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

[Dutchmaster617]

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

I never read through the topic, I just saw the first post and figured you have to be kidding me, the Pats are not that talented by the same logic, you can only list a handful of guys who make big impact on our team as well. So I just thought if you were dissing the Colts (maybe my mistake) then you are dissing us, because this same breakdown of talent is what people use against us to this day when predicting the playoffs.

Again my mistake, I never got your intentions and figured you were putting Indy down when they are playing poorly, ignoring the fact that the individual talent is similar to many contenders, they just haven't played/coached hard enough. Sorry for throwing this in the wrong direction if that is the case.

 

[IllegalContact]

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.

LOL.......like I said, you love to hear yourself talk regardless of how pointless you are.

you have yet to ever post something that would suggest you might have more football knowledge than a pile of poo

 

[Rob0729]

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.

First, I am not discrediting the o-line. It is generally recognized that the Colts' o-line sucks. The Pats drafted a tackle in the first round to find a replacement for Light. The Colts' drafted a tackle several picks later because o-line was their biggest weakness.

Second, I said Wayne is aging and possibly hitting the age wall. He is 33. That is a logical assumption.

Third, yes the Pats might have had a worse record last year because of a fortunately play or two here or there, but so could have the Colts. So if the Pats went 10-6, the Colts could have gone 7-9 under the same logic. The Pats won 4 games last year by 7 points or less which is 30% of their wins. The Colts won 5 games by 7 points or less which is 50% of their wins.

Fourth, there is a significant drop in talent between the two team. Maybe not comparing the top 5 players on each roster but 6-53 there is.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

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

I agree, this was all I was trying to say. About the tackles being padded by TOP, I also think the ease of scoring helped BenJ pad his stats to 1000, but people here act like its a crime to call BenJ replaceable.

 

[Rob0729]

I never read through the topic, I just saw the first post and figured you have to be kidding me, the Pats are not that talented by the same logic, you can only list a handful of guys who make big impact on our team as well. So I just thought if you were dissing the Colts (maybe my mistake) then you are dissing us, because this same breakdown of talent is what people use against us to this day when predicting the playoffs.

Again my mistake, I never got your intentions and figured you were putting Indy down when they are playing poorly, ignoring the fact that the individual talent is similar to many contenders, they just haven't played/coached hard enough. Sorry for throwing this in the wrong direction if that is the case.

I think the Colts have a handful of players that you can put up against most teams in the league, but I think after you get beyond those players that they are near the bottom in talent when comparing the rest of their roster with the rest of most other teams' roster. If you are stacked with talent, that doesn't mean you have 5-10 players who are great and garbage everywhere else. That is my point.

I didn't want to turn this into a Patriots vs. Colts debate. I think the Pats entire 53 man roster is significantly better than the Colts' entire 53 roster, but I don't think they are near the top as far as talent. Belichick thrives on smart players who have some talent, but are coachable and will do their job no matter what the role. I don't even think in the Super Bowl years, the Pats had top 3 in talent, but players who fit into the Belichick mold.

 

[Rob0729]

I agree, this was all I was trying to say. About the tackles being padded by TOP, I also think the ease of scoring helped BenJ pad his stats to 1000, but people here act like its a crime to call BenJ replaceable.

One last one. I am not one who said BJGE isn't irreplaceable. I just said he is better than Addai and Brown. Prior to this year, both Addai and Brown had the same opportunities to pad their stats and other than Addai's rookie season they have failed to do so. I just think BJGE is better than them. That is faint praise because I think both Addai and Brown are not very good. Addai might excel in the Kevin Faulk role, but he is not a lead back in any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

First, I am not discrediting the o-line. It is generally recognized that the Colts' o-line sucks. The Pats drafted a tackle in the first round to find a replacement for Light. The Colts' drafted a tackle several picks later because o-line was their biggest weakness.

Second, I said Wayne is aging and possibly hitting the age wall. He is 33. That is a logical assumption.

Third, yes the Pats might have had a worse record last year because of a fortunately play or two here or there, but so could have the Colts. So if the Pats went 10-6, the Colts could have gone 7-9 under the same logic. The Pats won 4 games last year by 7 points or less which is 30% of their wins. The Colts won 5 games by 7 points or less which is 50% of their wins.

Fourth, there is a significant drop in talent between the two team. Maybe not comparing the top 5 players on each roster but 6-53 there is.

I am not talking about you or any Pats fans, I am talking on neutral boards where people who typically spew Pats hate (Cassel 11-5, spygate, winning SBs off a kicker etc.) turn around and say the O-line and Wayne quit and that makes Peyton 500 in the playoffs or other dumb things. They act like Indy is garbage outside of Manning.

On the other point, the Colts could have had lucky dropped INTs (Say Peyton only throws 10) and end up 14-2, it doesn't just go one way, this is football and things happen.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

I think the Colts have a handful of players that you can put up against most teams in the league, but I think after you get beyond those players that they are near the bottom in talent when comparing the rest of their roster with the rest of most other teams' roster. If you are stacked with talent, that doesn't mean you have 5-10 players who are great and garbage everywhere else. That is my point.

I didn't want to turn this into a Patriots vs. Colts debate. I think the Pats entire 53 man roster is significantly better than the Colts' entire 53 roster, but I don't think they are near the top as far as talent. Belichick thrives on smart players who have some talent, but are coachable and will do their job no matter what the role. I don't even think in the Super Bowl years, the Pats had top 3 in talent, but players who fit into the Belichick mold.

I agree, that is why I can't see how Andy doesn't acknowledge that Bill would elevate a team like Indy, and Caldwell would make this team worse. Coaching is a big part of what won us titles, not huge talent. The Rams had more talent than us but got outcoached.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

...there is a significant drop in talent between the two team. Maybe not comparing the top 5 players on each roster but 6-53 there is.

Part of that is by design, however. The Colts have been losing players to injury.

Do they make claims on waived guys who could be an upgrade?
NO.

Do they bring in veteran free agents for tryouts?
NO.

Before the trade deadline, did they try to do anything?
NO.


You can give them the "woe is me, we have no talent at the bottom of the roster" excuse when it is central to their philosophy of tanking to get Andrew Luck.

 

[Ring 6]

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.

If Brady theows 20 Ints instead of 4?
THAT is your argument?

 

[Ring 6]

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.

Then we just simply disagree.
I don't know why you needed to confuse this.
If you want to think the Colts players, despite not playing as well, as just as good as the Patriots plays, feel free. I think you will continue to have trouble finding anyone to agree with you.

 

[Ring 6]

Part of that is by design, however. The Colts have been losing players to injury.

Do they make claims on waived guys who could be an upgrade?
NO.

Do they bring in veteran free agents for tryouts?
NO.

Before the trade deadline, did they try to do anything?
NO.


You can give them the "woe is me, we have no talent at the bottom of the roster" excuse when it is central to their philosophy of tanking to get Andrew Luck.

Well, they have to be doing something to replace the injured players.
Have they done any of the things you listed in other years when they were in contention? Not so much.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree, that is why I can't see how Andy doesn't acknowledge that Bill would elevate a team like Indy, and Caldwell would make this team worse. Coaching is a big part of what won us titles, not huge talent. The Rams had more talent than us but got outcoached.

Andy hasn't discussed whether BB would make them better or not, Andy is just pointing out that your argument that we are only better because of coaching because the players who play better only play better because of coaching is circular and weak.

 

[Ring 6]

I am not talking about you or any Pats fans, I am talking on neutral boards where people who typically spew Pats hate (Cassel 11-5, spygate, winning SBs off a kicker etc.) turn around and say the O-line and Wayne quit and that makes Peyton 500 in the playoffs or other dumb things. They act like Indy is garbage outside of Manning.

On the other point, the Colts could have had lucky dropped INTs (Say Peyton only throws 10) and end up 14-2, it doesn't just go one way, this is football and things happen.

So all teams are just equal and are only above or below 8 wins because of luck?

Indy has declined rapidly over the last few years. They went from contending for undefeated to a shaky 10 and 6. This year, without question they are a worse team than ever before, besides the QB issue. They would be struggling to get to .500 with Manning. Great QBs have a ton to do with their teams succeeding and are without a doubt the primary piece. The fact that the Colts would be struggling with Manning at 100% is exactly the reason that they suck. The Patriots have the best record in the NFL the last 2 years with Brady. That is a HUGE difference from struggling to make the playoffs.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Have they done any of the things you listed in other years...

Being first in line for any waived player gives you potential assets, if you choose to take them. They have not been in the position to do this in the past, but now that they are in such a position and chose to do nothing, one cannot help but notice.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

If Brady theows 20 Ints instead of 4?
THAT is your argument?

or instead of 10 (and counting) this year, that was part of my argument, problem? Good because I never asked.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

Then we just simply disagree.
I don't know why you needed to confuse this.
If you want to think the Colts players, despite not playing as well, as just as good as the Patriots plays, feel free. I think you will continue to have trouble finding anyone to agree with you.

You act as if everyone agrees with you here, far from it, then you act as if I care for agreement here which I don't.

The Colts are playing poor and losing, that isn't an indication of a poor roster, half of the time they are throwing games so how can you take that seriously?

 

[Dutchmaster617]

Andy hasn't discussed whether BB would make them better or not, Andy is just pointing out that your argument that we are only better because of coaching because the players who play better only play better because of coaching is circular and weak.

You forgot that we don't throw games and we have a healthy Brady, so those THREE things, and without two or more of them we would be better, but better as in 2-9 or 3-8.

 

[Keyser Söze]

I disagree with the thought that there should "be an investigation" and that they threw games etc.

I agree with your thought that they were not properly prepared in the backup QB role, and that they went out and chose a very poor choice in Collins.

They have been close in some games this yr. They should be having a very poor season at 3-8 or something like that, but some of the 0-11 problem is bad luck too.

They seem to have given up on some level, and I think that happened very quickly. I do not agree with any kind of thinking that they are one of the worst teams in the history of the NFL, even despite their 0-11 record.

We have witnessed some ridiculously untalented teams over the yrs, and most of those teams hovered around the 2 and 3 win mark. It is pure coincidence in my opinion, that the Colts are not one of those teams.

In other words, yes they suck; but no they don't suck on the level that some are making it out to be.

I'm saying the players each gave up when they knew Manning was done. I wasnt saying ownership threw the season. Just because the players quit, doesnt make Manning a 11 game winner.

 

[strngplyr]

This thread is so pointless, it's a bunch of people full of themselves clashing heads. Arguing here is so pointless, nobody will ever give ground because they "know" they are right.

Ignore this thread while you still can!