Does 7 straight Colts losses eliminate them from the playoffs?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : I disagree on Painter ''didn't do anything in the preseason with vanilla play to suggest he could handle the reg season''. If it was all vanilla play then Painter looking bad was all on the play calling and Caldwell should of recognized that Painter had enough skill to get it done. The year Brady went down, Cassel looked AWFUL in preseason yet BB went with him because he saw the talent everyday in practice, he was in the system for years, he knew all the plays and it was the logical choice to do so. I assume Caldwell does not possess that same kind of logic or maybe he is just a puppet that gets his strings pulled by Napolian. And on the 4th and 2, i agree with trying to get 2 yards, if we punted like everyone says we should of, i am pretty sure the Colts march down the field for 7 anyway. Our best chance to win was getting 2 yards. BB can be called a lot of names but no one can say he has '' no balls ''. (i.e. like they say about Caldwell when he rested his starters rather than go for perfection).
    Posted by PatsRfineIn09[/QUOTE]

         I completely agree. Excellent post!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    Right now I think the Colt organization is a mess.  Caldwell is not in control of that team.  He gets told what to do.  He has no control over personnel or play calling as I see it.  Caldwell is being setup to be the fall guy for all the Colts woe.  This micro managing or over indulgence is not good for the future either.  There's a meltdown a brewin'.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : I disagree on Painter ''didn't do anything in the preseason with vanilla play to suggest he could handle the reg season''. If it was all vanilla play then Painter looking bad was all on the play calling and Caldwell should of recognized that Painter had enough skill to get it done. The year Brady went down, Cassel looked AWFUL in preseason yet BB went with him because he saw the talent everyday in practice, he was in the system for years, he knew all the plays and it was the logical choice to do so. I assume Caldwell does not possess that same kind of logic or maybe he is just a puppet that gets his strings pulled by Napolian. And on the 4th and 2, i agree with trying to get 2 yards, if we punted like everyone says we should of, i am pretty sure the Colts march down the field for 7 anyway. Our best chance to win was getting 2 yards. BB can be called a lot of names but no one can say he has '' no balls ''. (i.e. like they say about Caldwell when he rested his starters rather than go for perfection).
    Posted by PatsRfineIn09[/QUOTE]

    So you disagree with the colts feelings about Painter because the Patriots feelings about Cassel were different?  Isn't there a disconnect there?  What does Cassel and the pats have to do with Painter and the colts.  They may be parallel stories but they are unrelated.  If you are going to disagree with my take, at least have reasoning that's related to it.   

    Further, your comparison likely isn't all that parallel to begin with.  I am willing to bet that when Cassel played poorly in the preseason, he was playing with mostly second and third stringers as Brady was getting the preseason snaps with the starting unit.  The difference is that Painter not only had the first team game snaps and didn't look great, he also had the first team training camp snaps which I am sure Cassel didn't have.  Remember, Brady wasn't hurt until the regular season.  Manning never practiced fully this year.

    And the vanilla play is what teams (or at least the colts) play in preseason.  Its about execution of the basics as opposed to exloiting weaknesses found in game planning complexities.  If Painter couldn't handle the easy stuff superbly, and I am suggesting that he didn't, then its understandable where confidence might have been lost by the coaches and management. 

    I still wanted Painter to get his shot, but I understood the Collins move. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]Right now I think the Colt organization is a mess.  Caldwell is not in control of that team.  He gets told what to do.  He has no control over personnel or play calling as I see it.  Caldwell is being setup to be the fall guy for all the Colts woe.  This micro managing or over indulgence is not good for the future either.  There's a meltdown a brewin'.
    Posted by garytx[/QUOTE]
    I agree with some of this. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rocky. Show Rocky's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    Doggg----

    You could say this mantra over and over and over and over and over!  You might eventually believe it!

    “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me” 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from GadisRKO. Show GadisRKO's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    Colts better win some games, I don't want them to get Luck(y).
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from gln826. Show gln826's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : gln - I have been over this in the past.  The offensive system in NE has not changed.  McDaniels was raised in Weis' system, and O'brien took over the same program.  System changes involve changes to nomenclature and scheme.  that hasn't changed in NE.  What has changed is personnel.  Now the Pats are taking advantage TE opportunities in their system.  And do you know who had say over that?  The one head coach that Brady has had.  During the Pats SB years, the offense played not to lose because the defense was so good.  Brady did a great job managing.  Today, Brady must win games for the pats, a different perspective, and he has won a lot of games, just not the ones in the post season.  
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Weiss and McDaniels were night and day!  Weiss was very consertive (running), used a lot of screens and some gadget plays. McD opened up the offense, a lot more passing, 3 & 4 WR sets, used a lot less TE play. O'B is somewhere in the middle (a lot of TE play). So you saying those 3 are the same makes you look like you should follow the Pats a lot more than you already do.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : Weiss and McDaniels were night and day!  Weiss was very consertive (running), used a lot of screens and some gadget plays. McD opened up the offense, a lot more passing, 3 & 4 WR sets, used a lot less TE play. O'B is somewhere in the middle (a lot of TE play). So you saying those 3 are the same makes you look like you should follow the Pats a lot more than you already do.
    Posted by gln826[/QUOTE]
    It doesn't matter.  A system isn't simply the plays that a team runs.  Its the playbook and the nomenclature behind it.  When Edgerrin James was with the colts, the predominant running play was the stretch play.  The colts don't runplay that much anymore, but that doesn't mean the system is different.  The personnel may change the plays that are run, but that doesn't mean the plays within the playbook and the nomenclature that goes with it have changed. 

    The pats have the same playbook they've had since Brady arrived. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : It doesn't matter.  A system isn't simply the plays that a team runs.  Its the playbook and the nomenclature behind it.  When Edgerrin James was with the colts, the predominant running play was the stretch play.  The colts don't runplay that much anymore, but that doesn't mean the system is different.  The personnel may change the plays that are run, but that doesn't mean the plays within the playbook and the nomenclature that goes with it have changed.  The pats have the same playbook they've had since Brady arrived. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    UD I might be taking this out of context(hi Russ) but you are too familiar with the patriots to say "The pats have the same playbook they've had since Brady arrived."  You know this is incorrect.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : UD I might be taking this out of context(hi Russ) but you are too familiar with the patriots to say "The pats have the same playbook they've had since Brady arrived."  You know this is incorrect.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    I believe they haven't changed the playbook.  Maybe added to it but not changed it.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy

    If the pats system was different today than in 2002, then the opening sentence  made in this article wouldn't have made sense:
    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4698837/branch-ochocinco-learns-quickly

    Here's another:
    http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/sports/pros_and_colleges/x873610888/Patriots-No-offensive-coordinator-No-problem

    and another:
    http://www.nesn.com/2011/09/dan-gronkowski-says-patriots-playbook-nearly-identical-to-josh-mcdaniels-broncos-offense.html

    Coaches are brought up in systems.  They don't change them just because they have taken on a new role within the team.  Tom Brady has played in the same offensive system since he arrived in Foxborough.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    Dude - one game does not a trend make.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from neali. Show neali's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : So you disagree with the colts feelings about Painter because the Patriots feelings about Cassel were different?  Isn't there a disconnect there?  What does Cassel and the pats have to do with Painter and the colts.  They may be parallel stories but they are unrelated.  If you are going to disagree with my take, at least have reasoning that's related to it.    Further, your comparison likely isn't all that parallel to begin with.  I am willing to bet that when Cassel played poorly in the preseason, he was playing with mostly second and third stringers as Brady was getting the preseason snaps with the starting unit.  The difference is that Painter not only had the first team game snaps and didn't look great, he also had the first team training camp snaps which I am sure Cassel didn't have.  Remember, Brady wasn't hurt until the regular season.  Manning never practiced fully this year. And the vanilla play is what teams (or at least the colts) play in preseason.  Its about execution of the basics as opposed to exloiting weaknesses found in game planning complexities.  If Painter couldn't handle the easy stuff superbly, and I am suggesting that he didn't, then its understandable where confidence might have been lost by the coaches and management.  I still wanted Painter to get his shot, but I understood the Collins move. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Underroos,

    Brady didn't play a snap in the preseason that Cassel went 11-5. Colts have been ordered to lose every game so they can get the top pick. They are used to lying down like they did against the Jets. So it should be easy for them to go 2-14 with some late season wins when the top pick is in the bag. Or maybe a heroic 0-16 is called for. I think they can do it.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from gln826. Show gln826's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    UD, just admit you are wrong.  When the Pats were winning SB, they were equally a run/pass team.  They were averaging between 21-23 points a game.  Since McD took over, they were averaging over 27 points a game with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel (a bunch of games) and Jabar Gaffney (Houston cast off) as their WR's, then scored 34 points a game with Moss, Welker, and Stallworth.  The offense was totally different!  Just because they kept some "older play" from Weiss, doesnt mean the offense was Weiss's dummy!

    Now, going back to the Scott Mitchell comment, since you didnt say anything about it, I guess you are in total agreement, because you know, it is hard to argue with tangible FACTS!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    Who cares I'd UD leaves, the more people talk Colts the more he shows up. Who cares about the Colts? They stink, they weren't good last year and they're garbage this year. They haven't drafted well and they don't use free agency so they are headed down hill. Manning will come back next year and rally them to a 8-8 season. Until they do something to turn their team around let's reward them with the attention their irrelevancy deserves- none.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6? : 1.  im not a "dude" 2.  They hung 32 on Carolina.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE]

    Dude - I don't care what you say, the pats ran a conservative offense to manage games and allow the defense to dominate.  I don't care if they had a few games where they effectively opened things up.  That's just good game planning. 

    Saying Brady was a game manager isn't an insult.  It simply was all he needed to do given his defense's dominance. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]UD, just admit you are wrong.  When the Pats were winning SB, they were equally a run/pass team.  They were averaging between 21-23 points a game.  Since McD took over, they were averaging over 27 points a game with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel (a bunch of games) and Jabar Gaffney (Houston cast off) as their WR's, then scored 34 points a game with Moss, Welker, and Stallworth.  The offense was totally different!  Just because they kept some "older play" from Weiss, doesnt mean the offense was Weiss's dummy! Now, going back to the Scott Mitchell comment, since you didnt say anything about it, I guess you are in total agreement, because you know, it is hard to argue with tangible FACTS!
    Posted by gln826[/QUOTE]

    LOL Gln - I provide evidence that Brady's played in the same system from the beginning (never had to learn a new playbook or nomenclature, as far as I can tell), yet without any evidence to support your point, you want me to say I am wrong. 

    Yeah, that makes sense. (That was sarcasm, gln).

    Look, I can't help it if you don't understand playbooks and systems. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]UD, just admit you are wrong.  When the Pats were winning SB, they were equally a run/pass team.  They were averaging between 21-23 points a game.  Since McD took over, they were averaging over 27 points a game with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel (a bunch of games) and Jabar Gaffney (Houston cast off) as their WR's, then scored 34 points a game with Moss, Welker, and Stallworth.  The offense was totally different!  Just because they kept some "older play" from Weiss, doesnt mean the offense was Weiss's dummy! Now, going back to the Scott Mitchell comment, since you didnt say anything about it, I guess you are in total agreement, because you know, it is hard to argue with tangible FACTS!
    Posted by gln826[/QUOTE]
    Gln - as for the scott mitchell comment, yes he had one great year. Don't know if it was better than any of Manning's years, but more importantly, it was only 1 year in 3 that he was with Moore. The other 2 were marginal at best. 

    That said, yes, Moore is a great OC.  He's not the colts OC any longer.  In fact this is the 3rd year of a different OC for the colts.  Moore is with the Jets.  Although Moore is gone, the colts still run the same system, just as Brady has since he was drafted. 

    One of the things that Moore always says about his time with Manning is that it was best for him simply to provide concepts and then let Manning do the rest. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hambonawilliams. Show hambonawilliams's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    The Colts "system"...

    1. Have a great QB, screw everyone else on the team

    2. Hire a holier than thou, bible thumping coach to mollify the local yokels...then hire a replacement who is nothing more than a mannequin whose mouth is open so often he floods the sidelines with drool...make sure both coaches are African-American so the KKK loving state of In-DIE-Ana can claim to not be racist swine

    3. Have no backups, no depth and no defense as a result of the great QB's front loaded contract
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mikeyyy. Show mikeyyy's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]Oh  - and Bub - much of what you said is correct - this does prove Manning's greatness.  Brady was a system QB when he won his SB's.  With the offensive reigns recently, he's put up big numbers and no championships.  In fact, he's lost his last 3 playoff games - and that goes back to 07 when he had his legendary defense.  Thanks for perking me up.
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Want to have fun listening to someone not real sure of what they are talking about?  Ask UD6 to explain exactly what a "sytem quarterback" is and then explain why that criteria DOESN'T also describe Montana, Aikman, Bradshaw, Manning, et al.  Couch potatos repeat terms they hear on ESPN and then pretend they understand the concept.  Too funny.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from LittleTimmy31. Show LittleTimmy31's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    The Colts appear to be irrelevant this year and any comments posted by UD6 or any other fan rooting for another team are irrelevant as well.

    Go Pats!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?

    In Response to Re: Is 5 straight Colts losses all it takes to hear crickets from UD6?:
    [QUOTE]The Colts appear to be irrelevant this year and any comments posted by UD6 or any other fan rooting for another team are irrelevant as well. Go Pats!
    Posted by LittleTimmy31[/QUOTE]

    Thank you for adding relevance to me and this thread and the colts by commenting on it. 
     

Share