Don't look now, but the Colts are the New New England Patriots

[tombonneau]

It dawned on me yesterday as I watched the Colts win another game they really "shouldn't have won" -- making something five for the season -- that what I was watching was old school New England Patriots football.

The team isn't amassing a ton of yards or points, but you know what? They score TDs in the red zone.

The team occasionally gives up yards and I doubt ranks highly in many defensive categories. But you know what? They have one of (if not THE) best red zone Ds in the league, rarely giving up TDs.

So as I watched that game thinking the Browns "should have won", I realized they had the ball inside the ten twice, maybe three times, and came away with FGs. And that's not luck. That's the Colts being a good team that knows how to win games.

And I couldn't help thinking it all looked a bit too familiar ...

PS
With much disgust, I'll be putting down some $$ on whatever the latest Colts Super Bowl odds are ...

 

[xmarkd400x]

I think a more accurate assessment would be "The Colts this year are putting together gritty wins, much like our Patriots have in their past Super Bowl seasons".

They are not the "New New England Patriots" until they either 1) Win back to back super bowls or 2) Blow it at the last second in back to back seasons.

 

[Pats726]

It dawned on me yesterday as I watched the Colts win another game they really "shouldn't have won" -- making something five for the season -- that what I was watching was old school New England Patriots football.

The team isn't amassing a ton of yards or points, but you know what? They score TDs in the red zone.

The team occasionally gives up yards and I doubt ranks highly in many defensive categories. But you know what? They have one of (if not THE) best red zone Ds in the league, rarely giving up TDs.

So as I watched that game thinking the Browns "should have won", I realized they had the ball inside the ten twice, maybe three times, and came away with FGs. And that's not luck. That's the Colts being a good team that knows how to win games.

And I couldn't help thinking it all looked a bit too familiar ...

PS
With much disgust, I'll be putting down some $$ on whatever the latest Colts Super Bowl odds are ...

There is always a flavor of the month...hop on their bandwagon..cya...

 

[tombonneau]

There is always a flavor of the month...hop on their bandwagon..cya...

Huh? Sorry I detest the Colts, but I can be objective, and I see a team winning the way the 03/04 Pats won games. And those were the teams that also won SBs. With the AFC wide open, the Colts get a home WC game, and then I think they can easily win two on the road, esp. if round 2 is @NYJ or @PIT. They are much better than either of those teams.

And it's not a matter of this month, it's the whole season. Even when they struggled early with injuries, they found ways to win.

 

[denverpatsfan]

You better get ready for it. Manning v Manning Super Bowl. It's coming. The league wants it too so look for some calls to go Peyton's way in Pittsburgh in the AFCCG. You heard it hear first folks.

I think I am going to get sick...

 

[BelichickFan]

I've been saying it for a while, these are the un-Patriots. We used to win by not making mistakes and making the big 3rd down or red zone stop when we needed it despite giving up more yards. Now we are often out gaining our opponents or, at least, being about equal but we are losing because we make the mistake (Gaffney drop against Indy), allow the big 3rd down play (3rd and 15 against The Jest in O.T.)

It's a shame but it is what it is.

 

[tombonneau]

I've been saying it for a while, these are the un-Patriots. We used to win by not making mistakes and making the big 3rd down or red zone stop when we needed it despite giving up more yards. Now we are often out gaining our opponents or, at least, being about equal but we are losing because we make the mistake (Gaffney drop against Indy), allow the big 3rd down play (3rd and 15 against The Jest in O.T.)

It's a shame but it is what it is.

That's exactly the miserable irony of it all. Less talented Pats teams would beat more talented Colts/Steelers/Chargers because they didn't make the dumb mistakes, now it seems like the dumb mistakes happen at least once a half.

And it just puts it into even more bitter perspective to see the Colts winning close games and avoiding big mistakes. Puke.

 

[Pats726]

I think a more accurate assessment would be "The Colts this year are putting together gritty wins, much like our Patriots have in their past Super Bowl seasons".

They are not the "New New England Patriots" until they either 1) Win back to back super bowls or 2) Blow it at the last second in back to back seasons.

I think THAT is a better statement of what one sees....the Panthers in 03 were MUCH LIKE the Patriots...I think many winning teams have that ability...to win games that they should not..do not make mistakes..and let OTHER TEAMS make them and win games they should not...part of what winning football is....

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

It's the law of averages. Indy has been putting a great product on the field ever since 2003 and was knocking on the door for several years. They finally got a ring in a year where they weren't even that fearful, probably not even their best team in this run. What they do this year is unknown but if they win it all it won't be undeserved no matter how many breaks they caught.

When you look at our team, we had 3 rings in 4 years with elite, but not dominant talent. For that to happen, you need alot of bounces to go your way. You need alot of things to fall into place, no matter how great you are and yes we were great. In this era you don't win without good fortune. The last 3 years, and this season of tough breaks seems to be a summation of everything 'owed' to us by the law of averages. It just can't go on forever. On the bright side, we are going to field a contender for at least the next 5 years with the personel and leadership we have on and off the field. Sooner or later things will start bouncing our way again, in due time, as long as we keep knocking on that door.

 

[Rob0729]

Huh? Sorry I detest the Colts, but I can be objective, and I see a team winning the way the 03/04 Pats won games. And those were the teams that also won SBs. With the AFC wide open, the Colts get a home WC game, and then I think they can easily win two on the road, esp. if round 2 is @NYJ or @PIT. They are much better than either of those teams.

And it's not a matter of this month, it's the whole season. Even when they struggled early with injuries, they found ways to win.

I don't remember the Pats playing mediocre football and having lucky breaks against bad teams. I can't remember a game like the Texans game earlier in the season where the Texans outplayed the Colts in every phase of the game and then have the QB make a couple of dumb mistakes (like trying to go over the defenders with a huge lead near the end of the game rather than sliding and punting away the ball) that gave the game to the Colts.

Sorry, the Pats had a dominant defense in 2003 that gave up the fewest amount of points in the league. In 2004, the Pats were near the top on both sides of the ball. They also had back to back 14-2 seasons and had the longest regular season winning streak during that stretch. The 2008 Colts are playing mediocre to average football and coming out with the right plays at the end. The closest I can see this year's Colts being is the 2001 Pats, but even that is a stretch. It is an insult to the 2003/2004 Pats to compare them to this Colts' team.

 

[Rob0729]

To further my point, the Colts are allowing 20.8 points per game and scoring 21.4 PPG this year for a 0.6 PPG margin of victory. In 2003, allowed 14.9 PPG and scored 21.8 PPG for a 6.9 PPG margin of victory. In 2004, the Pats allowed 16.2 PPG and scored 27.3 PPG for a 11.1 PPG margin of victory. Exactly how is this Colts team like the Pats of 2003 or 2004?

I guess they do favor better against the 2001 Pats that allowed 17.0 PPG and scored 23.2 PPG for a 5.2 PPG margin of victory, but even then it wasn't nearly as close.

Again, I see few similiarities to the Colts of this year and the Pats of the past. The Staple of the Pats of the past was solid to dominant defense and an offense that doesn't make mistakes. That isn't what the Colts are doing. They are playing mediocre, but managing to hang around long enough to captalize on a mistake or two. The Pats had lucky breaks during their run especially in 2001, but they also played solid football.

 

[Richter]

The Colts sure couldn't score in the red zone yesterday. That offense produced a miserable THREE POINTS against a bad Browns' defense, including a 4 down goal line stand where they were pathetic. That's a one and done team in the playoffs, unless they get a very inexperienced team (Broncos, namely) in the first round.

 

[tombonneau]

I don't remember the Pats playing mediocre football and having lucky breaks against bad teams. I can't remember a game like the Texans game earlier in the season where the Texans outplayed the Colts in every phase of the game and then have the QB make a couple of dumb mistakes (like trying to go over the defenders with a huge lead near the end of the game rather than sliding and punting away the ball) that gave the game to the Colts.

Sorry, the Pats had a dominant defense in 2003 that gave up the fewest amount of points in the league. In 2004, the Pats were near the top on both sides of the ball. They also had back to back 14-2 seasons and had the longest regular season winning streak during that stretch. The 2008 Colts are playing mediocre to average football and coming out with the right plays at the end. The closest I can see this year's Colts being is the 2001 Pats, but even that is a stretch. It is an insult to the 2003/2004 Pats to compare them to this Colts' team.

Wow, what short memories we have. I seem to recall the Pats needing a 10 pt rally in the fourth quarter to force an awful Texans team into OT before finally pulling out a 3 pt win.

I'll admit it's not a complete mirror image of the teams, and I had no idea that the Colts margin of victory was so razor thin (great stat, thanks for point it out, BTW), but I just looked back at some of those 03/04 Pats scores, and there are stretches very similar to what the Colts have done the last 5 weeks, just barely beating teams.

But saying that the Colts are playing mediocre football is just blind Colts hatred. They are not playing great football, but they are playing good football.

 

[Lansdowne]

. With the AFC wide open, the Colts get a home WC game, and then I think they can easily win two on the road, esp. if round 2 is @NYJ or @PIT.

I agree with your point about the Colts being a SB contender, but I wanted to point out that the only scenario in which a wildcard team would host a playoff game is if it were a 5th seed and faced the 6th seed in the conference finals. Division winners get to host their first playoff game, with the two best division winners getting a bye and the remaining two division winners hosting the two wildcard teams in the first round. It's very likely that the Colts will be the best of the non-division winners, putting them at a #5 seed, and the Broncos will likely have the worst record of the division winners, having them host the Colts in Denver as the #4 seed.

 

[tombonneau]

I agree with your point about the Colts being a SB contender, but I wanted to point out that the only scenario in which a wildcard team would host a playoff game is if it were a 5th seed and faced the 6th seed in the conference finals. Division winners get to host their first playoff game, with the two best division winners getting a bye and the remaining two division winners hosting the two wildcard teams in the first round. It's very likely that the Colts will be the best of the non-division winners, putting them at a #5 seed, and the Broncos will likely have the worst record of the division winners, having them host the Colts in Denver as the #4 seed.

You're right; I knew that, not sure why I typed that. Probably because it seems criminal that a 12-4 team will have to play at a 9-7 team, but them's the rules.

 

[Rob0729]

Wow, what short memories we have. I seem to recall the Pats needing a 10 pt rally in the fourth quarter to force an awful Texans team into OT before finally pulling out a 3 pt win.

I'll admit it's not a complete mirror image of the teams, and I had no idea that the Colts margin of victory was so razor thin (great stat, thanks for point it out, BTW), but I just looked back at some of those 03/04 Pats scores, and there are stretches very similar to what the Colts have done the last 5 weeks, just barely beating teams.

But saying that the Colts are playing mediocre football is just blind Colts hatred. They are not playing great football, but they are playing good football.

You are talking about one game with the Patriots.

Saying the Colts have been playing mediocre to average football is watching the game. The Colts were outplayed by a bad Browns team with their better QB out of the game for most of the game. They played horrible defense vs. the Patriots. They nearly lost to the Texans twice. They should have lost to the Vikings.

There has been only a handful of games where I thought the Colts played good or great football. Otherwise, they played so-so to decent at best football with teams just allowing them to hang around and let them win. The team has a 0.6 margin of victory per game and in hindsight they haven't had the hardest schedule in the world. When you beat your competition for the season by an average of less of a point per game, that isn't good football unless you have one statistically anomally where one opponent won by 30 points or something like that.

The Colts deserved to lose the game yesterday and one play made the difference between them losing and winning. And they had about three to four other games where that happened. They could easily be 4-8 right now than 8-4 if it wasn't for a handful of plays. You could never say that about the Patriots of 2003 or 2004.

The Colts are playing good football based on this year's level of play I guess since no one is playing consistent football. But typically I would say it wasn't great football.

 

[Spiral]

I hate to say it, but I think the 2008 team the most resembles the '03-'04 Patriots are the NYG. Regardless of the score, they seem to be in control at every point in every game.

 

[Rob0729]

I hate to say it, but I think the 2008 team the most resembles the '03-'04 Patriots are the NYG. Regardless of the score, they seem to be in control at every point in every game.

Yeah, I think the Titans remind me of the 2003 Pats (dominant defense and offense that doesn't screw up) and the Giants remind me of the 2004 Pats (solid in every area). I don't even know if the Colts are an elite team this year in a down year for the NFL where the 2003 and 2004 Pats were both elite teams where there were four or five elite teams each year.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

I'm not sure why this thread is getting such negative responses, though I guess negativity is in fact, the flavor of the month

I don't understand how anyone can believe BIll Belichick hasn't had some effect on the league and schooled a few teams on how to approach their draft,their season,and their game-planning.More importantly I don't get how anyone can bury their heads in the sand and not acknowledge that the Colts among others,have tried to adopt BB/Pioli's approach and have succeeded to some degree. Not all have been successful at it but the Colts have been obvious imitators these last few years and it's made them better. I remember when all their marbles rested in the lap of one player and I remember when that philosophy worked in our favor everytime. I can't stand the Colts for a myriad of reasons but that doesn't preclude me from realizing they've seen the light and have been seeing it for the last few years.

Some forget that the Pats have been the one thing blocking a lot of teams' paths to the Prize and why wouldn't those teams try their level best to study and replicate some of what they saw? Some succeed at it better than others,some choose to find their own path, but for the most part smart teams have gradually embraced at least part of what they've seen as reasons for the Patriots' sustained success. Polian may be a lot of things but he's not stupid. He got his a* handed to him enough times to realize the ONLY way to beat the Patriots was to try and become them.

 

[Lansdowne]

You're right; I knew that, not sure why I typed that. Probably because it seems criminal that a 12-4 team will have to play at a 9-7 team, but them's the rules.

Haha yeah, I hear ya. It would be interesting if they had it like the NBA, where the team with the better record gets HFA regardless of seeding.

The Colts have been winning games they have no business winning, similar to the SB champion Patriots teams. When you have a championship season, you need to catch some breaks. The Colts have caught plenty (while dealing with some injuries of their own, mind you) while the Patriots just can't catch a break. It's miraculous that we haven't heard of a Pats player being put on IR this week so far (knock on wood).