We’re not doing the Star Wars stuff again

[CheezyColt]

25 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Trent had the best oline in football, nowhere near the lateral quickness, speed, hands, or vision...Not to mention, Barkley has  great character traits, intangibles, and a much higher IQ...Nothing to compare..

All I keep hearing is Barkley is the next Adrian Peterson. I've heard that before (several times since 2012 actually). Before you say there's nothing to compare, let's note what sports outlets were saying about good ole TRich before he came out.

 

BR "So while Richardson may not be as dangerous a quick-strike weapon as Peterson is, he's actually the safer pick coming out of college".

SB Nation Mike Mayock: Trent Richardson Is The Best Running Back Prospect Since Adrian Peterson

NFL.com combine profile "Richardson is as compact and coiled an athlete that the running back position has seen since Adrian Peterson"

CBS sports "Here's the argument for Trent Richardson: He's better than Adrian Peterson."

[Smonroe]

1 minute ago, CheezyColt said:

All I keep hearing is Barkley is the next Adrian Peterson. I've heard that before (several times since 2012 actually). Before you say there's nothing to compare, let's note what sports outlets were saying about good ole TRich before he came out.

 

BR "So while Richardson may not be as dangerous a quick-strike weapon as Peterson is, he's actually the safer pick coming out of college".

SB Nation Mike Mayock: Trent Richardson Is The Best Running Back Prospect Since Adrian Peterson

NFL.com combine profile "Richardson is as compact and coiled an athlete that the running back position has seen since Adrian Peterson"

CBS sports "Here's the argument for Trent Richardson: He's better than Adrian Peterson."

 

Silly.  You can always find a bust. Jamarcus Russell is no reason not to draft any QB at 1.  

 

I’m not arguing for Barkley, but you can’t use Trent for an excuse not to draft him.  A better reason would be that even if he’s as good as Zeke we could probably get a RB later who would be almost as effective.   

[ClaytonColt]

14 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Yeah, I can’t argue against having a balanced team.  

 

I don’t want to make this a history lesson, but didnt we lose just about every playoff game during the Peyton/Dungy era because the O was stopped?   Both SD games, Pittsburgh (although there were extenuating circumstances), one of the NE games?

 

 

 

Yes, when it came to the crunch the teams we faced who were also contenders had a defense that could stop our all star offense. I suppose that's kind of the point.

 

Instead of learning from that and building a defense that could do that to the opposition we kept trying to make the offense better and better.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

[Smonroe]

30 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

Yes, when it came to the crunch the teams we faced who were also contenders had a defense that could stop our all star offense. I suppose that's kind of the point.

 

Instead of learning from that and building a defense that could do that to the opposition we kept trying to make the offense better and better.

 

Well, you could say our D in those days was built exactly right.  Built to play with the lead.  And if the O did their job we would have won several titles. I dot think anyone would argue that the Peyton offense wasn’t predictable.  Moore even said it, you know what we’re going to do but you can’t stop it.  

 

I think JB is building the D to be more balanced, not counting on having the lead. Even though the stats don’t show it, the D was pretty good last year.  

 

Getting back to the “Star Wars” discussion, if we have a balanced, effective offense, do we really need a top 5 D?  Is top 16 good enough?  

 

[ClaytonColt]

3 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Well, you could say our D in those days was built exactly right.  Built to play with the lead.  And if the O did their job we would have won several titles. I dot think anyone would argue that the Peyton offense wasn’t predictable.  Moore even said it, you know what we’re going to do but you can’t stop it.  

But then they did stop it though.

 

As for the final question...I suppose in theory yes but when we come up against teams who also have balanced, effective offenses but do have top 5 defenses as well them we shouldn't be surprised if they manage to control us better than we control them.

[Smonroe]

32 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

But then they did stop it though.

 

As for the final question...I suppose in theory yes but when we come up against teams who also have balanced, effective offenses but do have top 5 defenses as well them we shouldn't be surprised if they manage to control us better than we control them.

 

Yeah, that’s what I meant. The offense was predictable, good enough to beat most teams, not good enough to beat the elite.  Even in the SB year, the O only really performed well against the Pats. 

 

Now if you have an all pro tailback who can do it all, to go along with an all pro QB, and an innovative play caller...who needs a top D?  (J/K, don’t blow a gasket)

[ManningGM]

1 hour ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

 

More Star Wars!

The more they make the worse they get

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

The more they make the worse they get

The last one was bad I couldn't stand it 

[CheezyColt]

4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

Silly.  You can always find a bust. Jamarcus Russell is no reason not to draft any QB at 1.  

 

I’m not arguing for Barkley, but you can’t use Trent for an excuse not to draft him.  A better reason would be that even if he’s as good as Zeke we could probably get a RB later who would be almost as effective.   

Not silly. Look at the post I quoted and was responding to. JShipp was stating how much better Barkley is than T-Rich coming out, which is revisionist history at best. It sounds like we actually agree in that anyone, no matter how hyped, can bust. I have also made the same argument in regards to the value above replacement in this draft in the Chubb/Barkley debate, stating that this is a deeper draft of RBs than Edge rushers. Looks like we're on the same page. 

[Smonroe]

5 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

Not silly. Look at the post I quoted and was responding to. JShipp was stating how much better Barkley is than T-Rich coming out, which is revisionist history at best. It sounds like we actually agree in that anyone, no matter how hyped, can bust. I have also made the same argument in regards to the value above replacement in this draft in the Chubb/Barkley debate, stating that this is a deeper draft of RBs than Edge rushers. Looks like we're on the same page. 

 

My bad.  I didn’t follow the thread. I do think Barkley is better than TRich in just about every aspect but I get your point.  

[Andrew Luck fan club]

12 hours ago, ClaytonColt said:

It's a different situation because they didn't have the quarterback. We (hopefully!) do.

 

Look at the way the league is trending. It's all about building a defense that can limit the opposition or having a quarterback who can elevate the play of those around him. If you have both them you're basically the Pats. 

 

Between 2011 and 2016 we spent only 5 of a possible 18 high draft picks on defense (with 4 of those being 3rd rounders!!!) and we've basically been swimming against the tide of the NFL.

 

I've never seen a fan base so occupied with offense. It's time to look at what the Championship teams are doing and replicate it.

It’s mind numbing. 

7 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Yeah that star wars era was terrible. 

Being the last team to lose a game year after year. Usualy starting season with 6, 7, 8 wins etc. And winning the most games ever in a Decade.

Yeah one SB win while having the best quarterback ever is soo great. I mean seriously? 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 hour ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:

It’s mind numbing. 

Yeah one SB win while having the best quarterback ever is soo great. I mean seriously? 

If you recall, our many playoff losses, one & dones, WERE NOT because of our defense. We didn't exactly lose a bunch of 42-45 games.

Our Offense was responsible for its share of Blame. Peyton didn't put the points up in post season like he did in regular season. Not all on him of course, our OL struggled, were more overpowered against the better, tougher Defenses that you see in playoffs. We lost to qb's like Jay Feely, Mark Sanchez, and Billy Voltek subbing for Phillip Rivers.

 

If you don't recall, look up the scores of our losses in playoffs.

[Smonroe]

31 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

If you recall, our many playoff losses, one & dones, WERE NOT because of our defense. We didn't exactly lose a bunch of 42-45 games.

Our Offense was responsible for its share of Blame. Peyton didn't put the points up in post season like he did in regular season. Not all on him of course, our OL struggled, were more overpowered against the better, tougher Defenses that you see in playoffs. We lost to qb's like Jay Feely, Mark Sanchez, and Billy Voltek subbing for Phillip Rivers.

 

If you don't recall, look up the scores of our losses in playoffs.

 

I said basically the same thing in another thread. Even in the SB year, the only game the O excelled was against the Pats.   

[Andrew Luck fan club]

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

If you recall, our many playoff losses, one & dones, WERE NOT because of our defense. We didn't exactly lose a bunch of 42-45 games.

Our Offense was responsible for its share of Blame. Peyton didn't put the points up in post season like he did in regular season. Not all on him of course, our OL struggled, were more overpowered against the better, tougher Defenses that you see in playoffs. We lost to qb's like Jay Feely, Mark Sanchez, and Billy Voltek subbing for Phillip Rivers.

 

If you don't recall, look up the scores of our losses in playoffs.

Proved my point lol. Thanks. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

27 minutes ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:

Proved my point lol. Thanks. 

 

Yeah, caus the OL couldnt hold up. We needed and still need a OL that can do the job AND give the skill players a chance to do their job. Of course we couldn't run the ball. 

 

Did you check the scores yet?

[Fisticuffs111]

Whoops, posted in the wrong thread.

[Smonroe]

13 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

If you recall, our many playoff losses, one & dones, WERE NOT because of our defense. We didn't exactly lose a bunch of 42-45 games.

Our Offense was responsible for its share of Blame. Peyton didn't put the points up in post season like he did in regular season. Not all on him of course, our OL struggled, were more overpowered against the better, tougher Defenses that you see in playoffs. We lost to qb's like Jay Feely, Mark Sanchez, and Billy Voltek subbing for Phillip Rivers.

 

If you don't recall, look up the scores of our losses in playoffs.

 

Some here are obviously too young to get what you’re saying.  Don’t waste your time trying to explain it to them.  We’ll just go on being the uneducated dinosaurs and let them think they know it all, lol.

 

Some of those games were painful, especially the two SD games.  I think SD was 8-8 one year and barely snuck into the playoffs.  Our D played great in both games, but was worn down.  

[Andrew Luck fan club]

On 1/20/2018 at 2:33 AM, Trueman said:

I couldn't agree more. People can look back at the Peyton era with nostalgic goggles all they want , but we made massive mistakes. 

There is no way Tom Brady should be considered a better QB than Peyton - but he is , because we built our teams wrong and Dungy's defence was WAY too predictable for a certain rival all-time great QB and coach combination.

Dungy's scheme needed great players in specific positions , otherwise we'd get abused by any good team. There was no chess-match , there was no inventive schemes , no exotic blitzes , nor mixing man with zone ; there was literally nothing that masked our deficiencies or confused opposing coaches or quarterbacks. Everyone knew what we were going to run , and THE ONLY reason we won as much as we did was because of Peyton. I don't give a damn what our total defences were ranked in specific years. We all know the symbiotic relationship between offence and defence. You think that defence would have been "ranked" as high as it was (sporatically) if we had anyone other than #18 at QB? The answer is no.

We never had a great defence with Peyton , that's the truth. We had a 4 game hot streak with Booger and Bob Sanders (finally) being healthy. That's not enough to qualify as "great".

How many times did we hear announcers talk about the opposing teams running the ball on us "to keep Peyton off the field"? You think Brady had that issue?! Do you think experts are talking out of their * when they say the run game is vital in the playoffs? Or do I have to hear another asinine retort about how "we build our defence to play with a lead!".... Ugh , it makes me want to puke , another limiting philosophy by Polian....

Or " we play in a dome"! Sweet , so that means you need the best record in the AFC every year for your team to operate properly. Again - LIMITING...

Lets take a look down memory lane:

Sidenote: Keep in mind how different (worse) these stats would be if we had a QB of lesser quality. Hint : Look at the YPA

Polian/Peyton (1998)

Run defences (yards allowed/yards per attempt aka "keeping Peyton off the field) :                 

1998-  Yards allowed (YA): 2nd worst , Yards Per Attempt (YPA): Worst
1999- YA: 14th worst , YPA :  6th worst
2000- YA: 7th worst , YPA:  11th worst
2001- YA: 7th worst, YPA:  3rd worst    

Dungy arrives:

2002- YA: 13th worst, YPA: 12th worst.  Playoffs : 41-0 loss  (New York Jets, Road)  42 carries 180 yards allowed.

2003- YA :13th worst, YPA: 10th worst.  Playoffs: 41- 10 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 26 carries 146 yards 
                                                                              38-31 Win ( Kansas City , Road) 30 carries 196 yards
                                                                              24-14 Loss (New England, Road) 32 carries 112 yards                        

2004- YA: 9th worst, YPA: 2nd worst.   Playoffs: 49-24 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 21 carries 78 yards
                                                                             20-3 Loss (New England, Road) 39 carries 210 yards (we had 46)

2005-  YA : 16th , YPA: 5th worst.        Playoffs:  21- 18 Loss (Steelers @ the Dome) 42 carries 112 yards
(Pittsburgh had 10 more minutes of possession , and Ben made 14 pass completions, LOL)

2006- YA: Worst, YPA: Worst (#18 is incredible) Playoffs: 23-8 Win (KC @ the Dome) 17 carries 44 yards
                                                                                          15-6 Win (Baltimore, Road)  20 carries 83 yards
                                                                                          38-34 Win (New England @ the Dome) 24 carries 93 yards
                                                                                          29-17 Win (Chicago , Superbowl) 19 carries 111 yards

2007: YA: 15th , YPA : 7th Best            Playoffs:  28-24 Loss (San Diego @ the Dome) 33 carries 99 yards (we had 44)

2008: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 13th Worst   Playoffs: 23-17 Loss (San Diego, Road) 33 carries 167 yards (we had 64) 

2009: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 14th Worst  Playoffs: 20-3 Win (Baltimore @ the Dome) 19 carries 87 yards (we had 42)
                                                                             30-17 Win ( Jets @ the Dome) 29 carries 86 yards
                                                                             31-17 Loss (Saints , Superbowl) 18 carries 51 yards (Brees 32 of 39)

2010: YA: 8th Worst , YPA: 7th Worst Playoffs:  17-16 Loss ( Jets, @ the Dome) 38 carries 169 yards

Peyton is injured for the year /Polian's final:
 
2011: YA: 4th Worst , YPA 17th

Now, this doesn't include the simplistic nature of our pass-defence either , but I thought it was a pretty good indication on what #18 had to overcome.

Conversely, lets look at Brady:

2001:  YA: 13th worst , YPA: 11 worst.  Playoffs : Win (77 yards Oakland), Win (58 yards Pittsburgh) Win (90 yards St.Louis). Superbowl Ring

2002: YA 2nd worst , YPA 4th worst    Miss the Playoffs. .... Oh, wonder why?

2003: YA 4th best, YPA 6th best.    Playoffs : Win (84 yards Titans) , Win (98 yards Colts) , Win ( 92 yards Carolina)
Superbowl Ring

2004: YA 6th Best, YPA 11th best.     Playoffs: Win (46 yards Colts) , Win (163 yards Pittsburgh), Win (45 yards Philly)

You guessed it , Superbowl.

2005: YA: 8th best , YPA:  4th Best . Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2006: YA: 5th best , YPA: 10th Best.  Playoffs: Lose to Colts

2007: YA:10th best, YPA: 5th Worst  Lose to Giants in SB

2008: YA: 15th, YPA: 15th  go 11-5 with Matt Cassel LOL

2009: YA: 13th Best, YPA: 10th Worst.   Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore

2010: YA: 11th Best , YPA: 15th.   Playoffs: Lose to Jets

2011: YA: 17th, YPA: 8th Worst.   Playoffs: Lose to Giants in SB

2012: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 6th Best.  Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore

2013: YA: 3rd Worst, YPA: 7th Worst.  Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2014: YA: 9th Best, 10th best.     Playoffs: Win SB vs Seattle

2015: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 15th  Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2016: YA: 4th Best,  YPA: 10th Best.  Playoffs: Win Superbowl                                              

2017: YA: 17th , YPA: 2nd Worst. Playoffs: TBD


You know why we won the Super Bowl? Because Polian FINALLY got a good DT (Booger), after years and years and years. He finally used another avenue besides the draft to get a good player. What a novel idea! Imagine if the Patriots only relied on the draft for a decade ? Jesus, there's no chance Belichick would limit himself like that.--It's asanine. 

Polian's refusal to be creative in the free agent or trade market , Dungy's beyond basic and player-reliant Tampa 2 , our over-investment in skill positions, Polian's reliance on the draft for improvement EVERY YEAR - (which means when he had a poor draft WE DIDN'T IMPROVE ---outside of existing players improving).

I could go on and on, but it boils down to Belichick being far more intelligent than Dungy and Polian. Every year the Patriots would make bold moves and reinvent themselves , while we continued to the same thing over and over , putting everything on Peyton's shoulders.

You guys can look back at Peyton's time and want to replicate it all you want. And to some extent I understand that , because it beats the hell out of the Grigson/Pagano/Luck era , but we should look back at that time fondly AND critically. There's a lot of mistakes, we as fans, and the Colts organization itself,  can learn from that era if we choose to.

I'm * off that Peyton won't be unanimously thought of as the best of all-time , because personally, I think it could've been prevented.

And another thing , I think Andrew still has the potential to be the best QB in the game. How about we don't make the same mistakes?

You surround a great QB with a defence and an O-line, and you can win anytime , anywhere. We shouldn't have to bank on getting homefield throughout every year. It's limited thinking.

Build your damn team to win on any field , in any city.



 

Great post, and seeing logic like this in here is a breathe of fresh air. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

3 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

Some here are obviously too young to get what you’re saying.  Don’t waste your time trying to explain it to them.  We’ll just go on being the uneducated dinosaurs and let them think they know it all, lol.

 

Some of those games were painful, especially the two SD games.  I think SD was 8-8 one year and barely snuck into the playoffs.  Our D played great in both games, but was worn down.  

Those SD games were indeed painful, and my Colts caps wardrobe became thinner because of them lol.

[aaron11]

On 1/20/2018 at 10:29 AM, CheezyColt said:

All I keep hearing is Barkley is the next Adrian Peterson. I've heard that before (several times since 2012 actually). Before you say there's nothing to compare, let's note what sports outlets were saying about good ole TRich before he came out.

 

BR "So while Richardson may not be as dangerous a quick-strike weapon as Peterson is, he's actually the safer pick coming out of college".

SB Nation Mike Mayock: Trent Richardson Is The Best Running Back Prospect Since Adrian Peterson

NFL.com combine profile "Richardson is as compact and coiled an athlete that the running back position has seen since Adrian Peterson"

CBS sports "Here's the argument for Trent Richardson: He's better than Adrian Peterson."

you could find examples from every position like this

 

[CF4L]

I agree I don't care for the Star Wars stuff again. Great offenses are fun to watch but that's about it. 

 

It doesn't win many championships if any.

 

If its about rings you want a more balanced team, better coaching a team that doesn't live and die by the QB like the Colts have. 

 

Of course Jimbo said all this and the franchise got worse but hey he probably thinks we forgot.

 

 

[GoColts8818]

Really?  I was kinda hoping that our young Jedi Andrew would fly his football in and revenge his Jedi Master Peyton by blowing up the Evil Empire and Darth Hoodius.  

[i am yoda]

On 1/18/2018 at 10:00 PM, NorthernBlue said:

The fact of the matter is, great QBs like Luck don't need studs in every offensive skill position to succeed. Great QBs elevate those around them.

 

Just look at the 2014 Colts. Lucks RBs were TRich and an older Bradshaw. His TEs were Fleener and Allen. His WRs were TY, a rookie Crief, and an older Hakeem Nicks and Reggie Wayne. 

 

None of those guys besides TY are real stars, and haven't done much since that year. 

 

Sure, surrounding Luck with star receivers, a stud RB, and a do it all TE would stack his stats and win some games. But giving him an elite D that can win games even when the offence isn't clicking, would win championships.

 

Truth!

 

A good O-line and a stout defense equals perennial contenders.

[i am yoda]

On 1/20/2018 at 11:09 AM, Smonroe said:

 

Well, you could say our D in those days was built exactly right.  Built to play with the lead.  And if the O did their job we would have won several titles. I dot think anyone would argue that the Peyton offense wasn’t predictable.  Moore even said it, you know what we’re going to do but you can’t stop it.  

 

I think JB is building the D to be more balanced, not counting on having the lead. Even though the stats don’t show it, the D was pretty good last year.  

 

Getting back to the “Star Wars” discussion, if we have a balanced, effective offense, do we really need a top 5 D?  Is top 16 good enough?  

 

 

If you have an O-line than can keep Luck safe, you can have average skill position players.  There are usually plenty to be found in the mid-rounds of the draft.  Stack the O-line.  Build the defense.

[i am yoda]

On 1/20/2018 at 2:33 AM, Trueman said:

I couldn't agree more. People can look back at the Peyton era with nostalgic goggles all they want , but we made massive mistakes. 

There is no way Tom Brady should be considered a better QB than Peyton - but he is , because we built our teams wrong and Dungy's defence was WAY too predictable for a certain rival all-time great QB and coach combination.

Dungy's scheme needed great players in specific positions , otherwise we'd get abused by any good team. There was no chess-match , there was no inventive schemes , no exotic blitzes , nor mixing man with zone ; there was literally nothing that masked our deficiencies or confused opposing coaches or quarterbacks. Everyone knew what we were going to run , and THE ONLY reason we won as much as we did was because of Peyton. I don't give a damn what our total defences were ranked in specific years. We all know the symbiotic relationship between offence and defence. You think that defence would have been "ranked" as high as it was (sporatically) if we had anyone other than #18 at QB? The answer is no.

We never had a great defence with Peyton , that's the truth. We had a 4 game hot streak with Booger and Bob Sanders (finally) being healthy. That's not enough to qualify as "great".

How many times did we hear announcers talk about the opposing teams running the ball on us "to keep Peyton off the field"? You think Brady had that issue?! Do you think experts are talking out of their * when they say the run game is vital in the playoffs? Or do I have to hear another asinine retort about how "we build our defence to play with a lead!".... Ugh , it makes me want to puke , another limiting philosophy by Polian....

Or " we play in a dome"! Sweet , so that means you need the best record in the AFC every year for your team to operate properly. Again - LIMITING...

Lets take a look down memory lane:

Sidenote: Keep in mind how different (worse) these stats would be if we had a QB of lesser quality. Hint : Look at the YPA

Polian/Peyton (1998)

Run defences (yards allowed/yards per attempt aka "keeping Peyton off the field) :                 

1998-  Yards allowed (YA): 2nd worst , Yards Per Attempt (YPA): Worst
1999- YA: 14th worst , YPA :  6th worst
2000- YA: 7th worst , YPA:  11th worst
2001- YA: 7th worst, YPA:  3rd worst    

Dungy arrives:

2002- YA: 13th worst, YPA: 12th worst.  Playoffs : 41-0 loss  (New York Jets, Road)  42 carries 180 yards allowed.

2003- YA :13th worst, YPA: 10th worst.  Playoffs: 41- 10 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 26 carries 146 yards 
                                                                              38-31 Win ( Kansas City , Road) 30 carries 196 yards
                                                                              24-14 Loss (New England, Road) 32 carries 112 yards                        

2004- YA: 9th worst, YPA: 2nd worst.   Playoffs: 49-24 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 21 carries 78 yards
                                                                             20-3 Loss (New England, Road) 39 carries 210 yards (we had 46)

2005-  YA : 16th , YPA: 5th worst.        Playoffs:  21- 18 Loss (Steelers @ the Dome) 42 carries 112 yards
(Pittsburgh had 10 more minutes of possession , and Ben made 14 pass completions, LOL)

2006- YA: Worst, YPA: Worst (#18 is incredible) Playoffs: 23-8 Win (KC @ the Dome) 17 carries 44 yards
                                                                                          15-6 Win (Baltimore, Road)  20 carries 83 yards
                                                                                          38-34 Win (New England @ the Dome) 24 carries 93 yards
                                                                                          29-17 Win (Chicago , Superbowl) 19 carries 111 yards

2007: YA: 15th , YPA : 7th Best            Playoffs:  28-24 Loss (San Diego @ the Dome) 33 carries 99 yards (we had 44)

2008: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 13th Worst   Playoffs: 23-17 Loss (San Diego, Road) 33 carries 167 yards (we had 64) 

2009: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 14th Worst  Playoffs: 20-3 Win (Baltimore @ the Dome) 19 carries 87 yards (we had 42)
                                                                             30-17 Win ( Jets @ the Dome) 29 carries 86 yards
                                                                             31-17 Loss (Saints , Superbowl) 18 carries 51 yards (Brees 32 of 39)

2010: YA: 8th Worst , YPA: 7th Worst Playoffs:  17-16 Loss ( Jets, @ the Dome) 38 carries 169 yards

Peyton is injured for the year /Polian's final:
 
2011: YA: 4th Worst , YPA 17th

Now, this doesn't include the simplistic nature of our pass-defence either , but I thought it was a pretty good indication on what #18 had to overcome.

Conversely, lets look at Brady:

2001:  YA: 13th worst , YPA: 11 worst.  Playoffs : Win (77 yards Oakland), Win (58 yards Pittsburgh) Win (90 yards St.Louis). Superbowl Ring

2002: YA 2nd worst , YPA 4th worst    Miss the Playoffs. .... Oh, wonder why?

2003: YA 4th best, YPA 6th best.    Playoffs : Win (84 yards Titans) , Win (98 yards Colts) , Win ( 92 yards Carolina)
Superbowl Ring

2004: YA 6th Best, YPA 11th best.     Playoffs: Win (46 yards Colts) , Win (163 yards Pittsburgh), Win (45 yards Philly)

You guessed it , Superbowl.

2005: YA: 8th best , YPA:  4th Best . Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2006: YA: 5th best , YPA: 10th Best.  Playoffs: Lose to Colts

2007: YA:10th best, YPA: 5th Worst  Lose to Giants in SB

2008: YA: 15th, YPA: 15th  go 11-5 with Matt Cassel LOL

2009: YA: 13th Best, YPA: 10th Worst.   Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore

2010: YA: 11th Best , YPA: 15th.   Playoffs: Lose to Jets

2011: YA: 17th, YPA: 8th Worst.   Playoffs: Lose to Giants in SB

2012: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 6th Best.  Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore

2013: YA: 3rd Worst, YPA: 7th Worst.  Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2014: YA: 9th Best, 10th best.     Playoffs: Win SB vs Seattle

2015: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 15th  Playoffs: Lose to Denver

2016: YA: 4th Best,  YPA: 10th Best.  Playoffs: Win Superbowl                                              

2017: YA: 17th , YPA: 2nd Worst. Playoffs: TBD


You know why we won the Super Bowl? Because Polian FINALLY got a good DT (Booger), after years and years and years. He finally used another avenue besides the draft to get a good player. What a novel idea! Imagine if the Patriots only relied on the draft for a decade ? Jesus, there's no chance Belichick would limit himself like that.--It's asanine. 

Polian's refusal to be creative in the free agent or trade market , Dungy's beyond basic and player-reliant Tampa 2 , our over-investment in skill positions, Polian's reliance on the draft for improvement EVERY YEAR - (which means when he had a poor draft WE DIDN'T IMPROVE ---outside of existing players improving).

I could go on and on, but it boils down to Belichick being far more intelligent than Dungy and Polian. Every year the Patriots would make bold moves and reinvent themselves , while we continued to the same thing over and over , putting everything on Peyton's shoulders.

You guys can look back at Peyton's time and want to replicate it all you want. And to some extent I understand that , because it beats the hell out of the Grigson/Pagano/Luck era , but we should look back at that time fondly AND critically. There's a lot of mistakes, we as fans, and the Colts organization itself,  can learn from that era if we choose to.

I'm * off that Peyton won't be unanimously thought of as the best of all-time , because personally, I think it could've been prevented.

And another thing , I think Andrew still has the potential to be the best QB in the game. How about we don't make the same mistakes?

You surround a great QB with a defence and an O-line, and you can win anytime , anywhere. We shouldn't have to bank on getting homefield throughout every year. It's limited thinking.

Build your damn team to win on any field , in any city.



 

 

Best post I've seen!!

 

Exactly right!

[aaron11]

not sure i agree with this thread

 

we had the better team in 2005 and 2009, we just lost the lost games.  we had some bad luck with injuries to freeney and harper

[George Peterson]

On 1/18/2018 at 9:59 PM, Four2itus said:

I wouldn't trade my Colt experience for the Pats experience. I like the way this team operates. I like the typical type of humans we go after. 

 

I would be the happiest guy alive to re-live what we lived from 1999-2008. Call it Star Wars or anything you want, but it was the best era of Colts football in my life. 

 

Please....give me some more of that!!!

Trying to move into the future while being unable to let go of the past is not productive.

 

Andrew Luck is not Peyton Manning.  This is not 2004.  League defensive schemes have tightened and caught up with the way the Colts were running the offense, and Peyton is no longer here to be so dynamic and intelligent a quarterback that he could overcome that. 

 

Not trying to throw stones at Luck, but he just doesn't have the benefit of Peyton's experience.  He needs a bit more help than we're giving him right now.

[throwing BBZ]

On 1/20/2018 at 10:36 AM, Smonroe said:

 

Silly.  You can always find a bust. Jamarcus Russell is no reason not to draft any QB at 1.  

 

I’m not arguing for Barkley, but you can’t use Trent for an excuse not to draft him.  A better reason would be that even if he’s as good as Zeke we could probably get a RB later who would be almost as effective.   

 

 Shipp believes Barkley is already a cross between Bo Jackson and Barry Sanders.
 Richardson LOOKED Great in college. But i didn't say he was the next Walter Payton. Show me.

  Barkley has some excellent tools. He may be Marshall Faulk with a little more power. lol
  Would Faulk have survived all the touches he got with today's defenders? I'm selling on that.

[Four2itus]

1 hour ago, George Peterson said:

Trying to move into the future while being unable to let go of the past is not productive.

 

Andrew Luck is not Peyton Manning.  This is not 2004.  League defensive schemes have tightened and caught up with the way the Colts were running the offense, and Peyton is no longer here to be so dynamic and intelligent a quarterback that he could overcome that. 

 

Not trying to throw stones at Luck, but he just doesn't have the benefit of Peyton's experience.  He needs a bit more help than we're giving him right now.

All good  points, but nothing to do with what I wrote...or how I feel. My post was in response to a thread title that made the past accomplishments appear less than desirable...or that it was somehow lessened from what could have been. I defended it with all my being...and it was truth.

 

I dont even know where the comparisons between Manning and Luck came from...you're barking up the wrong tree there.....

 

The OP has since attempted to change his stance, and I think it was a good idea. 

 

For clarity, I am not living in the past. Far from it. But I will not stand idle and ignore commentary by those who have not spent decades rooting for, supporting, and believing in a team that reached it's pinnacle in 2006, and did it in a way that was classy, respectful, and something to be proud of...when they either purposefully or inadvertently disrespect that which was accomplished. 

 

 

[jshipp23]

Yeah it's horrible strategy to have an offense that can score a lot of points....smh...Lets try and become a ground and pound team which they have tried for 6 years now...I think Ballard is smart enough to change directions...Oh, and just because you have a dynamic offense doesn't mean your defense has to be trash..We can have a star wars offense and still build a good defense..The NFL has changed a lot as far as salary cap, it's possible to pay top guys on both sides without sacrificing one...You want to protect Luck give him an elite RB to lean on sometimes instead of having to do it all himself...DRAFT BARKLEY,  sign Norwell, sign 1 of Landry ,Amendola,Robinson, Watkins, and possibly Jimmy Graham...Instantly we have a top 5 offense...Then go all out on defense, sign Ansah or Lawrence, Sign Zach Brown at ILB, Resign Melvin, Desir, and Mingo..Draft defense rds 2-7..Now we will finally have a New coach who can actually gameplan week to week,, and a much needed culture change in our soft as cotton locker room from Pagano disaster..Bam, now we are cooking,  we are contending next year...If we can't get Ansah or Lawrence draft edge in 2nd round pretty simple stuff, and we have cap and draft assets to do all this..Then the next draft our defense can once again be the focus with maybe a tackle and guard mixed in...

[George Peterson]

The problem isn't the offense.  The problem is the lack of balance.  Sooner or later you're going to run into a team in the playoffs that can stop you in the short term and that's going to be enough to end your postseason.  That happened to the Colts more than a few times.

 

If you're going to overload the offense and stack your talent there, you need a good DC and a strong team ethic on defense, and the ability to pick talent off the trash heap and make it work.  Neglecting defense entirely in the name of offense won't get you deep into the postseason where good defenses have an advantage.

 

I'd rather put McDaniels' offensive playcalling to the test with lesser receivers, like he's used to working with in New England, and stack the D.  It won't be as dynamic, but I bet that team would win more playoff games.

[CheezyColt]

So we just need to sign the best OL, best WR, best pass rusher, and top ILB on the market this year while re-signing our own best free agents? Simple enough.

[jshipp23]

15 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

So we just need to sign the best OL, best WR, best pass rusher, and top ILB on the market this year while re-signing our own best free agents? Simple enough.

Yes...I think offensive players will want to come here and play with Luck in McDaniels system..It may be harder to lure the top defensive players in free agency, but we can focus defense heavy in draft next few years..It's not at all a stretch to think we can get Norwell, one of the top 5 wrs, and Graham..Graham can play the Gronk role in this system, and New England has had success with 2 quality tight ends Gronk/Hernandez-Gronk/Bennett, so Doyle will still get his looks as well, and both can play together...To get them signed we are looking at about 40 million..Still leaves us enough to sign melvin, desir, vinatieri, mingo and still get Lawrence or Ansah with plenty of cap left..Keep in mind most free agents we sign are getting 3-4 yr front loaded deals which will come off books as draft picks develop..Long term rebuilds don't work in NFL.. Too many things to factor in, not like NBA or MLB..When you have a franchise guy at QB you don't want to waste a lot of years rebuilding solely through the draft, always should be win now Mentality while we have Luck...

[ClaytonColt]

35 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

So we just need to sign the best OL, best WR, best pass rusher, and top ILB on the market this year while re-signing our own best free agents? Simple enough.

I any figure out why every team doesn't just sign the best half dozen free agents on the market. Duh! These GMs eh?

[SteelCityColt]

On 19/01/2018 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Luck fan club said:

You’re so dense. I’d use another word but this place is rated PG for all the snowflakes. 

 

But snowflakes are beautiful and unique...

 

Yes it is PG forum as you put it as we want to be family friendly and open up the community to posters of all backgrounds.

 

If you have concerns with the rules, posting about them isn’t the right way to go about it, PM one of the Mod team instead please. 

 

 

[jshipp23]

6 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

I any figure out why every team doesn't just sign the best half dozen free agents on the market. Duh! These GMs eh?

Yeah, we shouldn't try...Just draft Chubb and sign a bunch of mid-level free agents and find that franchise RB in 4th round....Keep about 45 million put back in salary cap every year and  hope we hit on multiple draft picks next 3 yrs....Then when Luck is 34 we might contend....

[ClaytonColt]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Yeah, we shouldn't try...Just draft Chubb and sign a bunch of mid-level free agents and find that franchise RB in 4th round....Keep about 45 million put back in salary cap every year and  hope we hit on multiple draft picks next 3 yrs....Then when Luck is 34 we might contend....

No. We should definitely try....just not sure we can base our future dealings and strategy on it actually happening.

[jshipp23]

Just now, ClaytonColt said:

No. We should definitely try....just not sure we can base our future dealings and strategy on it actually happening.

Good thing draft is after free agency.....I just once would  like  see us get a few of the top tier free agents...This  year we have the cap to be aggressive...Rather  overpay for quality and add a few difference makers...