Interesting fact IF we go to Indy in the playoffs...

[supafly]

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.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Seriously, get over it. You guys are way too obsessed with the Colts, bringing up every ridiculous stat to give you hope since 2005 and continue to live in the past. Their recent record against Indy sucks. If they're lucky to face the Colts again, the Pats will find a way to lose.

 

[supafly]

Seriously, get over it. You guys are way too obsessed with the Colts, bringing up every ridiculous stat to give you hope since 2005 and continue to live in the past. Their recent record against Indy sucks. If they're lucky to face the Colts again, the Pats will find a way to lose.

We can compete with the Indy Colts, especially on their home field.

In 06 we had no real WR's, yet were still up 21-3

In 07 we beat them

In 08 we lost by 3 without TFB

In 09 we were up by 17 in the 4th quarter

--------------------

Besides, the thread was about the success and overall competitiveness when we play at the home of the Indy Colts. I wouldn't let 3 games decided by less than 3 points ruin that for you.

There is absolutely nothing that says we cannot compete with the Colts, never did they start to pull away in ANY of those games, not once.

 

[supafly]

Seriously, get over it. You guys are way too obsessed with the Colts, bringing up every ridiculous stat to give you hope since 2005 and continue to live in the past. Their recent record against Indy sucks. If they're lucky to face the Colts again, the Pats will find a way to lose.

Who's living in the past?

In 2006 with a depleted and non existent WR corps, we went to Indy and had a 21-3 lead.

In 2007 we won.

In 2008 we lost TB yet still were a David Thomas penalty or Gaffney drop from winning again. Lost by a FG.

In 2009 we were up 17 in the 4th quarter, and lost by a point.

Where is the past? You mean to tell me that any of those games led you to believe that we cannot compete with Indy, none of them were even here in Foxborough.

I'm missing the whole 'living in the past' thing. They haven't even sniffed domination. This is all in the present.

 

[patsinthesnow]

You may not be afraid of them, but the Pats sure are. As a life long Pats fan, I am certain that the Pats, if they play in Indy, will loose in the playoffs. And this time, I don't even think it will be close. The Pats need to bring in someone on the defense with an attitude. I would rather have Jerry Porter than the sheep we have now...

Indy doesn't blow ANYONE out. It would be a close game.

 

[supafly]

Indy doesn't blow ANYONE out. It would be a close game.

You're damn right it'd be a close game. In 2001 we had the same record after 15 weeks, then went on to win the SB.

Too many people around here are scared of the Indy Colts, which is exactly why I even posted the thread. It was supposed to be a sign of optimism.

Then I post it, and a few pessimistic negative people try and ruin anyone's hope by claiming that we're 'living in the past' like the 1-2 record in their dome the past 3 yrs is gonna make that big of a difference. They talk like we got pasted by 40+ points in all 3 of the games.

For those negative people who think the Colts own us, or that we'd get clobbered---look at another thread about a matter of inches. A successful 4th down and 2 would've made us 2-1 at Indy in the last 3, and everyone's minds would be different.

 

[supafly]

I actually find it rather disturbing that an attempt at hope and optimism turns into the same couple/few posters once again whining about how this team cannot compete--especially after the facts suggest otherwise.

As the 'matter of inches' thread points out, a successful 4th and 2 attempt and the team is 10-4, playing for a bye, and everyone's basically happy.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Who's living in the past?

In 2006 with a depleted and non existent WR corps, we went to Indy and had a 21-3 lead.

In 2007 we won.

In 2008 we lost TB yet still were a David Thomas penalty or Gaffney drop from winning again. Lost by a FG.

In 2009 we were up 17 in the 4th quarter, and lost by a point.

Where is the past? You mean to tell me that any of those games led you to believe that we cannot compete with Indy, none of them were even here in Foxborough.

I'm missing the whole 'living in the past' thing. They haven't even sniffed domination. This is all in the present.

The fact is, the Pats are 1-5 against the Colts since 2004. The Colts flat out own them. The Pats can compete with Indy but they can't beat them. I don't care if the Pats are up 40-0, they have found a way to lose 5 out of the last 6 meetings.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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.

I have no idea what you're arguing about. You're saying that we play Indy tight. I say that's an uninteresting statement because it's tautological. Everybody knows it. Indy has just been a little better than us consistently these last five years. So, I don't find it a revelation that spreads are tight nor would I argue that the Colts and Pats are two evenly matched teams.

My point is that recently we haven't done so well against them, which is indisputable on the facts given our record against them over the last five years (1--5) vs. the prior five years (5--1). As i observed, neither says anything about how we'd do against them in Indy in the Playoffs this year (BTW, I think we'd kick their butts, just a gut feel).

You should be careful with couple of your characterizations, though. Indy won a close, evenly fought game in Foxboro in 2006; we were hardly "spanked" in a game where both teams put up virtually the same number of yards. And, I have absolutely no idea what your're talking about when you call the 2005 game "closer" when they beat us 40--21. I think I'm known on this board for my command of the history of the NFL and my facts, so get your ducks in order before you argue facts with me.

All the stuff about being "scared" to go to Indy and "always losing" there comes from somewhere else because I'd be the last to say that.

Beyond that, I'm chalking your post up to too much Egg Nog and still wishing you a Merry Christmas.

 

[bostonia3333]

Pats need to be up 35-0 for me to be able to run an errand or go out for a walk while the game is going on. This team just can't finish games anymore.

Ever since Feb 2008, this team has found ways to choke leads down the stretch, and they have been even more creative at losing leads this year than ever. I expect that to continue in the playoffs, you can't just flip on a switch and expect that trend to change. I am numbed by Pees' ineptitude, I just don't get angry at the defense anymore. I don't know why they let up on defense, but it's part of their identity right now--Pees' passiveness has rubbed off on the team, and the desire to make plays and tackle effectively seems to be missing. They almost blew that Buffalo game last week--no one mentions that. I expect another uncomfortable game this week against Jax. It's just one of those years.

 

[Lansdowne]

I remember that AFCCG, when Asante Samuel picked off Peyton Manning and brought it back for a TD. I shrugged to my father and began casually talking about how the Patriots were going to do the same to Rex Grossman in Miami. I was as calm and comfortable as can be.

Then the second half happened. Colts scored a touchdown on three consecutive possessions, include a bull**** PI call on Hobbs that the officiating crew later apologized for, and a fluke fumble recovery in the end zone. At that point I knew it wasn't our night, and everything that happened after that was just elementary.

This year's game against Indy was eerily reminiscent. That's why I don't feel comfortable with them going into Indy. There is a very distinct home field advantage.

I can handle it if the Colts smash the Patriots in the mouth like they did in 2005. But they had extra help in every game after that, and that's what makes it hard to swallow.

 

[supafly]

I have no idea what you're arguing about. You're saying that we play Indy tight. I say that's an uninteresting statement because it's tautological. Everybody knows it. Indy has just been a little better than us consistently these last five years. So, I don't find it a revelation that spreads are tight nor would I argue that the Colts and Pats are two evenly matched teams.

My point is that recently we haven't done so well against them, which is indisputable on the facts given our record against them over the last five years (1--5) vs. the prior five years (5--1). As i observed, neither says anything about how we'd do against them in Indy in the Playoffs this year (BTW, I think we'd kick their butts, just a gut feel).

You should be careful with couple of your characterizations, though. Indy won a close, evenly fought game in Foxboro in 2006; we were hardly "spanked" in a game where both teams put up virtually the same number of yards. And, I have absolutely no idea what your're talking about when you call the 2005 game "closer" when they beat us 40--21. I think I'm known on this board for my command of the history of the NFL and my facts, so get your ducks in order before you argue facts with me.

All the stuff about being "scared" to go to Indy and "always losing" there comes from somewhere else because I'd be the last to say that.

Beyond that, I'm chalking your post up to too much Egg Nog and still wishing you a Merry Christmas.

Apparently you aren't aware of the term 'vice versa' either, as you still cannot read a post correctly.

That is why I included the term 'vice versa' next to the 2005/2006 games, because I was not sure off the top of my head which game it was, and did not feel like looking it up.

If that is the best you can do (not understand what vice versa means) then it is pointless to go back and forth with you. You have now pointed out multiple things that I myself, already stated several sentences into the posts, and you've actually done it more than once now. Once again, I will question your ability to read and comprehend the sentences correctly. Why would you go on and on about me not knowing the differences between the games of 05/06, when I was the one who used the term 'vice versa' to begin with??? It seems illogical, as I've already proved that I didn't remember which game it was.

------

Once again, the thread was meant to spread some hope and optimism in a season where I have heard many, many posters (never claimed it was you) say that we consistently get clobbered in the dome at Indianapolis. I provided a cold hard fact that stated otherwise. If you were not one of the posters who claimed such a thing, then I am not sure why you even posted a negative message in the first place (???)

You were the ONLY person who had any kind of problem with it, and I am not the least bit surprised--as I have noticed your excessive whining regarding this year's team in many other posts.

Most were pleasantly surprised by the fact, and I hope I may have instilled a bit of confidence for some who may have needed it.

When some of the classy posters don't have anything of value to add, they simply do not respond. Your eyeroll, etc, over something that was meant to be positive shows your true colors, as do many of your posts that have knocked the team down this year.

 

[supafly]

Pats need to be up 35-0 for me to be able to run an errand or go out for a walk while the game is going on. This team just can't finish games anymore.

Ever since Feb 2008, this team has found ways to choke leads down the stretch, and they have been even more creative at losing leads this year than ever. I expect that to continue in the playoffs, you can't just flip on a switch and expect that trend to change. I am numbed by Pees' ineptitude, I just don't get angry at the defense anymore. I don't know why they let up on defense, but it's part of their identity right now--Pees' passiveness has rubbed off on the team, and the desire to make plays and tackle effectively seems to be missing. They almost blew that Buffalo game last week--no one mentions that. I expect another uncomfortable game this week against Jax. It's just one of those years.

As do I, this years younger defense has been working through some problems over the past season, and many people have gotten awfully freaked out due to the high expectations, etc.

Bottom line is that there are still many things to be thankful for, and a chance at the playoffs and SB are both wonderful things. There are many of us who still remember the early '90's and are so grateful that those days are over.

I don't expect any blowouts or major leads, etc, but I do expect the ability to be able to continue to compete this year. Next year we will patch up some problems and be closer to the teams of the past decade, but now is the time that we have to stick together and back our team. We will most likely be in a 3 game tournament with a shot to win the conference. If we get a few breaks, and play and execute an effective gameplan, we may even get a chance at 2 weeks preparation for another Super Bowl.

As for the Indy information, I expected most to be somewhat surprised by it, and thought it would add a bit of optimism to the upcoming stretch run. I by no means, (as I stated in the very beginning) expected it to be a back and forth about whether or not we won in the past few years there--as I realize that we lost close games. At least 95% including you, seemed to have understood.

 

[supafly]

I remember that AFCCG, when Asante Samuel picked off Peyton Manning and brought it back for a TD. I shrugged to my father and began casually talking about how the Patriots were going to do the same to Rex Grossman in Miami. I was as calm and comfortable as can be.

Then the second half happened. Colts scored a touchdown on three consecutive possessions, include a bull**** PI call on Hobbs that the officiating crew later apologized for, and a fluke fumble recovery in the end zone. At that point I knew it wasn't our night, and everything that happened after that was just elementary.

This year's game against Indy was eerily reminiscent. That's why I don't feel comfortable with them going into Indy. There is a very distinct home field advantage.

I can handle it if the Colts smash the Patriots in the mouth like they did in 2005. But they had extra help in every game after that, and that's what makes it hard to swallow.

Yes, but you have to feel somewhat better knowing that they played close games vs. consistently getting blown out against Manning. Yes, he's gotten plenty of breaks and some great luck--but it can't continue forever.

Judging by the comments I have read in some threads the past several weeks, you'd swear some people were sure that we'd lost by 40+ in every game there.

 

[BradysBunch12]

Beating Indy in their dome requires you to be PERFECT. In other words, score 7 every time, don't turn the ball over, overcome the bad calls by the refs. Hell, the 2007 team had to overcome a lot of bad calls and 2 Brady INTs just to barely beat them by 4 points.

I do agree, however, that 5 out of the last 6 games (1 which we won, another one that was started by a high school quarterback) we were neck and neck with them and a couple plays differently or better calls by the refs and we're the ones on the winning side. I just hate to rely on that, and Indy is a team that if you want to beat them, force Manning to get happy-feet and throw 3-4 INT and put more than a 17 point lead on them. That, or be prepared to put up 7 every time you have the ball, which this team has not done this season except against Tennessee.

 

[supafly]

I have no idea what you're arguing about. You're saying that we play Indy tight. I say that's an uninteresting statement because it's tautological. Everybody knows it. Indy has just been a little better than us consistently these last five years. So, I don't find it a revelation that spreads are tight nor would I argue that the Colts and Pats are two evenly matched teams.

My point is that recently we haven't done so well against them, which is indisputable on the facts given our record against them over the last five years (1--5) vs. the prior five years (5--1). As i observed, neither says anything about how we'd do against them in Indy in the Playoffs this year (BTW, I think we'd kick their butts, just a gut feel).

You should be careful with couple of your characterizations, though. Indy won a close, evenly fought game in Foxboro in 2006; we were hardly "spanked" in a game where both teams put up virtually the same number of yards. And, I have absolutely no idea what your're talking about when you call the 2005 game "closer" when they beat us 40--21. I think I'm known on this board for my command of the history of the NFL and my facts, so get your ducks in order before you argue facts with me.

All the stuff about being "scared" to go to Indy and "always losing" there comes from somewhere else because I'd be the last to say that.

Beyond that, I'm chalking your post up to too much Egg Nog and still wishing you a Merry Christmas.

Is that why in a different thread yesterday you claimed, and I quote, "that after Mike Brown stopped Kevin Dyson short of the 1 yard line in the 1999-2000 Super Bowl, that the Titans went 20 years without winning another one?"

Because you, who is so 'well known on this board for his facts' cannot figure out that it's only been 9 or 10 years instead of the 20 that you stated? (post #18--matter of inches thread)

Maybe it's you who needs to get his 'ducks in a row,' Mr. Fact stater, because I never claimed anything. I wrote that the Pats played Indy close in 2006/2005, and were beaten decently in the other year, 2005/2006 (or vice versa). Most would take that as someone not quoting themselves because they weren't sure which year it took place. Maybe you need to try and re-read things more than once, because you seem to have some trouble with comprehension.

 

[Lansdowne]

Yes, but you have to feel somewhat better knowing that they played close games vs. consistently getting blown out against Manning. Yes, he's gotten plenty of breaks and some great luck--but it can't continue forever.

Judging by the comments I have read in some threads the past several weeks, you'd swear some people were sure that we'd lost by 40+ in every game there.

The games in Indy have all been close, dating back to 2003.

2003: Pats win by 4 (defense bends but doesn't break)
Colts rallied back and fell a yard short of a comeback win

2006: Pats lose by 4 (plenty of blame to go around: Ricochet Caldwell, Hobbs PI, Troy Brown runs wrong route, etc.)
Colts rallied back and got their yard, largest blown deficit in CG history

2007: Pats win by 4 (Welker becomes my hero by icing the game on third down, then declaring, "You f*cking suck!" at the Colts corners)
Had to mount a 4th quarter comeback to win

2008: Pats lose by 3 (thanks, David Thomas...no, really)
Choked in the red zone, Colts answered every time

2009: Pats lose by 1 (I don't feel like talking about it)
See: 2006

Don't get me wrong, I'll always root for the Patriots and I'll hold out hope that they can beat anybody on any given day. I believed strongly in them when most people wrote them off against San Diego back in 2006. But let's be honest with ourselves here: while even the SB champion teams let opposing teams back into games, they at least put a halt to it when they had to. In this rivalry, the Colts have gotten better with time and the Patriots, well, haven't. So I'd be lying to myself if I said I would be confident in a rematch. I want the rematch, for sure, because I want the Pats to get the last laugh against these guys. But I would be petrified, for a multitude of reasons.

 

[supafly]

Beating Indy in their dome requires you to be PERFECT. In other words, score 7 every time, don't turn the ball over, overcome the bad calls by the refs. Hell, the 2007 team had to overcome a lot of bad calls and 2 Brady INTs just to barely beat them by 4 points.

I do agree, however, that 5 out of the last 6 games (1 which we won, another one that was started by a high school quarterback) we were neck and neck with them and a couple plays differently or better calls by the refs and we're the ones on the winning side. I just hate to rely on that, and Indy is a team that if you want to beat them, force Manning to get happy-feet and throw 3-4 INT and put more than a 17 point lead on them. That, or be prepared to put up 7 every time you have the ball, which this team has not done this season except against Tennessee.

I agree totally, and you have a great point.

I do not feel confident by any means that we'd win for sure, but I do have more confidence than some here that we'd certainly be able to compete neck in neck.

There have been multiple threads about who we'd rather play, etc--and why. Some feel confident going to SD more, while most feel our shot at Indy would be best taken in the earlier, divisional round, when they're a bit rusty. I personally, would rather play them early also, rather than travel to the West Coast first, then likely have to play them after we beat SD the next week.

I felt that due to all of the threads regarding who we'd rather play, etc, that some would be pleased to be reminded that we have played them pretty tough recently. Like I said, according to some posters, you'd think by listening to them that the Pats have absolutely zero chance--which isn't close to true. As a great contributor recently pointed out, we were only a matter of inches one way or the other from winning that game, and being 10-4 right now.

I think that would've given a lot of people here a bit more confidence, knowing that we actually won 2 out of the last 3 there.

 

[BradysBunch12]

I'll be honest, a rematch and a win against Indy would be my Super Bowl. This team, while "never say never" doesn't have the look of a championship team. But I do think they're capable of putting it all together for one game and making 18-1 a footnote to 16-1.

To me, it's looking like a Chargers/Saints SB this year. Rivers is playing like the Brady of old and the Saints, while vulnerable, are better than any team in the NFC, especially with the dome field advantage.

 

[supafly]

The games in Indy have all been close, dating back to 2003.

2003: Pats win by 4 (defense bends but doesn't break)
Colts rallied back and fell a yard short of a comeback win

2006: Pats lose by 4 (plenty of blame to go around: Ricochet Caldwell, Hobbs PI, Troy Brown runs wrong route, etc.)
Colts rallied back and got their yard, largest blown deficit in CG history

2007: Pats win by 4 (Welker becomes my hero by icing the game on third down, then declaring, "You f*cking suck!" at the Colts corners)
Had to mount a 4th quarter comeback to win

2008: Pats lose by 3 (thanks, David Thomas...no, really)
Choked in the red zone, Colts answered every time

2009: Pats lose by 1 (I don't feel like talking about it)
See: 2006

Don't get me wrong, I'll always root for the Patriots and I'll hold out hope that they can beat anybody on any given day. I believed strongly in them when most people wrote them off against San Diego back in 2006. But let's be honest with ourselves here: while even the SB champion teams let opposing teams back into games, they at least put a halt to it when they had to. In this rivalry, the Colts have gotten better with time and the Patriots, well, haven't. So I'd be lying to myself if I said I would be confident in a rematch. I want the rematch, for sure, because I want the Pats to get the last laugh against these guys. But I would be petrified, for a multitude of reasons.

I'd be cautiously optimistic too, for sure. As a matter of fact, I'd be concerned.

I agree that there is a fine line between optimism and realism, and I will also say that when the ink hits the books, they have had the better of the rivalry lately. I will agree that they seem to have evolved some, while we have stayed the same in some regards. It would be great to go back to confusing defensive schemes, because, IMO that's what it would take to win. I am not sure if this yr's defense has the pieces to do that as effectively as we'd need them to.

Maybe we'll simply get lucky, and a lower ranked seed can take one of those top 2 teams out, that's what I'm hoping. Regardless of whatever happens, the team needs to improve in several areas to make a run this year.

I think I am letting some of the more pessimistic people who claim it's already over get to me a bit.