Are the mediots setting this up?

[hambone1818]

It seems like the media is almost setting up the loss for the Colts. Sportscenter just had a lead-in to a peice on Pats-Colts by saying 'Will Marvin Harrison play? See how immense an impact his loss would be, next.' (not verbatim, but it was something along those lines).

My opinion (and I think the opinion of many other football fans) is that Harrison is currently the 5th most important player on the Colts offense. I'd put Wayne ahead of him; I think--particularily for this game--Clark is more important; Addai, to me, is the second most important player on the offense; and then there's Manning.

Granted, anytime you lose your #1/2 receiver it's a big blow, I will not deny that. But a 35 y.o. Harrison with bad knees might not be the same player that many remember and think about when analyzing the matchup.

I might be paranoid, but the way the media has dealt with the Pats this year I could easily see this loss (if, in fact, the Colts lose) spun into 'they may have lost, but put Harrison in there and it might be different' by a good portion of the media.

Unless, of course, the Pats win by 3 TD's, which I think is just as likely.

 

[CTPatsFan]

I heard essentially the same thing on Sirius NFL this morning on my drive to work. M. Harrison may still play but he's injured so...

 

[Pats Fan in Indy]

I still have a lot of respect for Harrison. He and Addai are the only Colts' players that I have a hard time disliking. Up until this season, he had shown no signs of aging. If you look at his stats, they were very consistent, and I honestly think that they would be the same this year if he wasn't injured. Manning's stats may be a little depleted because of him right now. I mean, why hasn't anyone pointed out that Manning only has 11 TD's through 7 games? Or is it 12? Still! That's not Manningesque.

Maybe Manning is in decline from his meteoric prime? I'm ready for those discussions to begin.

 

[patsgo]

I heard essentially the same thing on Sirius NFL this morning on my drive to work. M. Harrison may still play but he's injured so...

WHO CARES WHAT THE MEDIA SAYS< TELL ME WHY ITS SO IMPORTANT THAT EVERYTHING THE DUMB MEDIA SAYA NEEDS TO BE POSTED AND DEBATED FOR HOURS???????

 

[Peytonsbetter]

It seems like the media is almost setting up the loss for the Colts. Sportscenter just had a lead-in to a peice on Pats-Colts by saying 'Will Marvin Harrison play? See how immense an impact his loss would be, next.' (not verbatim, but it was something along those lines).

My opinion (and I think the opinion of many other football fans) is that Harrison is currently the 5th most important player on the Colts offense. I'd put Wayne ahead of him; I think--particularily for this game--Clark is more important; Addai, to me, is the second most important player on the offense; and then there's Manning.

Granted, anytime you lose your #1/2 receiver it's a big blow, I will not deny that. But a 35 y.o. Harrison with bad knees might not be the same player that many remember and think about when analyzing the matchup.

I might be paranoid, but the way the media has dealt with the Pats this year I could easily see this loss (if, in fact, the Colts lose) spun into 'they may have lost, but put Harrison in there and it might be different' by a good portion of the media.

Unless, of course, the Pats win by 3 TD's, which I think is just as likely.

Who cares what the media thinks? If the Colt's lose, they lose. Its as simple as that. Doesn't matter who plays or who doesn't play.

BTW, can we put to bed the notion that Reggie is only successful b/c he plays across from Marv? Marvins missed 2 of the last 3 games and Reggie has been DOMINANT in his absence. Reggie is our best receiver and one of the 5 best in the league, IMO.

 

[hambone1818]

Who cares what the media thinks? If the Colt's lose, they lose. Its as simple as that. Doesn't matter who plays or who doesn't play.

BTW, can we put to bed the notion that Reggie is only successful b/c he plays across from Marv? Marvins missed 2 of the last 3 games and Reggie has been DOMINANT in his absence. Reggie is our best receiver and one of the 5 best in the league, IMO.

I agree that the media does not matter in the sense that they have no impact on wins and losses, SB teams, etc. But I'm a big fan of the historic impact of teams, and history--unfortunately--resides partially in the hands of the media. In 30 years, when people go back to research the 2007 Patriots, they will find a team that was caught cheating, a team that 'ran up the score', a team that may have skirted by the other dominant power because they were missing their most important player.

Granted, none of this will matter if the Pats win the Super Bowl. But when I'm retired, reading the History of the Patriots for the 20th time, I don't want to have glaze over the best team I've ever seen just because there was a perception that this team was cheap, dirty and lucky.

 

[BHSL2]

Ah, what do ya know, Hambonelives from the ESPN Colts board. Between you and Irishfan, I don't know who talks up this "cheating" thing more.

 

[Peytonsbetter]

I agree that the media does not matter in the sense that they have no impact on wins and losses, SB teams, etc. But I'm a big fan of the historic impact of teams, and history--unfortunately--resides partially in the hands of the media. In 30 years, when people go back to research the 2007 Patriots, they will find a team that was caught cheating, a team that 'ran up the score', a team that may have skirted by the other dominant power because they were missing their most important player.

Granted, none of this will matter if the Pats win the Super Bowl. But when I'm retired, reading the History of the Patriots for the 20th time, I don't want to have glaze over the best team I've ever seen just because there was a perception that this team was cheap, dirty and lucky.

I guess it does matter, if you look at it that way. I definitely agree that the media has a lot to do with how certain teams and individuals are remembered.

Well said.

 

[hambone1818]

Ah, what do ya know, Hambonelives from the ESPN Colts board. Between you and Irishfan, I don't know who talks up this "cheating" thing more.

Sorry there, but I've never posted on a Colts board. I have no way of proving this, of course, but rest assured I'm a Pats fan and would love nothing more than the 'cheating' and the 'running up the score' talk just disappearing forever.

 

[BHSL2]

Ok, fair.

I thought you were one of those annoying buggers from over there.

 

[MightyFooda]

I try to remember what the media says at the time and the way the teams are remembered are 2 totally different things. Almost no one talks about how the Cowboys were coked up and everyone thought Aikman was gay.
No one talks about how the Steelers were a bunch of Roid freaks.
No one talks about how the 72 Dolphins were not dominant at all in their victories.
they just remember all these teams for their greatness. Hopefully the sam will be true for the Pats.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Who cares what the media thinks? If the Colt's lose, they lose. Its as simple as that. Doesn't matter who plays or who doesn't play.

BTW, can we put to bed the notion that Reggie is only successful b/c he plays across from Marv? Marvins missed 2 of the last 3 games and Reggie has been DOMINANT in his absence. Reggie is our best receiver and one of the 5 best in the league, IMO.

I agree about Wayne. A much better wideout than the whining bigmouth legend in his own mind who voided his contract here after saying he would play, and left in a hissey fit for the Seahags. Many posters here had He-Who-Shall-Never-Be-Named as a Top 10, comparable to but just behind Wayne. NFW.

 

[hambone1818]

I try to remember what the media says at the time and the way the teams are remembered are 2 totally different things. Almost no one talks about how the Cowboys were coked up and everyone thought Aikman was gay.
No one talks about how the Steelers were a bunch of Roid freaks.
No one talks about how the 72 Dolphins were not dominant at all in their victories.
they just remember all these teams for their greatness. Hopefully the sam will be true for the Pats.

All due respect, but I disagree. I'm young enough to say that I've only seen one of those three examples you listed (the Cowboys, of course), and the FIRST thing I think about with the Steelers is the roids, ditto the Phins and their weak schedule. I'm only going based off of what I've read and heard about the two teams, and while I know they were both all-time great teams (though it could be argued the '72 Dolphins don't belong in that discussion despite going undefeated), the first thing that pops into my head when I hear about those two teams is EXACTLY what you listed.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I have to agree, the proliferation of posts about "so and so said this, so and so said that," is getting annoying. But hell, this is the mini-super-bowl, so you expect it.

That said... I did a post of my own this morning on another thread -- it's been a long time since the Pats have NOT had key injuries all over the field. Hell, we STILL have them, we're just winning anyway.

If Moss, God forbid, goes down, I still think we win this game. As has been pointed out, we gave these guys a hell of a game with a massive injury list (and a true one at that.) And NO, Indy isn't better now. Indy is what it was when they beat us -- i.e., Indy with Bob Sanders. When Sanders is out, Indy's D disappears. Uh, what happens when Seymour is out? Oh that's right, he's BEEN out.

If Harrison's out, and they can't produce at wideout with Wayne, Gonzales, and whoever steps up, then they don't deserve to be champs, at least not by the Pats' standards.

Ever think of that?

If Harrison's in, I don't care how much you whine that his knee hurts. You either win or you lose. You don't get "guilty with an explanation" options in football.

PFnV

 

[Buchanty]

All due respect, but I disagree. I'm young enough to say that I've only seen one of those three examples you listed (the Cowboys, of course), and the FIRST thing I think about with the Steelers is the roids, ditto the Phins and their weak schedule. I'm only going based off of what I've read and heard about the two teams, and while I know they were both all-time great teams (though it could be argued the '72 Dolphins don't belong in that discussion despite going undefeated), the first thing that pops into my head when I hear about those two teams is EXACTLY what you listed.

You must be a "glass is half empty" type of individual. Even my sons (both under 18) say Steel Curtain when you mention the 70's steelers, and "unbeaten" for the Dolphins, though they cant name a single person on the team.

I think there will be many biographies and histories that will bring things to light, which will only emphasize that the label "cheaters" was in vogue during the 07 season and not based on fact. Signal stealing is not only common, its omnipresent and the only rule that was broken is location of the act not the act itself.

As for Harrison, he has always been one of my favorite Colts, how can you not appreciate his skills and athleticism? But he is only a year younger than Troy and is beginning to show his mortality. Even if the Colts lose, I dont think the result would change with Harrison playing. If they win though I suspect that Colts fans will say that they could have done even better, and clearly have the better receivers.

Wayne is definitely the number 1 and is playing at an elite level. Addai is my next favorite player on the Colts (especially for his incredible support and care for his paralysed college teammate), but he is not elite yet. He has done more that Maroney, I admit, but more so because of Maroney's injuries and very effective blocking (they even make Kenton Keith look like a major RB) Those two and Clark (one of my least favorite Colts) are the core of their offense in front of Manning. They are the group that has defined the 07 season so far without Harrison, and are undefeated as a result. There is no plausible way that a loss can be explained away by not having Marvin on the field.

 

[hambone1818]

You must be a "glass is half empty" type of individual. Even my sons (both under 18) say Steel Curtain when you mention the 70's steelers, and "unbeaten" for the Dolphins, though they cant name a single person on the team.

Well I apologize, because certainly I think about the dominant defense of the Steelers and the unbeaten Phins in '72...I guess I should rephrase my post by saying that when I think Steel Curtain--aside from the dominant defense--I think about the rampant steroids...and when I think of the undefeated Dolphins, it leads to a thought that they really didn't play anyone. I'll give them all the credit they deserve as a few of the better teams in NFL history, but there is that little smudge of dirt on their shiny legacies, and that's what I'm getting at.

I think there will be many biographies and histories that will bring things to light, which will only emphasize that the label "cheaters" was in vogue during the 07 season and not based on fact. Signal stealing is not only common, its omnipresent and the only rule that was broken is location of the act not the act itself.

Let's hope that's the case. In a few years, when the hatred dies down, I hope someone does some legitimate research into the whole 'cheating' and filming issue, because my guess is that it was (is?) more rampant than the media and NFL want to allow us to believe.

As for Harrison, he has always been one of my favorite Colts, how can you not appreciate his skills and athleticism? But he is only a year younger than Troy and is beginning to show his mortality. Even if the Colts lose, I dont think the result would change with Harrison playing. If they win though I suspect that Colts fans will say that they could have done even better, and clearly have the better receivers.

Wayne is definitely the number 1 and is playing at an elite level. Addai is my next favorite player on the Colts (especially for his incredible support and care for his paralysed college teammate), but he is not elite yet. He has done more that Maroney, I admit, but more so because of Maroney's injuries and very effective blocking (they even make Kenton Keith look like a major RB) Those two and Clark (one of my least favorite Colts) are the core of their offense in front of Manning. They are the group that has defined the 07 season so far without Harrison, and are undefeated as a result. There is no plausible way that a loss can be explained away by not having Marvin on the field.

I wasn't trying to take anything away from Harrison...don't get me wrong, I have all the respect in the world for him. He's long been one of my favorite receivers (along with Hines Ward and Troy Brown) both for his immense ability and also his humility, which is far too rare among NFL receivers. I just believe, at his age and with a bad knee condition, he simply isn't the player he was even a year ago. Wayne is a huge talent, and while Addai isn't the next coming of Marshall Faulk he's a top 10 (maybe top 5) NFL running back.

My whole point is that it seems like it's being set up that the Colts are playing this game vastly undermanned with their 'best' receiver not in the game. I just don't want to hear--especially after last years AFCCG--that the Colts lost because they were undermanned. And again, I'm thinking more of legacy (I know, a little early to be talking about that)...maybe something like this never shows up in 30 years, but I don't want any dirt on this team to tarnish their otherworldly glow.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

All due respect, but I disagree. I'm young enough to say that I've only seen one of those three examples you listed (the Cowboys, of course), and the FIRST thing I think about with the Steelers is the roids, ditto the Phins and their weak schedule. I'm only going based off of what I've read and heard about the two teams, and while I know they were both all-time great teams (though it could be argued the '72 Dolphins don't belong in that discussion despite going undefeated), the first thing that pops into my head when I hear about those two teams is EXACTLY what you listed.

But that is because you are a Pat's fan and this team had historic rivalries with those teams. 90% of the football public today doesn't recall those teams in our eyes. Historians write history with distance and perspective. Sure at times like this the warts on other champions noses will resurface in impassioned discussions, like Denver and SF cheating on the cap. But a year ago when they spoke of those teams you heard narry a wimper about those little indiscretions.

The sports media has imploded into a 24/7 free for all ratings brawl, so everything gets more attention these days. But that attention is also more short lived than ever because the casual audience is so large and half of them are ADD. What we represent this season is really no different than what the 49ers or Cowboys represented back in the day - dominance. It's just that with all the eyes trained on the competition it's become more obvious that there isn't much.

Which is why the Colts will and have to still be serious contenders no matter what happens this week or next, or beyond. Ditto the Steelers who managed to snag a Superbowl in 2005 from the 6th seed, or the Cowboys unless they fall back to the mediocre pack in the NFC. There has to be a worthy foil or our dominance is diminished and from a ratings fueling standpoint provides a far less compelling story.

Let's not forget too that aside from a bunch of front running bandwaggon teamless NFL fans, "America's Team" as Jerry perfers them to be portrayed was the object of jealousy fueled hatred (albeit tinged with a tad of grudging admiration) where 31 other team fan bases were concerned. That's what you get for being dominant. So if you want other fans to love and respect you, you're dreamin' or you don't really want to be a dynasty.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I agree that the media does not matter in the sense that they have no impact on wins and losses, SB teams, etc. But I'm a big fan of the historic impact of teams, and history--unfortunately--resides partially in the hands of the media. In 30 years, when people go back to research the 2007 Patriots, they will find a team that was caught cheating, a team that 'ran up the score', a team that may have skirted by the other dominant power because they were missing their most important player.

Granted, none of this will matter if the Pats win the Super Bowl. But when I'm retired, reading the History of the Patriots for the 20th time, I don't want to have glaze over the best team I've ever seen just because there was a perception that this team was cheap, dirty and lucky.

Ummm . . . I'm guessing by the time that "History of the Patriots' Super Bowl Seasons, Volume I: 2001 to 2007" comes out, the Pats'll have enough writers that they can gloss over it so you don't have to.

 

[He Ban Me]

It seems like the media is almost setting up the loss for the Colts. Sportscenter just had a lead-in to a peice on Pats-Colts by saying 'Will Marvin Harrison play? See how immense an impact his loss would be, next.' (not verbatim, but it was something along those lines).

My opinion (and I think the opinion of many other football fans) is that Harrison is currently the 5th most important player on the Colts offense. I'd put Wayne ahead of him; I think--particularily for this game--Clark is more important; Addai, to me, is the second most important player on the offense; and then there's Manning.

Granted, anytime you lose your #1/2 receiver it's a big blow, I will not deny that. But a 35 y.o. Harrison with bad knees might not be the same player that many remember and think about when analyzing the matchup.

I might be paranoid, but the way the media has dealt with the Pats this year I could easily see this loss (if, in fact, the Colts lose) spun into 'they may have lost, but put Harrison in there and it might be different' by a good portion of the media.

Unless, of course, the Pats win by 3 TD's, which I think is just as likely.

I don't think folks will point to that. He's important from the standpoint of having to be accounted for. His numbers, while not historic, are pretty much for 4-4.5 games. Extrapolate it out, and it's a pretty decent year. Hard to tell what the truth is about the knee. Someone started a rumor about it being his Posterior Cruciate. Sounds possible based on what I have read about this type of injury. Seems like the off season/current season has been 2 steps forward, 2 steps back. Draft a replacement for Tarik, Tarik Retires. Draft to beef up DT, Booger blows his knee, draft a couple WR, Marvin gets injured. Nothing new in the NFL, teams deal with it, Colts are not immune. Hell, look at Pats. Replace Dillon with a very nice Morris, and bam, he's done. Perserverance is key!