Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bronco's Eagles and Seahwaks no longer SB contenders


akcolt

Recommended Posts

Only one of them was ever a contender for Super Bowl (Seattle)

 

Philly has not won a playoff game since 2008 and Denver, we all know what happened last year.

 

I would not count out Seattle though even as a wild card. People forget that last year they barely won a bunch of games they could have easily lost against bad teams like Houston and Tampa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure what this means? All the teams you listed are winning their divisions with the exception of Seattle. Both the Eagles and Broncos could finish with a bye or at the very least a home playoff game in round 1.

 

That being said ... hard to bet on the Eagles with Sanchez. He will struggle against quality teams the rest of the way. Dallas takes that division if Romo's back holds up...

 

Denver needs to fix everything that got exposed by NE ... and hope the injures they suffered yesterday are not lingering.

 

Seattle is still in the thick of things but their defense is nowhere near what it was last year and they will struggle to just get in given there are other second place teams with better records then them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. And the Broncos let the Pats score 50 on them. They'll won't make the playoffs.

If your going to post scores you could at least get them right.  :nono:     The Pats scored 43 on the Broncos one more than they scored on the Colts and the Colts were at home and not Foxboro   We should have done better than that with home field advantage.  :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your going to post scores you could at least get them right. :nono: The Pats scored 43 on the Broncos one more than they scored on the Colts and the Colts were at home and not Foxboro We should have done better than that with home field advantage. :yes:

Home field is overrated. Fans don't make any noise and it's just like playing at home. I hated hearing that we were going to win all week just because of home field.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One week, you are close to a top 5 pick, the other week, you are close to winning the division. The NFC South that is, LOL :)

 

It would be funny if the Saints win the NFC South somehow and host the Seahawks as a 7-9 team and beat them, it will be deja vu in reverse from 2010 all over again :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

"Bronco's Eagles and Seahwaks no longer SB contenders"

 

Oh I disagree.  All those teams can get to the SB and win.

 

As of right now I think the Broncos still can be the #1 seed in the AFC.  Both the Pats and Broncos have similar strength schedules remaining.

 

Broncos play the...

 

Bills

@Chargers

@Bengals

Raiders

 

Patriots play...

 

@Chargers

Dolphins

@Jets

Bills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the sarcasm, but you know let's look at the colts Wins and Losses:

 

Week 1 - LOSS @ Broncos (9-3 record) Playoff Team

Week 2 - LOSS vs Eagles (9-3 Record) Playoff Team

Week 3 - WIN @ Jaguars (2-10 Record)

Week 4 - WIN vs Titans (2-10 Record)

Week 5 - WIN vs Ravens (7-5 Record)

Week 6 - WIN @ Texans (6-6 Record)

Week 7 - WIN vs Bengals (8-3-1 Record) Playoff Team

Week 8 - LOSS @ Steelers (7-5 Record)

Week 9 - WIN @ Giants (3-9 Record)

Week 10 - BYE

Week 11 - LOSS vs Patriots (9-3 Record) Playoff Team

Week 12 - WIN vs Jaguars (2-10 Record)

Week 13 - WIN vs Redskins (3-9 Record)

 

Does anyone see a pattern here?

 

Against teams with a winning record we are 2-4

 

Against current playoff teams we are 1-3

 

Against teams .500 or lower we are 6-0

 

The combined records of opponents we've beaten: 33-62-1

 

The combined records of opponents we've lost to: 34-14

 

This is a huge red flag, I don't know how everyone else feels, but I'm not overly optimistic about the 2014 Colts heading into the post season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The D and running game won the 1 SB Manning was terrible and he tossed away the SB against the Saints .

 

was he a superior QB  as opposed to a Dilfer who was on a team that won a SB that he helped get there ? the answer is yes=your statement is false. Besides, none of what I said needed to be true anyway. He was on a team,that team won a SB . He does in fact win SBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

was he a superior QB  as opposed to a Dilfer who was on a team that won a SB that he helped get there ? the answer is yes=your statement is false. Besides, none of what I said needed to be true anyway. He was on a team,that team won a SB . He does in fact win SBs.

Well if you want to put it that way my statement is not false Manning has not won SB's that would imply he has won multiple SB's not just one .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the sarcasm, but you know let's look at the colts Wins and Losses:

Week 1 - LOSS @ Broncos (9-3 record) Playoff Team

Week 2 - LOSS vs Eagles (9-3 Record) Playoff Team

Week 3 - WIN @ Jaguars (2-10 Record)

Week 4 - WIN vs Titans (2-10 Record)

Week 5 - WIN vs Ravens (7-5 Record)

Week 6 - WIN @ Texans (6-6 Record)

Week 7 - WIN vs Bengals (8-3-1 Record) Playoff Team

Week 8 - LOSS @ Steelers (7-5 Record)

Week 9 - WIN @ Giants (3-9 Record)

Week 10 - BYE

Week 11 - LOSS vs Patriots (9-3 Record) Playoff Team

Week 12 - WIN vs Jaguars (2-10 Record)

Week 13 - WIN vs Redskins (3-9 Record)

Does anyone see a pattern here?

Against teams with a winning record we are 2-4

Against current playoff teams we are 1-3

Against teams .500 or lower we are 6-0

The combined records of opponents we've beaten: 33-62-1

The combined records of opponents we've lost to: 34-14

This is a huge red flag, I don't know how everyone else feels, but I'm not overly optimistic about the 2014 Colts heading into the post season.

You could probably do that with a lot of teams. But if you came into this season expecting a SB, you were kidding yourself.
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.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The Colts part in the podcast is from 9:50 til about 13:40, so it is a short listen. He said LT is a big question. Struggled at that position since Castanzo left. Raimann has not really panned out. Need the position to be solidified. Like the Oline man from Pitt and there is a belief that he can play LT. It could mean nothing but teams do draft for next years free agent market. I believe Raimann is up for a contract and could give the Colts some flexibility if Raimann wants huge money and/or if they don't really think he is he answer moving forward and Conclaves shows something. Let be honest,  Cosell could be totally opposite of what the Colts think of Raimann as a LT.  
    • Agree in that he may have used the incorrect words in trying to get his point across.   I would have to listen to it again but I believe he did say that the Colts have basically not found their starting LT.
    • Not unless they feel that one of the Oline men they drafted could develop into a LT. They used a 3rd a 4th on Oline this year and that is what they used on Raimann when they drafted. I am not saying Raimann is trash. Like I said, a lot of people on this forum and the media are high on him and Cosell is not.  He could be some where in the middle in how the Colts feel about them. If that is true, then  I would tend to believe that he has not cemented himself as the franchise LT moving forward.
    • If he said something like 'Raimann isn't a franchise LT, but he's serviceable,' I probably wouldn't bat an eye. If he said 'they could probably improve at LT because I'm not sure Raimann will hold up,' my ears would perk up a little, but that's still a defensible opinion. Saying he has not panned out is a different story. I interpret that as meaning he thinks Raimann has played poorly, which is objectively not true.   Like you said, we can disagree on a draft prospect, and only time will tell. If someone has doubts about how someone on the team will perform in the future, that's fair. But saying Raimann has not panned out is based on what we've already seen, and in this case, I think Cosell is just wrong.    Maybe I'm taking his comment too literally. I listened to the interview, it was just one line in a broader discussion, and maybe if he was going to clarify he'd state his position differently. 
    • We would have to pick pretty high to move on from Rainmann. That would mean a bad season and that isn’t happening.  I doubt they would pay a LT in FA. That’s too much money.
  • Members

    • Catloaf

      Catloaf 408

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TheNextGM

      TheNextGM 655

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 4,673

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • holeymoley99

      holeymoley99 2,684

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Hawkeyecolt

      Hawkeyecolt 1,050

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ADnum1

      ADnum1 3,178

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • G8R

      G8R 54

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Superman

      Superman 21,033

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 17,520

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MB-ColtsFan

      MB-ColtsFan 2,666

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...