Doc Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Why clean house? They have a great chance at 1st overall and Luck next year, and can begin the process all over again.
8-8 Forever? Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 I would be surprised by a clean sweep of house. They are playing horrible but that was expected. They built this team around Manning. They cannot win without him. Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter, Dan Orvlosky? Ugh. Alot of teams would struggle to win games with these guys at QB but 62-7? Thats not because of QB play When your No. 1 makes $20+m per season, your have nothing left for a backup. You take the risk Manning is indestructible . Which he has been for all but this year. Pretty good bet. I just hope they keep betting on him. That way, they don't draft a QB.
NoSaint Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 The crappy tampa 2 works if your offense is powerful and gets you a lead that forces the opposition to change their game plan and go to the pass and more open field type plays. Then the small, super fast tampa 2 athletes eat that up with INTs and easy tackles in front of them. It failed with the Bills as opponents just ran at it , plus Bills offense wasn't very good at getting leads. It is a good defense if you have a half dozen great athletes in it and your offense is terrific. Both of which the Colts had a few of the last 10 years. With Manning down, the whole thing kind of falls apart. very true. its a defense that once it gets the lead tries to get the turnover to step on the other teams throat - whether the sack/fumble from a fast pass rush that no longer has run duty, or from the zone dbs reading the hurried throw. in a tight game, or playing from behind it is a slow bleed.
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 I've always agreed with you on this point, BC. Now stop hijacking the thread. Kill them with kindness. I'm on to you.
dpberr Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Horrible recent drafts and bloated contracts have doomed this team. If the Colts do end up having the #1 pick in the draft, I'd trade it for picks spent on defense, and spread out those picks over two years so you have high picks in two consecutive drafts. The Colts aren't going to fix that excuse for defense in a year. There isn't a single strength on defense outside the ends, who aren't getting any younger. I'd keep Manning.
Fan in Chicago Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) There are so many ways to go with this..... 1) The Bills have never been in a situation where they have a top 5 all time qb on their team who ate up such a huge chunk of the payroll, let alone in a salary cap era. 2) For the record, the year before they drafted manning, they too Tarik Glenn (LT) and Adam Meadows (RT) in rounds 1 and 2. 3) Polian (no, I don't have a link) admitted that he was either missing on picks and/or neglecting the OL of late. 4) The Colts are a dome team. Their defense was small and fast. A player such as Freeney could pin his ears back and go for the sack because Manning would pile up points and make teams have to pass. Manning made that team. It's been obvious for a while. In other words, Polian isn't the problem. He built his team according to circumstance, and probably whiffed a few times along the way. He is a winner, and built great teams wherever he went. He has a line of people who worked under him that were successful. Think about Polian, then give some thought to Levy/Jauron. Bill, with all due respect, how can you write 1-4 and then absolve Polian of blame ? I think Polian has to take the blame for this mess of a team sans PM. As far as teams, minus QBs, go I hate to admit that the Pats* are far superior to the Colts. It is not just about having drafted/acquired a decent backup QB. But, also about building an overall team that does not depend so severely on one player. The corollary point I made several weeks back is that if Polian was that good, and with PM at QB, the COlts should have won at least 1-2 more superbowls. I hear what you say about salary, but then the negotiations should have centered around a number (PM's comprensation) that does not restrict team building. All in all, I place the blame squarely at Polian's feet. And maybe the Colts fans realize that, in the long run, it is better that this situation happened (note: I am NOT cheering an injury) now instead of later. The process of team building can begin now and in the next offseason and not when PM was ready to retire. Edited October 24, 2011 by Fan in Chicago
NoSaint Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Horrible recent drafts and bloated contracts have doomed this team. If the Colts do end up having the #1 pick in the draft, I'd trade it for picks spent on defense, and spread out those picks over two years so you have high picks in two consecutive drafts. The Colts aren't going to fix that excuse for defense in a year. There isn't a single strength on defense outside the ends, who aren't getting any younger. I'd keep Manning. i havent been following them too closely but they shelved several defensive starters pretty early in the season, once it was apparent manning was a no go. were they real year long injuries, or are they trying to keep guys bubble wrapped for a run next year? the defense isnt THAT bad, especially when healthy
DrFishfinder Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 I would be surprised by a clean sweep of house. They are playing horrible but that was expected. They built this team around Manning. They cannot win without him. Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter, Dan Orvlosky? Ugh. Alot of teams would struggle to win games with these guys at QB but 62-7? Thats not because of QB play Not at first look. But Indy only had 11 first downs and held the ball for less than 22 minutes. That is at least partially because of QB play. Especially when he's 9/17 for 67 yards, no TD's and an interception. I agree with you, the Colts are built around Manning. Without him, they are unable to put points on the board or even go 50/50 on TOP. That being said, it's inexcusable that the Colts have stuck with such a blatantly bad backup QB as Curtis Painter for the last 2 or 3 years. If someone is going to get canned, they should get canned for making the decision to keep Painter, not for the Colts playing the way they are with Painter.
NoSaint Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) Not at first look. But Indy only had 11 first downs and held the ball for less than 22 minutes. That is at least partially because of QB play. Especially when he's 9/17 for 67 yards, no TD's and an interception. I agree with you, the Colts are built around Manning. Without him, they are unable to put points on the board or even go 50/50 on TOP. That being said, it's inexcusable that the Colts have stuck with such a blatantly bad backup QB as Curtis Painter for the last 2 or 3 years. If someone is going to get canned, they should get canned for making the decision to keep Painter, not for the Colts playing the way they are with Painter. and fumble(s).... after that first drive when he had to pull every guy individually to position them, and they still looked confused then the ball was snapped into him when he wasnt looking... not a good start. he was down to under 10 seconds and was down the line in guys ears, repositioning people. the dome wasnt even that loud on that play. for an opening drive, they looked terribly unprepared. id point that to both qb play and coaching. manning hits them in both columns did he put one other on the ground too? Edited October 24, 2011 by NoSaint
Captain Hindsight Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Not at first look. But Indy only had 11 first downs and held the ball for less than 22 minutes. That is at least partially because of QB play. Especially when he's 9/17 for 67 yards, no TD's and an interception. I agree with you, the Colts are built around Manning. Without him, they are unable to put points on the board or even go 50/50 on TOP. That being said, it's inexcusable that the Colts have stuck with such a blatantly bad backup QB as Curtis Painter for the last 2 or 3 years. If someone is going to get canned, they should get canned for making the decision to keep Painter, not for the Colts playing the way they are with Painter. Who were they going to sign that was content sitting behind Manning for years on end? Having Rodgers behind Favre is the exception not the rule
IDBillzFan Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 That being said, it's inexcusable that the Colts have stuck with such a blatantly bad backup QB as Curtis Painter for the last 2 or 3 years. If someone is going to get canned, they should get canned for making the decision to keep Painter, not for the Colts playing the way they are with Painter. And that's it in a nutshell. I was surprised how fast they went after Collins AND started him when they had Painter behind Manning for the past couple of years. That told me all I needed to know about Painter, and it was on full display last night. Live by the Peyton. Die by the Peyton.
RyanC883 Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Perhaps bad coaching? Peyton also appeared to be the coach of the team, making multiple audibles at the line. W/o him, is it possible they lost their offensive coordinator as well?
silvermike Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Who were they going to sign that was content sitting behind Manning for years on end? Having Rodgers behind Favre is the exception not the rule Ryan Fitzpatrick signed to sit behind Trent Edwards. I think he would have taken a deal in Indianapolis if it was offered, and represents exactly the kind of player that they should have gone after. Mark Brunell has been deep on somebody's depth chart for a few years, too. There were definitely better options than Curtis Painter. Kerry Collins was closer to the right idea, except they didn't give him a full offseason on the roster.
BuffaloBill Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 I would be surprised by a clean sweep of house. They are playing horrible but that was expected. They built this team around Manning. They cannot win without him. Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter, Dan Orvlosky? Ugh. Alot of teams would struggle to win games with these guys at QB but 62-7? Thats not because of QB play I have to agree with officer retrospect.. and I would have to say the focus goes beyind one game, even though it was a beatdown. The situation shows how a couple of bad drafts and tying up significant portions of your cap in aging players will lead to a train wreck. I highly doubt Polian is called to the carpet but I do think the situation shows too much willingness in their system to hang on to fading stars.
Homer Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 If the Bills lost 62 to zip you wouldnt be able to see Niagra Falls for "the get out of town" billboards.
Captain Hindsight Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Ryan Fitzpatrick signed to sit behind Trent Edwards. I think he would have taken a deal in Indianapolis if it was offered, and represents exactly the kind of player that they should have gone after. Mark Brunell has been deep on somebody's depth chart for a few years, too. There were definitely better options than Curtis Painter. Kerry Collins was closer to the right idea, except they didn't give him a full offseason on the roster. I don't. Fitz said the Bills offered him the best chance to start. if he wanted to ride the Bench he could have stayed in Cinci behind Palmer. If you sign a QB that is content being the back-up you didnt sign someone that can help your team IMO
Haplo848 Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 It really looks to me that the Saints put the Madden difficulty setting to "Rookie" last night...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted October 24, 2011 Author Posted October 24, 2011 Who were they going to sign that was content sitting behind Manning for years on end? Having Rodgers behind Favre is the exception not the rule Ryan Fitzpatrick signed to sit behind Trent Edwards. I think he would have taken a deal in Indianapolis if it was offered, and represents exactly the kind of player that they should have gone after. Mark Brunell has been deep on somebody's depth chart for a few years, too. There were definitely better options than Curtis Painter. Kerry Collins was closer to the right idea, except they didn't give him a full offseason on the roster. Silvermike was good enough to name names… but one needn't do so to make the argument that there are competent backup quarterbacks available. They had Sorgi for several years. If they had one with him, why should the Colts suddenly be unable to have a competent backup after him?
Captain Hindsight Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 Silvermike was good enough to name names… but one needn't do so to make the argument that there are competent backup quarterbacks available. They had Sorgi for several years. If they had one with him, why should the Colts suddenly be unable to have a competent backup after him? Maybe finding a backup QB is as hard as it is finding a Franchise QB
NoSaint Posted October 24, 2011 Posted October 24, 2011 semi-serious question: how long has caldwell been with the colts, or an allpro qb in general? also, did anyone notice about 85% of the plays early went to the right side? run, pass, everything to the right
Recommended Posts