I'm tired of this Colts are loaded with talent myth

[Rob0729]

Now lets do the same with our lovely Pats.

Brady HOF elite QB
Welker good slot WR benefited from Brady
Gronkowski great young TE, big red zone target
Hernandez young TE that is good but needs improvement
Solid O-line (same with Indy as you ignored)

BJGE, Woody, Price, Slater, Ocho, Branch etc all avg-mediocre

Wilfork great NT
Mayo good player but not elite
Chung good but again not all world status

McCourty, Spikes, Arrington etc are young question marks, a lot of the rest are weak talent that is well coached.

They are as talented as us minus the QB and coach, give them Peyton and a decent coach and they are 8-3. Nice try but talent isn't everything (Philly anyone?) and they can still beat us without Peyton btw.

First, if you read this entire thread, I already did this exercise.

Second, I didn't ignore the Colts' o-line because it is below average. The Pats' o-line is far better than the Colts. Even the biggest Colts' fans will admit that their o-line has been a problem for years. The Colts have used a lot of failed high draft picks to fix the line, buy as I said they failed (Tony Oh! Oh! being the worst example).

Third, you are way off about Welker. Yes, Brady makes him better, but he had 1,165 yards in 2008 with Matt Cassel throwing to him. If you are discount Welker as being a product of Brady even though he was a 1100 yard receiver with Cassel, we need to discount all of the Colts' receivers including Reggie Wayne because they are products of Manning.

Fourth, I never said that talent was everything. I am countering the myth that the Colts are loaded with talent.

Thanks, you giving us the biased anti-Patriot view though.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

You missed Brian Waters (arguably the best RG in football this year). You missed Chung who is an above average safety. You missed Spikes who is a very good run down LB. By my count, the Pats have 7 good to elite players on offense alone. That is how many the Colts may have on their team.

Sure buddy? Guys like Chung, Spikes, BenJ etc would play poorly in Indy and be labeled as talentless there, not to mention you are biased as a Pats fan.

They don't have coaching, and they don't have a winning atmosphere, the team is expected, allowed, and even maybe rewarded (top pick) for losing and not trying. In NE good players get cut sometimes for no reason, in Indy these guys wouldn't have to try nearly as hard, this isn't a talent issue it is a coaching and discipline issue. When Peyton is back and what not they will be right back to challenging us with their so called talentless team.

 

[Ring 6]

avg number of sacks for peyton over his 13 year career is less than 18 a year

avg number of sacks per year since the colts became elite (last 8 manning years) = less than 16 a year


that's really quite quite insane

brady's avg number of sacks per year is 24 in his 11 year career counting this season but not counting his injury season

brady takes more sacks but hasn't been as careless with the football

10.27 ints per year for brady (counting this season but not counting his injury season) and 15.23 ints per year for peyton....

Clearly 6 more sacks and 5 less Ints is better decision making.
Taking a sack is not simply a function of not getting rid of the ball quickly, because the throws chucked up there to avoid the sack (and we are talking about roughly one every 3 games) are risky ones that often get picked.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

First, if you read this entire thread, I already did this exercise.

Second, I didn't ignore the Colts' o-line because it is below average. The Pats' o-line is far better than the Colts. Even the biggest Colts' fans will admit that their o-line has been a problem for years. The Colts have used a lot of failed high draft picks to fix the line, buy as I said they failed (Tony Oh! Oh! being the worst example).

Third, you are way off about Welker. Yes, Brady makes him better, but he had 1,165 yards in 2008 with Matt Cassel throwing to him. If you are discount Welker as being a product of Brady even though he was a 1100 yard receiver with Cassel, we need to discount all of the Colts' receivers including Reggie Wayne because they are products of Manning.

Fourth, I never said that talent was everything. I am countering the myth that the Colts are loaded with talent.

Thanks, you giving us the biased anti-Patriot view though.

If Matt Cassel was in Indy with a serious attempt to win and good coaching like he had here in 08, Reggie Wayne would still be a 1000+ 9+ TD 90+ catch receiver. You are here ignoring the situation and just looking at numbers. I am not discounting Welker, but I will say Indy's talentless receiving core is better than ours.

Our team has more depth, but our team is not much talented itself. I know its hard to post this on Patsfans but it is true if you stop being biased. This isn't anti-Patriot, they are well disciplined and coached not loaded with talent, most of the top teams are the former not the latter and NE is one of them. Take the homer glasses off (comparing Bill and Cassel to Caldwell and Painter?) and realize the main point of Indy only having a few guys is the same as here in NE, minus the HOF coach and QB.

 

[Ring 6]

Sure buddy? Guys like Chung, Spikes, BenJ etc would play poorly in Indy and be labeled as talentless there, not to mention you are biased as a Pats fan.

They don't have coaching, and they don't have a winning atmosphere, the team is expected, allowed, and even maybe rewarded (top pick) for losing and not trying. In NE good players get cut sometimes for no reason, in Indy these guys wouldn't have to try nearly as hard, this isn't a talent issue it is a coaching and discipline issue. When Peyton is back and what not they will be right back to challenging us with their so called talentless team.

Your argument seems to be based on starting from the presumption that Patriot players are worse than they play because of coaching and Colt players are better than they play because of coaching. Thats a dangerous presumption when you are trying to prove the difference is coaching.
It is equally dangerous to throw all players that don't have 'name value' under a blanket and call them the same.

 

[Ring 6]

If Matt Cassel was in Indy with a serious attempt to win and good coaching like he had here in 08, Reggie Wayne would still be a 1000+ 9+ TD 90+ catch receiver. You are here ignoring the situation and just looking at numbers. I am not discounting Welker, but I will say Indy's talentless receiving core is better than ours.

Our team has more depth, but our team is not much talented itself. I know its hard to post this on Patsfans but it is true if you stop being biased. This isn't anti-Patriot, they are well disciplined and coached not loaded with talent, most of the top teams are the former not the latter and NE is one of them. Take the homer glasses off (comparing Bill and Cassel to Caldwell and Painter?) and realize the main point of Indy only having a few guys is the same as here in NE, minus the HOF coach and QB.

If you are going to use the Cassell argument the you need to compare to the 2008 Patriots, the one that just came off an 18-1 season. The one with Moss and Welker, Seymour, Vrabel, Bruschi, etc, etc.

 

[Rob0729]

Sure buddy? Guys like Chung, Spikes, BenJ etc would play poorly in Indy and be labeled as talentless there, not to mention you are biased as a Pats fan.

They don't have coaching, and they don't have a winning atmosphere, the team is expected, allowed, and even maybe rewarded (top pick) for losing and not trying. In NE good players get cut sometimes for no reason, in Indy these guys wouldn't have to try nearly as hard, this isn't a talent issue it is a coaching and discipline issue. When Peyton is back and what not they will be right back to challenging us with their so called talentless team.

Guys like Chung and Spikes are not built for the Tampa 2. So they wouldn't perform well in that defense in Indy, but they could certainly perform in other systems at a high level.

The Colts' offense has been built around a great running game for so many years, I wouldn't be surprised if BJGE would be better there than here.

Again, my assessment of the Colts goes back to last year where they were Peyton Manning and a bunch of other guys.

Peyton probably will not be back to his old self ever again and even if he is, the Colts will not be nearly as competitive for a playoff spot next year unless they improve quite a bit since Houston will give them a challenge and possibly even Tennessee and Jacksonville (depending on who they get as a head coach).

They are a team with very little talent because they are a team that builds almost exclusively through the draft and have misfired on a lot of high draft picks in recent years.

 

[Rob0729]

If Matt Cassel was in Indy with a serious attempt to win and good coaching like he had here in 08, Reggie Wayne would still be a 1000+ 9+ TD 90+ catch receiver. You are here ignoring the situation and just looking at numbers. I am not discounting Welker, but I will say Indy's talentless receiving core is better than ours.

Our team has more depth, but our team is not much talented itself. I know its hard to post this on Patsfans but it is true if you stop being biased. This isn't anti-Patriot, they are well disciplined and coached not loaded with talent, most of the top teams are the former not the latter and NE is one of them. Take the homer glasses off (comparing Bill and Cassel to Caldwell and Painter?) and realize the main point of Indy only having a few guys is the same as here in NE, minus the HOF coach and QB.

First, I already said the Colts' WRs are better than the Pats. But that is my pro Pats bias coming out. It is the only position group where they are better than the Pats unless you count DE as its own position and not d-line as a group.

Second, with Cassel, Randy Moss only had 1,008 yards in 2008. Yes, he had 11 TDs, but that was a 12 TD decline from the year before. So I think your estimates of Wayne are off. I don't know if Cassel would have gotten him over 1,000 yards with Cassel coming off the bench like he did.

Third, I never said the Pats are one of the most talented teams in the league. They are certainly more talented than the Colts which isn't saying much. I am just countering the argument that they are "stacked" with talent. They aren't. They sucked in all phases last year other than the passing game and if they were in a more competitive division, they probably wouldn't have gone above .500. They have been living off of reputation, Manning, and weak schedule for a few years now.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

Your argument seems to be based on starting from the presumption that Patriot players are worse than they play because of coaching and Colt players are better than they play because of coaching. Thats a dangerous presumption when you are trying to prove the difference is coaching.
It is equally dangerous to throw all players that don't have 'name value' under a blanket and call them the same.

My argument is simply that it is silly for a Pats fan to call the Colts talentless and us not, because they are very close to the same, minus the coach and healthy QB (as well as the desire to win now and not lose for draft position). That a lot of Patsfans favorites like Benjarvus and Branch are not that good just like this guy is saying of Colts players.

But that only works if you believe that Indy is purposely losing, which I do, if you disagree then ignore my comments. I think they could have beaten a few of teams this year even with their horrible QB, now you add in a decent-good starting QB like Cassel with a great coach and they are a playoff team.

 

[Rob0729]

If you are going to use the Cassell argument the you need to compare to the 2008 Patriots, the one that just came off an 18-1 season. The one with Moss and Welker, Seymour, Vrabel, Bruschi, etc, etc.

And let's not forget the Pats benefitted from a easy schedule that year too. I doubt that Cassel could bring that same team to 11-5 if they had this year's Colts' schedule.

That 2008 team had a lot of good to gret talent. Seymour had a career high in sacks that year. Adalius Thomas was still above average. Ty Warren was still very good. Mayo won the Defensive Rookie of the Year. Vrabel was coming off a 12 sack year the year before. Moss was coming off a record breaking career year. Welker was a stud. Gaffney was a solid #3 WR. Kevin Faulk was the best 3rd down/change of pace back in the game. The Pats had a pretty good RB rotation of Faulk, Morris, Jordan, and BJGE. Meriweather was still above average.

 

[Ring 6]

My argument is simply that it is silly for a Pats fan to call the Colts talentless and us not, because they are very close to the same, minus the coach and healthy QB (as well as the desire to win now and not lose for draft position). That a lot of Patsfans favorites like Benjarvus and Branch are not that good just like this guy is saying of Colts players.

And I disagree. I am simply pointing out the circular argument you are making.
Premise: Our guys are better only because of coaching
Argument: Our guy would play worse with their coaching and their guy would play better with our coaching.
Whether you are right or wrong your argument is invalid

But that only works if you believe that Indy is purposely losing, which I do, if you disagree then ignore my comments.

No, if I disagree I will explain my disagreement.

I think they could have beaten a few of teams this year even with their horrible QB, now you add in a decent-good starting QB like Cassel with a great coach and they are a playoff team.

I find that totally ridiculous, but you could use that argument for any team, and you can pick any variable and add them in that place. It doesn't make a valid argument.

I could argue that punter is the most important position in football. I could argue that all of our players are better than other teams, but we had bad punts in all of the games we have ever lost, and that field position is so important that it makes every player better, and if we had a great punter we would have won 10 straight SBs. That silly argument is as well supported as the one you are trying to make.

 

[Rob0729]

My argument is simply that it is silly for a Pats fan to call the Colts talentless and us not, because they are very close to the same, minus the coach and healthy QB (as well as the desire to win now and not lose for draft position). That a lot of Patsfans favorites like Benjarvus and Branch are not that good just like this guy is saying of Colts players.

But that only works if you believe that Indy is purposely losing, which I do, if you disagree then ignore my comments. I think they could have beaten a few of teams this year even with their horrible QB, now you add in a decent-good starting QB like Cassel with a great coach and they are a playoff team.

First, the argument is about the Colts, not the Pats. The Pats' talent is a red herring because it has nothing to do with the original premise. People who disagreed with my original argument threw that in.

Second, I specifically stated I did not include either Branch or BJGE in my list of good to elite talent on the Pats roster. I said both have been too inconsistent this year to be considered good. The only thing I said is that BJGE is a better lead back than either Addai or Donald Brown. Even though some have tried, it is hard to counter that.

Third, I am basing my assessment of the Colts from last year as much as this year. If the team around Manning last year looked any good, I would not be making this argument. But the Colts looked horrible last year, but benefitted from Manning, a weak schedule, some bad decisions from the opposing coach, and luck.

Fourth, I don't disagree at this point they are probably "Sucking for Luck", but they didn't go into the season that way. If they did, they wouldn't have paid for Collins and they were stupid to go into the season with that strategy because until about 3-4 weeks ago, there was no guarantee they would get the first overall pick with that strategy going into the season. Remember there were three or four teams supposably "Sucking for Luck" in September including the Dolphins.

Again, this Colts team last year was 2-3 against teams with winning record (2-4 if you count the playoffs) with Manning at QB. They already faced 6 teams who have winning records right now and have four more left on their schedule with winning records. Even with Manning, you cannot say this team is any better than last year. If they lost a third of their games last year against good teams with Manning, it is safe to assume that they would lose than many or more with a decent QB this year.

I didn't think they would be better than 9-7 before I heard Manning was out. But that was before I found out teams like Houston and Cincy were going to be actually very good.

One last time. I don't think the Pats are anywhere near the top when it comes to talent. That wasn't the argument. The argument is that people who argue that the Colts are stacked with talent are wrong. They are not very talented except in a few positions and not as talented as the Pats.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

And I disagree. I am simply pointing out the circular argument you are making.
Premise: Our guys are better only because of coaching
Argument: Our guy would play worse with their coaching and their guy would play better with our coaching.
Whether you are right or wrong your argument is invalid


No, if I disagree I will explain my disagreement.




I find that totally ridiculous, but you could use that argument for any team, and you can pick any variable and add them in that place. It doesn't make a valid argument.

I could argue that punter is the most important position in football. I could argue that all of our players are better than other teams, but we had bad punts in all of the games we have ever lost, and that field position is so important that it makes every player better, and if we had a great punter we would have won 10 straight SBs. That silly argument is as well supported as the one you are trying to make.

I am not arguing that, I am arguing that in OPs logic we are not that talented. I believe we are but I also believe Indy is. Neither team is stacked and neither team can win a ring without the top 2 QBs in the game.

I don't even like the Colts, but they have talent similar to ours, and that is my opinion.

 

[IllegalContact]

First, the argument is about the Colts, not the Pats. The Pats' talent is a red herring because it has nothing to do with the original premise. People who disagreed with my original argument threw that in.

Second, I specifically stated I did not include either Branch or BJGE in my list of good to elite talent. The only thing I said is that BJGE is a better lead back than either Addai or Donald Brown.

Third, I am basing my assessment of the Colts from last year as much as this year.

Fourth, I don't disagree at this point they are probably "Sucking for Luck", but they didn't go into the season that way. If they did, they wouldn't have paid for Collins and they were stupid to go into the season with that strategy because until about 3-4 weeks ago, there was no guarantee they would get the first overall pick with that strategy.

Again, this team last year was 2-3 against teams with winning record (2-4 if you count the playoffs) with Manning at QB. They already faced 6 teams who have winning records right now and have four more left on their schedule with winning records. Even with Manning, you cannot say this team is any better than last year. If they lost a third of their games last year against good teams with Manning, it is safe to assume that they would lose than many or more with a decent QB this year.

I didn't think they would be better than 9-7 before I heard Manning was out. But that was before I found out teams like Houston and Cincy were going to be actually very good.

LOL.........

quick question........without brady, what'e the pats record this year?.....I already know your answer, but I want to hear it anyway.....I'm figuring 1, maybe 2 wins.....

 

[Rob0729]

LOL.........

quick question........without brady, what'e the pats record this year?.....I already know your answer, but I want to hear it anyway.....I'm figuring 1, maybe 2 wins.....

Well, if they had TBC on the team, 11-0.

 

[Rob0729]

I am not arguing that, I am arguing that in OPs logic we are not that talented. I believe we are but I also believe Indy is. Neither team is stacked and neither team can win a ring without the top 2 QBs in the game.

I don't even like the Colts, but they have talent similar to ours, and that is my opinion.

So you are arguing a point I never made. I never made this a Patriots vs. Colts argument. Others did.

I think the Colts have several great to elite talents (Freeney, Wayne, Clark, and Mathis) and not a heck of a lot else. Several players are above average, but but most of the team is mediocre.

As for the Pats, they probably don't have as many great to elite players (if you take Brady out of the argument), but they have far more above average to very good players.

 

[IllegalContact]

Well, if they had TBC on the team, 11-0.

yup....

you just love to hear yourself talk..........the substance doesn't matter, you just love to hear it

 

[Dutchmaster617]

BTW I also disagree that Indy is 'loaded', I haven't heard it since everyone discredits Wayne and the o-line to defend Peyton, but I agree with you on that part. My disagreement comes where you say they would be mediocre with Peyton and a coach, in which case I would say they would be great with a few off nights, the typical 10-13 win season that they usually have. That is essentially where we are, take away Bill, Brady, and the drive to win and we look just as talent less as the Colts.

They went 10-6 last year and we went 14-2, you say luck, Peyton, and bad coaching from the opposition, but isn't that what we have faced in the last two seasons (22-5 regular season last 27 games)? If Brady's dropped INTs are caught and he throws 20 picks like Manning, the opponents are coached better etc. this team is 10-6 last year or this year as well. I just don't see a big gap in talent either way.

 

[Rob0729]

yup....

you just love to hear yourself talk..........the substance doesn't matter, you just love to hear it

When you make a post of substance, it will be your first. And I will respond to you. I am not going to take your Jets fan posing as a pats fan arguments seriously though.

 

[IllegalContact]

So you are arguing a point I never made. I never made this a Patriots vs. Colts argument. Others did.

I think the Colts have several great to elite talents (Freeney, Wayne, Clark, and Mathis) and not a heck of a lot else. Several players are above average, but but most of the team is mediocre.

you could say the same about the pats.......who do they have on defense? wilfork? you could say the exact same thing about mayo that you said about angerer...lots of tackles because the defense can't get off the field.

as for the offense, they have brady, gronk, and welker.....you could easily argue the OL is overrated......the running game is mediocre and brady has been hit plenty of times....outside of those 3, anyone on the pats O is pretty much interchangeable with anyone on the colts from an impartial view. brady makes them better