What Were The Colts Thinking?

[Jack Lambert]

The Colts started 14-0 in 2005, rested their starters the last two weeks, and ended up getting upset in the playoffs by the Steelers in the divisional round. Resting your starters in games, along with the first round bye, also deprives the starters of two weeks of in-game experiences. Not to mention zero momentum going into the playoffs.

 

[Bart]

I'm all for resting injured players, or even other starters, if everything has been clinched. But this was different. When you're 14-0, with two lowly teams left in your schedule, how can you not at least consider going for it?

Yes, this was different. The Colts winning streak and the probability of going undefeated was generating a lot of excitement. It was totally unnecessary to take a dive. Hell, Manning and the other players were still playing into the third quarter.How much rest did they actually get? It would have made more sense not to play them at all. If Manning was taking a beating, or was recovering from injuries I would understand, but he rarely even gets his jersey soiled. Why pulll starters when a game of this magnitude and possible historic significance is still in jeopardy? You'd think it was a preseason game.

What about the backup QB? Is there a worse situation to make a debut?

So, what about next week? Should Peyton sit or play? Who cares now?And they have a bye coming anyway. The whole thing is lame.

I'm tellin ya, Don Shula is one fortunate guy.

 

[Thrashen]

As Bart said, judging by the rationale the Colts exhibited against the Jets"¦none of the Colts' starters should play at all this coming week. After all, there is "nothing to play for."Â￾ I'm sure the fans who paid tons of money to see "top notch"Â￾ football enjoy watching backups, scrubs and rookies. Then again, they probably can't tell the difference in terms of quality and the vast amount of mental errors, chest-thumping celebrations, penalties, and fake-writhing on the turf after every play.

Contrast that wimpy "pull-back"Â￾ attitude (a Tony Dungheap trademark) to the killer instinct of, say, Bill Bellichick, who forces a "professional"Â￾ NFL defense to stop his teams"¦.or the score keeps going up and up. I realize the ultimate goal is the SB trophy, but this is a reoccurring storyline"¦.a team goes into the playoffs "cold"Â￾ and on the losing streak"¦and loses their first game.

And no, I could care less if any NFL team gets blown-out or run-up or humiliated. They're adults who are paid handsomely to play a game. They are also worshipped by zillions of DWFs, all under the false notion that "these are the best players in the world."Â￾ The only bawl-babies too "sensitive"Â￾ to handle such a loss are the always-fragile afroletes.Edited by: Thrashen

 

[WHITE NOISE]

Well stated Thrashen.

 

[White Shogun]

I've heard some players say that an undefeated season is worth more than a Super Bowl ring. Without referencing the web, how many of you can say who won, say, Super Bowl XXII? XXXIV?

Everyone knows the only two teams to ever go undefeated, and the only one in history to do so all the way through the Super Bowl.

 

[GWTJ]

I've heard some players say that an undefeated season is worth more than a Super Bowl ring. Without referencing the web, how many of you can say who won, say, Super Bowl XXII? XXXIV?

Everyone knows the only two teams to ever go undefeated, and the only one in history to do so all the way through the Super Bowl.

Well, if there were a bunch of undefeated teams, like there are Super Bowls, then people would start forgetting those teams i'm sure. Just like they've started to forget teams with only 1 loss or wildcard teams that won it all.

Here's a question, ESPN's top football play of the decade was David Tyree's clutch catch in the Super Bowl that led to the Giants beating the undefeated Patriots. Was that the #1 play because it led the Giants to victory or was it #1 because it led to the Patriots losing their undefeated season? Answer that and we'll know which is more important.

 

[WHITE NOISE]

An unndefeated season and your remembered forever. Superbowl win and hardly anyone remembers who won after a couple of years.

Crime statistics provide concrete figures in which negros far outnumber whites in thefts and robberies. Well, add Caldwrong's robbing the fans and team of immortality to the list of thefts.

 

[guest301]

An unndefeated season and your remembered forever. Superbowl win and hardly anyone remembers who won after a couple of years.

Crime statistics provide concrete figures in which negros far outnumber whites in thefts and robberies. Well, add Caldwrong's robbing the fans and team of immortality to the list of thefts.

Adding that to the black crime statistics is funny stuff White Noise.

Edited by: guest301

 

[White Shogun]

I've heard some players say that an undefeated season is worth more than a Super Bowl ring. Without referencing the web, how many of you can say who won, say, Super Bowl XXII? XXXIV?

Everyone knows the only two teams to ever go undefeated, and the only one in history to do so all the way through the Super Bowl.

Well, if there were a bunch of undefeated teams, like there are Super Bowls, then people would start forgetting those teams i'm sure. Just like they've started to forget teams with only 1 loss or wildcard teams that won it all.

Here's a question, ESPN's top football play of the decade was David Tyree's clutch catch in the Super Bowl that led to the Giants beating the undefeated Patriots. Was that the #1 play because it led the Giants to victory or was it #1 because it led to the Patriots losing their undefeated season? Answer that and we'll know which is more important.

Answering that question will only answer what the ESPN writer who wrote the article thinks is important.

Was that the catch where the receiver caught the ball with his helmet? Edited by: White Shogun