saying "we should have drafted Beanie Wells instead of Donald Brown," two years later. I never liked the Donald Brown pick, not because he was disappointing in his first two seasons, but because I don't think you draft a running back in the first round when you're a pass first team and running back is the easiest position to fill on your offense. I just don't think it's reasonable or fair to say "see, that move didn't work out, that's why Bill Polian needs to be fired."

Agreed, to an extent. Peyton Manning didn't make Dwight Freeney a great pass rusher, and he didn't make Bob Sanders a great safety. On and on. Manning is great, and I don't think there's ever been anyone as important to his team as he is to the Colts. Not only that, but he's handled the responsibility and the pressure and the scrutiny very well.

Bill Polian still has a track record outside of Peyton Manning. He has the Bills and the Panthers on his resume, and he did a fine job in both places. Neither team has been good since he left. Manning has made his job easier, no doubt. He's made everyone's job easier.

I 110% understand its won 'on the field' and those instances you brought up are a great illustration of that. We have beat every team, and yet when the lights are on we would shoot ourselves in the foot, or caught unprepared, or this or that. The thing that befuddles me is the consistency of it. I've been through all the GMs of the past 26 years, and none of them have lost as much as Polian, and for the life of me I can't figure out why. They get the the big games less, but win more. And none of them had #18. This is what has truly got me questioning if Polian should be our GM moving forward. That and the length of years between truly hitting a quality draft pick. Its growing larger and larger, and it seems more and more of Bills accomplishments are becoming more and more dated. Yes he improved the Bills, but that was 20+years ago, what is the statue of limitations on being able to reference past work? Is it 25 years? 10? 5? It just seems to me a majority of Polian support is rooted in teams that are 25/20/15 years old, and thats not something that I can get behind.

[GoPats]

You don't mind if I co-sign that, do you pal? This just simply makes sense. Like-minded souls have been saying things like this for many moons now. Glad to see an outside voice repeat it. Again.

Anytime brother. :wink:

[deedub75]

A backup quarterback has been the least of our worries over the years. And even a so-called "capable" backup quarterback wouldn't have salvaged this season for us. 6-10 is only better than 0-16 (which we're not yet) in name. Realistically speaking, if you're going to be bad, you might as well be the worst, and reap the benefits. I don't want us to be 0-16, and I hate that we're 0-11. I'm not advocating tanking games. I'm just saying I don't know why people are making a big deal out of a backup quarterback, when this team is built around Peyton Manning.

It's like a movie I saw a couple years ago, I can't remember which. A guy somehow had a gun built that was connected to his DNA or something like that. Only he could fire it. That's the Colts over the last few years, which is good and bad. Realistically speaking we should have had a contingency plan, and our defense should have been better, and on and on. But you replace Manning with an average backup quarterback -- going rate is $3 or $4 million a year, for someone who wouldn't have played at all over the past several years -- and you're still not a good team. So stop harping on not having a backup quarterback. If you're going to complain about something, complain about the defense and the offensive line, which have needed serious help for at least three seasons. Complain about a coaching staff that has flat-out refused to fix basic things that hurt our team's chances of winning. You fix those things, and we could realistically be 6-5 right now even with Curtis Painter.

So you can see that I can be critical of the front office. I'm not giving them a pass in this debacle of a so-called season. I just don't care at this point, whether we win a game or not. It would suck to have 0-16 on your record as a franchise, but we already have 1-15, so who cares? We have several 3-13 seasons. End of the day, being a bad team is being a bad team. At least this season is going to bring some fundamental changes that should have been made already.

I know that a backup QB was the least of our worries but this offseason it was the really the only thing they really could have fixed and yet they didn't. Even with a good backup we wouldn't be winning a bunch of games but no one wants to look this bad. How could they not have know what they had with Painter until the last minute and then they go and get Collins out of his rocking chair and pay him $4M? It's just a pattern of ineptitude.

[Superman]

I 110% understand its won 'on the field' and those instances you brought up are a great illustration of that. We have beat every team, and yet when the lights are on we would shoot ourselves in the foot, or caught unprepared, or this or that. The thing that befuddles me is the consistency of it. I've been through all the GMs of the past 26 years, and none of them have lost as much as Polian, and for the life of me I can't figure out why. They get the the big games less, but win more. And none of them had #18. This is what has truly got me questioning if Polian should be our GM moving forward. That and the length of years between truly hitting a quality draft pick. Its growing larger and larger, and it seems more and more of Bills accomplishments are becoming more and more dated. Yes he improved the Bills, but that was 20+years ago, what is the statue of limitations on being able to reference past work? Is it 25 years? 10? 5? It just seems to me a majority of Polian support is rooted in teams that are 25/20/15 years old, and thats not something that I can get behind.

I'm saying that I don't think it makes sense to judge a GM based on what his team does in the playoffs, especially when his team gets into the playoffs every year. I can't say "we make it there because of Manning, but we lose because of Polian." That doesn't make sense to me.

And like you said, Polian's teams have gotten to big games more than anyone else's. I'm not saying that makes him the best, but I do believe that is an indication of him being good at what he does.

I also wonder what you mean when you say there's been many years between hitting on draft picks. We hit on Addai. I think we hit on Gonzo, and his career feel apart because of injuries. (If you're going to sell the Gonzo pick short, you have to sell the Sanders pick short, and I don't think that makes sense.) Ugoh and Pollak were misses. Brown and Hughes were definitely not good picks for our team, whether they wind up being good players or not. But that's just the first rounders. We've gotten really good players in pretty much every draft. Antoine Bethea, Clint Session, Austin Collie, etc. It's not like we've just been terrible in the draft. Missed on some first rounders, which sucks, but when you go back and say "we could have had X instead of Y", you're playing hindsight GM, and I don't think that's fair or realistic. Everyone misses on first rounders from time to time.

By the way, if you believe what's being said, Bill isn't making the draft picks anymore. It's mostly Chris, as of this year. And we knocked this year's draft out the park.

Lastly, I'm not saying "Bill Polian deserves to be regarded as a good GM forevermore because of the Bills and Panthers from 20 and 15 years ago." I'm just saying that it's not like the only thing he's ever done is run the Colts, and he just got lucky with Peyton Manning. And even with the Colts, we have top five players at several positions, other than quarterback. So it's not just Peyton Manning making us good over the years. It's evolved into a team that's propped up by Manning's brilliance, which is a double-edged sword. But we have players at other positions that pull their own weight, and that's to Polian's credit as the GM, not Manning's as the quarterback.

[deedub75]

I 110% understand its won 'on the field' and those instances you brought up are a great illustration of that. We have beat every team, and yet when the lights are on we would shoot ourselves in the foot, or caught unprepared, or this or that. The thing that befuddles me is the consistency of it. I've been through all the GMs of the past 26 years, and none of them have lost as much as Polian, and for the life of me I can't figure out why. They get the the big games less, but win more. And none of them had #18. This is what has truly got me questioning if Polian should be our GM moving forward. That and the length of years between truly hitting a quality draft pick. Its growing larger and larger, and it seems more and more of Bills accomplishments are becoming more and more dated. Yes he improved the Bills, but that was 20+years ago, what is the statue of limitations on being able to reference past work? Is it 25 years? 10? 5? It just seems to me a majority of Polian support is rooted in teams that are 25/20/15 years old, and thats not something that I can get behind.

I still think that a lot of our success in making the playoffs so many consecutive years is playing in such a weak division. When you have 6 games against the Titans, Jags, and Texans it makes your path to a division title a bit easier. Once you get to the playoffs, it's a different story. Also, the small fast players we have seem to wear down and tire out through the regular season and don't seem to play as well in the playoffs against really good teams.

[Superman]

I know that a backup QB was the least of our worries but this offseason it was the really the only thing they really could have fixed and yet they didn't. Even with a good backup we wouldn't be winning a bunch of games but no one wants to look this bad. How could they not have know what they had with Painter until the last minute and then they go and get Collins out of his rocking chair and pay him $4M? It's just a pattern of ineptitude.

How is not having a backup quarterback a "pattern of ineptitude," especially when a better backup quarterback still makes us a not very good team? A pattern?

We had Painter because he was inexpensive and was being groomed to take some snaps if the situation ever called for it. Which it hasn't, not in 13 years, not until September. Do you really think it's a good idea to pay for a so-called quality backup quarterback to sit on the bench and eat up $3 million a year, and practically never play? Is it worth maybe winning 5 or 6 games this year? I don't think it is. I hate that we're so bad, but if we get the top pick, then it will be just a blip on the radar, and the team should be moving right back to the top again, assuming we make good decisions.

I'll also note that we went after a number of other backups before we signed Kerry Collins (including Matt Hasselbeck, whose Titans are 6-5). And I'll note that the Painter Experiment didn't look all that bad for a few weeks, and then the wheels came off as injuries kept piling up.

Also, that wasn't the only thing the front office could have fixed. The offensive line needed fixing, and they took significant steps in that regard. Those steps look pretty good at this point. We improved the defensive line also.

[Superman]

I still think that a lot of our success in making the playoffs so many consecutive years is playing in such a weak division. When you have 6 games against the Titans, Jags, and Texans it makes your path to a division title a bit easier. Once you get to the playoffs, it's a different story. Also, the small fast players we have seem to wear down and tire out through the regular season and don't seem to play as well in the playoffs against really good teams.

We beat every team we play. AFC, NFC, doesn't matter. We play a first place schedule every year. We win at home and on the road. I don't get this line of reasoning that we can't beat really good teams.

I also think it's a double-standard to say we have small players that wear down, and then complain when we rest those players late in the season.