Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Pack Loss Strangely Familiar....and D Still Wins Games


cmgww

Recommended Posts

Anyone else feel today's GB loss felt eerily familiar to, say, 2005?? Colts rolled through the season, got homefield and rested, then came out rusty and out of synch against the Steelers, who (like the Giants) had to fight their way in as a wild card team. And they lost at home. The difference was at least in 2005 the Colts D was good enough to keep it close. This one was really never close, esp. in the 2nd half. I know Dungy's son's death cast a big pall over late 2005 and maybe that had something to do with the game, but something said on the NFL Network stuck with me. Aaron Rodgers hadn't played since CHRISTMAS DAY. In 2005 Manning played a bit in the final two games but not much more...

Just a thought. Not trying to start a "rest or play" debate.....

And another thing....for all the offensive fireworks this season and the talk that the old "defense wins championships" mantra is dead, only one top offensive team remains in the playoffs. The Pats. The Saints, Packers, both done....Both beaten by superior defenses. The Pats' D seems to be coming together so they may have what it takes to win it all. But then again they beat the Broncos, so we'll see. The Ravens have a great D and decent offense but no one is calling them the 2nd coming of the Packers (today excluded). The 49ers smothered the Saints with great defensive secondary play and a solid running game (143 yards to Saints 37) and some big pass plays. Defense still wins in the playoffs, and that's been really evident this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else feel today's GB loss felt eerily familiar to, say, 2005?? Colts rolled through the season, got homefield and rested, then came out rusty and out of synch against the Steelers, who (like the Giants) had to fight their way in as a wild card team. And they lost at home. The difference was at least in 2005 the Colts D was good enough to keep it close. This one was really never close, esp. in the 2nd half. I know Dungy's son's death cast a big pall over late 2005 and maybe that had something to do with the game, but something said on the NFL Network stuck with me. Aaron Rodgers hadn't played since CHRISTMAS DAY. In 2005 Manning played a bit in the final two games but not much more...

Just a thought. Not trying to start a "rest or play" debate.....

And another thing....for all the offensive fireworks this season and the talk that the old "defense wins championships" mantra is dead, only one top offensive team remains in the playoffs. The Pats. The Saints, Packers, both done....Both beaten by superior defenses. The Pats' D seems to be coming together so they may have what it takes to win it all. But then again they beat the Broncos, so we'll see. The Ravens have a great D and decent offense but no one is calling them the 2nd coming of the Packers (today excluded). The 49ers smothered the Saints with great defensive secondary play and a solid running game (143 yards to Saints 37) and some big pass plays. Defense still wins in the playoffs, and that's been really evident this weekend.

It's funny that you should think of this without even mentioning the most obvious similarity - which is what I assumed the thread was about. The Packers played without their offensive co-ordinator whose son just died. Drowned in a lake - took them a day or so to find the body and confirm it. Just like in 2005, I can't imagine that something like that wouldn't have a negative impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny that you should think of this without even mentioning the most obvious similarity - which is what I assumed the thread was about. The Packers played without their offensive co-ordinator whose son just died. Drowned in a lake - took them a day or so to find the body and confirm it. Just like in 2005, I can't imagine that something like that wouldn't have a negative impact.

I thought they had suffered a tragedy...but couldnt remember for sure it was the Packers when I posted

Sad indeed and a spooky parallel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

told ya D wins games in NFL playoffs

where are the haters now?

no matter who your QB is, D wins games.

peace out haters!!!

Who is it you're talking to?

Of course defense can win games, or not, either way really.

Explain to me, in your rock solid theory, how do you explain the Packers having a 15-1 record with the worst defense in the league?

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but you sound a little conceited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

told ya D wins games in NFL playoffs

where are the haters now?

no matter who your QB is, D wins games.

peace out haters!!!

Oh yeah - you told us. Nevermind the fact that SF scored 36 and NY scored 37 this week. And it's not like SF crushed the Saints - they scored 32 and the game went down to the wire. GB didn't execute on plays they normally do.

You need both - a good defense and a good offense. If you can't score some points you will not win. If you look back over the past decade the only team that won on defense alone (pretty average offense) was Baltimore. If you look at the Pats, the Steelers, the Colts, the Buccaneers, the Saints, the Giants and the Packers they all had good to great offenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is it you're talking to?

Of course defense can win games, or not, either way really.

Explain to me, in your rock solid theory, how do you explain the Packers having a 15-1 record with the worst defense in the league?

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but you sound a little conceited.

and yet he's still wrong because he uses total yards on defense, yet no coaches do.

GB was 1st in takeways. They had big leads. Of course the defense relaxed with passing today and gave up yards.They still won.

NE ranks 31st in yards. Yet they are tied for 2nd in ints,3rd in takeways,21st in red zone, and 15th in PA. (GB was 19th).

I've said NE defense was good and above avg since game 3 and I still stand by that. Cus I watch the games. I see where they "consistently" make the plays to help win games.

Anyone who thinks NE has the worst defense missed the boat a long time ago:)

So he hasn't told us anything yet;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reminded me more of the Giants-Pats SB than anything else.

The Giants are hot, and a very dangerous team to play. And the offense is better than it was in '07. Hakeem Nicks is simply amazing and Eli is playing the best football of his career. As much as part of me would love to see the Pats get another shot at them (and I'm not looking past Baltimore at all), the other side wants no part of it. Either way, the NFC representative will have an outstanding defense and a potentially explosive offense, and should have the edge in the big one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and yet he's still wrong because he uses total yards on defense, yet no coaches do.

GB was 1st in takeways. They had big leads. Of course the defense relaxed with passing today and gave up yards.They still won.

NE ranks 31st in yards. Yet they are tied for 2nd in ints,3rd in takeways,21st in red zone, and 15th in PA. (GB was 19th).

I've said NE defense was good and above avg since game 3 and I still stand by that. Cus I watch the games. I see where they "consistently" make the plays to help win games.

Anyone who thinks NE has the worst defense missed the boat a long time ago:)

So he hasn't told us anything yet;-)

Brady said it best. To paraphrase...

During the 3/4 SB years, the Patriots foundation was as a solid defensive team with an offense that played well in the situational sense. (Like the game-winning drive against the Rams.)

Now, it's the opposite. The team is built on offense, but the defense plays solid situational football when needed. Whether that's a takeway, a big stop, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brady said it best. To paraphrase...

During the 3/4 SB years, the Patriots foundation was as a solid defensive team with an offense that played well in the situational sense. (Like the game-winning drive against the Rams.)

Now, it's the opposite. The team is built on offense, but the defense plays solid situational football when needed. Whether that's a takeway, a big stop, etc.

I missed him saying that. A good analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is it you're talking to?

Of course defense can win games, or not, either way really.

Explain to me, in your rock solid theory, how do you explain the Packers having a 15-1 record with the worst defense in the league?

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but you sound a little conceited.

read the responses in this thread after your post.

D wins games. period.

Giants, NE, SF and Baltimore are all defensive oriented teams and been like that throughout their history. Aside maybe from Frisco in the 80's. but even that had amazing defense. That is why these teams are here in the championship games.

When it comes to playoffs D wins games, not O and not anything else you gonna try to say.

and yes i agree with what the other poster said and what Brady said - NE won all their SB's because of their D.

and there is nothing that you or anyone can do that will prove me wrong.

D baby!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is it you're talking to?

Of course defense can win games, or not, either way really.

Explain to me, in your rock solid theory, how do you explain the Packers having a 15-1 record with the worst defense in the league?

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but you sound a little conceited.

It was not the "worst defense". It was #19 in the most important defensive stat, scoring. It was #1 in the 2nd most important, turnovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Camparable to a .300 hitter going into a sudden slump and cn't get out of it.Today you can hit any ball pitched, tomorrow you will need a tennis racket. In football it is a collective breakdown and to me it is unexplainable and always will be. "Godd days and bad days"- they plague us all. Like bowling or shooting pool I personally have gone through agonizing days where I looked like a cow playing when the day before I was like a razor through butter. It all comes from the brain-to-the-body, sometime they connect and sometimes they don't!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and when Colts won the SB, it was the D that won all those playoff games. Peyton was secondary to our sucess in 06.

Yes - the defense could have beaten the Patriots all by themselves. I don't know why the offense even showed up! /sarcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - the defense could have beaten the Patriots all by themselves. I don't know why the offense even showed up! /sarcasm

the defense shut out NE in the second half. That's why Indy won that game.

baltimore was shut out, I think we also played Denver and we shut them down. and in the big game, Chicago couldnt do squat on offense.

Manning and the offense was secondary in our SB win.

There is nothing u can do or say that will prove me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No...28..

You're arguing against the sun coming up in the morning...

In the last 5 years..6 of the Super Bowl teams were offense-dominated squads

Green Bay..NOLA....Arizona, New England and Indy twice....

The game has changed...with the no defense rules and indoor play..

You have to have a big time offense to reach the title game..and you can get there with a middle-of-the road (Indy, GB, NOLA) defense..

Manning and our offense controlled the ball in our Super Bowl win. It ceratinly was not a defensive showcase....and the game was played in the rain..

..and its how you get there..not how you play when you do..

Its an offensive game..

I'll bet that both teams scored at least 28 in Indy in 3 weeks and I wont find anyone who will take that bet.//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a defensive game, and it will always be a defensive game. I dont care what you are trying to say.

D wins games and is the most important factor in winning games. NFL is built on defense.

Your examples of what happened last few years are irrelevant.

The history of this game outweights your comments of idiocracy and stupidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a defensive game, and it will always be a defensive game. I dont care what you are trying to say.

D wins games and is the most important factor in winning games. NFL is built on defense.

Your examples of what happened last few years are irrelevant.

The history of this game outweights your comments of idiocracy and stupidity.

It simply isnt a defensive game anymore..

NOLA shreded SF's top-rated defense..and SF needed 36 points to win...

the NYGs needed 37 points.

You're saying the sun doesn't shine..that water isnt wet...

the last few years are when we've seen the most change.....

..and I notice you didnt challenge the 28-28 minimum for the SB

Its all about the 'O' and we all know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and Giants, Green Bay and NE are defensive oriented teams and always will be that way.

your only decent points are Arizona and NO. Wow you made a case for 2 teams.

try again and this time make it good.

Green bay is a defense-oriented team,

Really?

I guess you missed Sunday's game...and the 16 before it...

or Drew Brees 5500 yards... or Brady's 5000..

You're blowin' in the wind here...

the game has changed..watch any college bowl games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB forced the most turnovers this year and won pretty much every game because their defense. They also have some of the most dominant defensive players around.

Big whoop they allow much yards. Your point is still stale. There are many people here that will back me on the greatness of GB defense and also what it did for them last year.

Let me ask you, mr. offense, if a team wins 55 - 7, who won that game? O or D?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB forced the most turnovers this year and won pretty much every game because their defense. They also have some of the most dominant defensive players around.

Big whoop they allow much yards. Your point is still stale. There are many people here that will back me on the greatness of GB defense and also what it did for them last year.

Let me ask you, mr. offense, if a team wins 55 - 7, who won that game? O or D?

depends on the game...what game are we referring to...

was it 55-0 at the half,,..or 7-7 after 3 quarters....too simplistic a question

all rules changes lately have boosted the offense....

To say that GB won 'pretty much' because of their defense means I suspect you're kidding... :ashamed:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

read the title of this thread and read what the OP wrote.

I am done arguing with you, as you seem to be missing the point and just wanna argue and prove some pathetic little point that Offense wins games.

That is absurd.

Imagine that, Offense wins games? lol, its laughable at best.

It should be like, "Offense wins games?" COMON MAN!!!

hahahahahahahaa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and 55 - 0 at the half = defense is the reason for that win

7 - 7 after 3 quarters = defense is the reason for that also..

Eitherway you slice it, dice it etc..That question was very simple and you failed to answer it.

You are bias to what ESPN says and you can't formulate reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There isnt an arguement anymore...That's what Im trying to say...

5,500 Brees..5,000 Brady.....Even Tim Tebow was on the field for TDs..

Packers drop 8 passes.....gain 400 yards......but defense wins?

You are arguing against snow in the in winter time. You may not like it but its in your face

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and 55 - 0 at the half = defense is the reason for that win

7 - 7 after 3 quarters = defense is the reason for that also..

Eitherway you slice it, dice it etc..That question was very simple and you failed to answer it.

You are bias to what ESPN says and you can't formulate reality.

I thouhgt you were done, 28??? :nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and 55 - 0 at the half = defense is the reason for that win

7 - 7 after 3 quarters = defense is the reason for that also..

Eitherway you slice it, dice it etc..That question was very simple and you failed to answer it.

You are bias to what ESPN says and you can't formulate reality.

You need to stay away from cliches...like 'Defense wins"

or 'Either way you slice it"

............in the 55-0 game...WRONG...the offense obviously held the ball the vast majority of the half..

This is football we're talking about right...?

You know we're not talkin basketball, right?

..all rules changes favor offense....You havent mentioned one that didnt.

I'll watch ESPN,..,you clearaly have been watching the oldies channel.

Dick "Night Train' Lane..what a player, huh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a team wins 55-10 then the defense allowed the offense to have all those drives to score those points by getting off the field.

Its true offense has increased by more favorable passing rules which produces higher scores in the final result. However that doesn't nullify what a defense means. It may not be as dominant as years past but it still matters.

As long as 28 says NE actually does have a defense because he doesn't use the ridiculous NFL ranking of yards,I'll support him:)

If NE's defense didn't make key stops,turnovers,red zone defense they don't win as many games and lose the seeding.

I understand to a point fans pointing out NFL rankings based on meaningless yards but to see ex-coaches and players in the media do so makes me wonder how much of football they've forgot.

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.
×
×
  • Create New...