- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 32,634
- Reaction score
- 23,169
i did read the whole post and i do know we play indy tough. i think every patriots fan (make that "football fan") knows that full well; it's why the game is always played on a sunday or monday night for season high Nielsen ratings.
problem is, i don't know what "promising" trend you're talking about since over the last five years (since 2005), we're 1--5 against them, including two memorable fourth quarter cough ups in the 2006 AFCCG and this year. sure the games are usually close (except for 05), but that's what you expect with two great teams.
to me the trend is anything but "promising" when contrasted with the first half of the decade when our record against them was the mirror opposite at 5--1 and we more or less owned them. that's not to say i don't think we won't beat them in the playoffs, just that the recent trendline definitely gives little comfort.
if, as you suggest, I am in the minority on this one, which I doubt, i'm comfortable being there. Merry Christmas anyway.
The 1-5 record you are speaking of didn't all happen AT Indy, did they? Actually, the only time that Indy really spanked us was in Foxborough in 2006, the one here in 2005 was closer (or vice versa). That's not AT Indy. Not to mention that in 2 of the past 3 games we played there, we were either without a capable group of WR's, or Tom Brady himself--which proves that we can play in their dome as a team, just the same as any other stadium. The overall point was one of surprising optimism and hope, you sound like that is impossible for you to accept. Indy did not outplay or start to pull ahead in any of the games, once again a sign of hope.
The bottom line is that I have heard many posters speak of how we, once again, "get owned AT Indy, etc." That simply isn't true at all, where have we gotten owned? If so many people here know we play them so tough in their own stadium (which many didn't...) then why are they so scared of going there? The 'usual' Sun and Mon night games didn't even start until 2005--and that's hardly going back to the past 18 trips there, which indeed is a 'trend' that goes back over 20 years. Not since 2005.
All were either wins or very close losses. In 06 AFCCG we were up 21-3 (is that 'getting owned?')
Last year we lost 18-15 (once again, not getting owned)
This year we were up 17 in the 4th quarter (again...)
Yes, I can agree that we blew leads in 2006 and 2009, but that really doesn't have anything to do with what we're discussing. Actually 7 out of the past 8 meetings have been won by the team that was originally trailing--that stat has nothing to do with people being scared to go there, and suggesting how we always lose there.
I have provided encouraging information that is a FACT that we have either won in their dome, or lost very close games. This fact suggests that we can play with them there. If you do not find it encouraging, then yes, I still think you stand alone. Everyone was disappointed about a blown lead in 2006, and the one this year--that is a given. But it has nothing to do with what I am talking about, you're talking about the disappointment of blowing late leads which is...a totally different subject.
The bottom line is that many will be, and have admitted to being, surprised to find this information out. You are arguing a point that I already crossed several lines into the post. I was the one who originally brought up that it did not equal a playoff win, but is encouraging nonetheless.
I guess you claiming that you already knew that over the past 20 odd years we have either won there or lost by a close margin--I somehow find that hard to believe.
-----------
I was simply trying to point out an interesting and surprising fact, while showing the forum some reason for optimism. You sound like you're throwing out the whole theory or trend, simply because you're still bitter that we lost the past 3 AT Indy (all by 3 pts or less).
While many here thought that the Colts completely owned us in their home stadium, this goes back many years to prove the exact opposite.
Last edited: