Denver CB Harris says Wilson is better than Luck [Merge]

[Superman]

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2011/12/12/2630093/another-columnist-thinks-the-colts-are-intentionally-tanking-the-2011

 

-5 points for quoting Brad Wells.

 

Not only that, the only Indy media member that is included in that article is Bob Kravitz. Kravitz was long at odds with the Polian regime, so there's no surprise that he would be critical of the staff.

 

Also, the answer to Kravitz's comments is that, yes, the staff really was that bad. And that's why they're all gone.

[amfootball]

Linking a Brad Wells article doesn't count exactly. He's almost got as big an axe to grind and certainly he doesn't have any real inside access to the team.

Besides if it was a tank season why risk losing the number 1 pick with back to back wins?

I posted his article because he has links to other reporters who also wrote articles about the tanking:

#1 IndyStar, Bob Kravitz

#2 Mike Florio

#3 Howard Bryant

#4 Mike Preston

[SteelCityColt]

Sorry. You have to do better than that. You have yet to prove that they did not tank. Saying you watched interviews and press conferences and "trust" mgmt. is not evidence you know.

Actually I think in this debate the burden of proof is on yourself to show they did tank. Much in the same vain as innocent before guilty, you really should have some solid proof before you start libelling professional athletes.

[amfootball]

-5 points for quoting Brad Wells.

 

Not only that, the only Indy media member that is included in that article is Bob Kravitz. Kravitz was long at odds with the Polian regime, so there's no surprise that he would be critical of the staff.

 

Also, the answer to Kravitz's comments is that, yes, the staff really was that bad. And that's why they're all gone.

Like I said, your own media believed the Colts tanked and they have waay more access than you or me.

[Superman]

Sorry. You have to do better than that. You have yet to prove that they did not tank. Saying you watched interviews and press conferences and "trust" mgmt. is not evidence you know.

 

Never said I trust management. That management team is gone, deservedly so.

 

And again, this claim has been thoroughly debunked. You've presented nothing to substantiate it.

[amfootball]

Actually I think in this debate the burden of proof is on yourself to show they did tank. Much in the same vain as innocent before guilty, you really should have some solid proof before you start libelling professional athletes.

I said from the get go it is my opinion and told Superman that I would agree to disagree but he has continued to push it.

[SteelCityColt]

Seriously.....  12 pages...   

 

I bet Luck and Wilson would think you're all  Nutz  

It's ok we've moved back to "where were you in the 2011 season" and other conspiracies

[Superman]

Like I said, your own media believed the Colts tanked and they have waay more access than you or me.

 

Again, no they didn't. Brad Wells isn't media, and Bob Kravitz isn't "the media." 

[House]

Are people really dumb enough to believe we tanked for Luck .

Funny enough, same people who believe an entire organization orchestrated fraud, undetected , somehow don't believe Spygate was beneficial.

Isn't that a strange coincidence, and not at all hypocritical?

[Superman]

I said from the get go it is my opinion and told Superman that I would agree to disagree but he has continued to push it.

 

Did I push it? Or did I refute a baseless claim that you won't stop repeating?

 

You won't stop repeating it. I won't stop refuting it.

[amfootball]

Never said I trust management. That management team is gone, deservedly so.

 

And again, this claim has been thoroughly debunked. You've presented nothing to substantiate it.

Just watching the season is proof enough. Again, my opinion. I never said it was fact. In fact I said I have no issue with people who did not think they tanked. I just disagree with them.

[SteelCityColt]

I said from the get go it is my opinion and told Superman that I would agree to disagree but he has continued to push it.

The issue is that your opinion is accusing quite a lot of people of what is actually I'm guessing a criminal offense, namely fixing games. So unless you can prove it unequivocally...It's probably best to not keep committing it to the written word.

[amfootball]

The issue is that your opinion is accusing quite a lot of people of what is actually I'm guessing a criminal offense, namely fixing games. So unless you can prove it unequivocally...It's probably best to not keep committing it to the written word.

Criminal, hardly. Common, yes. In all sports actually. I mean do you think the 2009 Colts should be prosecuted for laying down the final two games allowing the Jets to get into the playoffs? I don't.

[Superman]

Just watching the season is proof enough. Again, my opinion. I never said it was fact. In fact I said I have no issue with people who did not think they tanked. I just disagree with them.

 

No it's not.

 

Like I said, you're entitled to your false opinion. I'm not trying to stop you from posting it. But it's going to be refuted, always. 

[Superman]

Criminal, hardly. Common, yes. In all sports actually. I mean do you think the 2009 Colts should be prosecuted for laying down the final two games allowing the Jets to get into the playoffs? I don't.

 

The Colts objective wasn't to let the Jets in the playoffs. Their objective was to limit risk to their best players. And that's entirely different from making a conscientious decision to tank an entire season.

[amfootball]

Like I said, you're entitled to your false opinion But it's going to be refuted, always. 

I would expect nothing less from you on this topic or any other .... ;)

[amfootball]

The Colts objective wasn't to let the Jets in the playoffs. Their objective was to limit risk to their best players. And that's entirely different from making a conscientious decision to tank an entire season.

Meh. Not sure how resting players is any different than not competing hard. I mean you are resting in order to win the Super Bowl, right? And that means a team got into the playoffs that never should of. That is worse to me than losing your games to get the #1 pick.

[SteelCityColt]

Criminal, hardly. Common, yes. In all sports actually. I mean do you think the 2009 Colts should be prosecuted for laying down the final two games allowing the Jets to get into the playoffs? I don't.

Yes criminal, I'm no expert on US law but it's certainly a criminal offense in most 1st world countries.

Can you understand there's a marked difference between pulling starters and purposefully setting out to lose games. In fact a whole season of games?

You're just wildly speculating.

[Gavin]

Sorry. You have to do better than that. You have yet to prove that they did not tank. Saying you watched interviews and press conferences and "trust" mgmt. is not evidence you know.

If bringing a QB in who has thrown for almost 41,000 yards....(Who Polian knows quite well from Carolina) is not a desperate attempt to save our 2011 season then I don't know what is, Polian certainly had his faults but ya gotta have some hardcore proof of him wanting to tank the season if your gonna question the mans pride of being able to put rosters together that could win consistently. He took a risk on Collins that he could keep the team in the hunt and he lost, It happens.

[amfootball]

Yes criminal, I'm no expert on US law but it's certainly a criminal offense in most 1st world countries.

Can you understand there's a marked difference between pulling starters and purposefully setting out to lose games. In fact a whole season of games?

You're just wildly speculating.

Tanking is rampant in the NBA. No one has ever been prosecuted. You can't punish a team for competitive drive.

[dw49]

Signing Collins and then starting Painter game after game is evidence enough.

 

 

That's ridiculous. There were no good options available by the time the Colts realized Manning could not play. Plus they really didn't even know if he would be out for the year when they signed Collins. Plus who in God's name would tank a season before it even started ? As far as Painter , Poilan had to figure he was better than bringing in some other bum that didn't know the offense. Plus you have to know that Polian is a vain man and by starting some stiff of the street rather than Painter would basically be admitting that he was an * for having Painter as the back up. 

 

Really .. utterly ridiculous logic on your part. Logic isn't the word I'm looking for because if you follow what you have through , it makes zero sense.

 

So anyway , who was in on the "fixed" or dumped season starting from week one ? Polian by himself ? Doubt that one as he gets himself fired. So that one doesn't make sense. So did Irsay direct Polian to do this dump job ? Geez if so .. he better hope Polian doesn't let this out cause wow !!!!! He would probably be forced to sell the club.

 

I'm so confused... Doesn't make sense this came from Polian alone as would probably be fired. Doesn't make sense that Irsay directed Polian to do this and then fire him for losing all those games. Man... who the heck did this ? Ahhh ... they looked at each other and winked ....not a word said just winked.

[Superman]

Meh. Not sure how resting players is any different than not competing hard. I mean you are resting in order to win the Super Bowl, right? And that means a team got into the playoffs that never should of. That is worse to me than losing your games to get the #1 pick.

 

That's nonsense. The Jets didn't clinch in Week 16. And absolutely, resting players at the end of the season is entirely different than intentionally losing games. There's simply no comparison.

[SteelCityColt]

Tanking is rampant in the NBA. No one has ever been prosecuted. You can't punish a team for competitive drive.

But how do teams tank? The norm is to pull the starters is it not?

[amfootball]

That's nonsense. The Jets didn't clinch in Week 16. And absolutely, resting players at the end of the season is entirely different than intentionally losing games. There's simply no comparison.

True. But had the Colts beat them in week 16, they would have been eliminated from the playoffs.

[amfootball]

But how do teams tank? The norm is to pull the starters is it not?

You can do that or just have then run a very vanilla game plan. Or not try to get talent to improve the team.

[House]

This thread is a low point for the intelligence of certain posters on this board. And it is spiraling so fast.

[dw49]

Tanking is rampant in the NBA. No one has ever been prosecuted. You can't punish a team for competitive drive.

 

 

Once again ...WRONG. They don't tank anymore since they put in a lottery weighted draft. They did no doubt tank and it was done by playing young guys off the bench with the excuse they needed to see who was good and who was not. The Colts did not have more talented players on the bench than they did on the field. 

[SteelCityColt]

You can do that or just have then run a very vanilla game plan. Or not try to get talent to improve the team.

I know it's very subtle but that's different to going out from the whistle to lose a game,or as you accuse, 16 of them. Morally maybe not so cool but certainly a shade of grey rather than the black and white you present.

Let me ask you another way, do you think the league (who has artificially strived to create parity) and who above else protects the product (the games) would be too happy about a team tanking?

By your thought process the Jags/Raiders are serial offenders

[Superman]

True. But had the Colts beat them in week 16, they would have been eliminated from the playoffs.

 

First, that's not true. The Steelers were trying to catch the Jets. 

 

Second, that's not the Colts business. They were in the playoffs, and had everything clinched. I disagree with the decision to pull the starters with every fiber of my being, but that has nothing to do with the Jets trying to make the playoffs. Same thing the week later with the already eliminated Bills. You pull your starters when you've clinched, if you choose to do so. I hate it, but it's entirely different from tanking an entire season, and you know it is.

[House]

Also. This thread give great tips for bashing just about anything.

Example.

"I believe the Patriots cheat for all of their wins. Prove it you say? How about you prove to me they didn't. Oh you can't? Boom. Factually defeated by my opinion that isn't based on anything but my own feelings."

[Gavin]

I know it's very subtle but that's different to going out from the whistle to lose a game,or as you accuse, 16 of them. Morally maybe not so cool but certainly a shade of grey rather than the black and white you present.

Let me ask you another way, do you think the league (who has artificially strived to create parity) and who above else protects the product (the games) would be too happy about a team tanking?

By your thought process the Jags/Raiders are serial offenders

[amfootball]

First, that's not true. The Steelers were trying to catch the Jets. 

 

Second, that's not the Colts business. They were in the playoffs, and had everything clinched. I disagree with the decision to pull the starters with every fiber of my being, but that has nothing to do with the Jets trying to make the playoffs. Same thing the week later with the already eliminated Bills. You pull your starters when you've clinched, if you choose to do so. I hate it, but it's entirely different from tanking an entire season, and you know it is.

No, the Jets were out if the Colts beat them.

 

I did not say it is the same but that the difference in my mind is not that great. I find both actions just as deplorable.

[dw49]

You can do that or just have then run a very vanilla game plan. Or not try to get talent to improve the team.

 

 

So once again... Are you saying that the whole coaching staff was in on this fix ? And who gave the word to devise these bad game plans... Polian ? Funny that not one of the coaches involved came forward with this. Wouldn't they think it hurt their careers ? Wouldn't these coaches that made the bad game plans and then were fired be bitter ? Tough to get a job after the NFL sees these horrible game plans there devised ... You are being so ridiculous. Answer a few of these questions please...

[amfootball]

Once again ...WRONG. They don't tank anymore since they put in a lottery weighted draft. They did no doubt tank and it was done by playing young guys off the bench with the excuse they needed to see who was good and who was not. The Colts did not have more talented players on the bench than they did on the field. 

Do you think teams should be prosecuted for tanking? That was the question, I was answering. I don't. It is not criminal.

[dw49]

Do you think teams should be prosecuted for tanking? That was the question, I was answering. I don't. It is not criminal.

 

 

Depends how it's done. If management tells a coaching staff to have players lay down and not play hard .. yes. If they just play rookies with the excuse they need to know if they should be part of the team going forward .. no. What you suggest could involve the first scenario . The second one was not done by the Colts. Better players did not sit the bench to lose games. I see you avoid the tough questions and come back with silly stuff like this. 

[SteelCityColt]

Do you think teams should be prosecuted for tanking? That was the question, I was answering. I don't. It is not criminal.

I disagree, given the amount of betting on games at the least financial fraud could come into play. People have been prosecuted for influencing games and that's tantamount to what you're saying.

If you can't see there's a marked difference between pulling/resting starters and deliberately, let me emphasise this point, deliberately as a professional athlete setting out to lose a game then I'm not sure where to go with this,

Help me understand your view....

Who exactly was in on the tank? The GM,the Coaches, all the players?

How do you think people who lost their jobs and in some players cases their dream of playing in the NFL were convinced to keep all this quiet?

If it was that obvious a tank job why didn't the league at least investigate it? Are they in on it too?

[amfootball]

Depends how it's done. If management tells a coaching staff to have players lay down and not play hard .. yes. If they just play rookies with the excuse they need to know if they should be part of the team going forward .. no. What you suggest could involve the first scenario . The second one was not done by the Colts. Better players did not sit the bench to lose games. I see you avoid the tough questions and come back with silly stuff like this. 

I honestly don't know what was said or devised but the effort of the team was highly questionable from the middle of the season on. That is not disputable. You can say it was a factor of the poor roster. Maybe it was, or the coaching staff. I don't know. But please don't act like Colts mgmt. was blind to the fact that Luck was sitting there for them once the team was 0-4, 0-5, 0-6. The season was lost so why not go for the best pick since Elway?

[Superman]

No, the Jets were out if the Colts beat them.

 

I did not say it is the same but that the difference in my mind is not that great. I find both actions just as deplorable.

 

Five years ago, so I might be fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure the Jets wouldn't have been eliminated until Week 17. Unless there are some crazy tie breakers I don't remember.

 

Either way, the two situations aren't remotely the same. You can dislike them equally, that's up to you. I dislike peanut M&Ms and brussel sprouts equally. That doesn't make them the same.

[amfootball]

Five years ago, so I might be fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure the Jets wouldn't have been eliminated until Week 17. Unless there are some crazy tie breakers I don't remember.

 

Either way, the two situations aren't remotely the same. You can dislike them equally, that's up to you. I dislike peanut M&Ms and brussel sprouts equally. That doesn't make them the same.

Jets were out with a loss to the Colts.

 

Again, we can agree to disagree on your second point.

[Superman]

I honestly don't know what was said or devised but the effort of the team was highly questionable from the middle of the season on. That is not disputable. You can say it was a factor of the poor roster. Maybe it was, or the coaching staff. I don't know. But please don't act like Colts mgmt. was blind to the fact that Luck was sitting there for them once the team was 0-4, 0-5, 0-6. The season was lost so why not go for the best pick since Elway?

 

So did the team start tanking after they started 0-4, 0-5, 0-6? Or did they decide to tank when they signed Kerry Collins, who you claimed should have been in a bar instead of on the football field? Or was it when they started Curtis Painter?  Or was it back in July when they failed to sign a better backup QB?

 

It doesn't help your argument that you can't even state clearly what you think happened.