Is there any accountability in journalism?

Following this story by Chappell at the Star, its hard to see why Lombardi said Sanders would never play again.


He even tweeted that he stood by his story and that the Colts were lying. I'm wondering if BBS ever managed to get in touch with NFL.com on this issue and if Lombardi has a response to Sanders taking the field yesterday.

It seems to me that Lombardi should have to make a statement saying he was wrong about the issue. I would really like to know who is "source" was so they care share some of the blame as well. This is seriously irresponsible journalism and its the kind of thing that is becoming more rampent as the field expands. Journalists should not be given a pass when they report on something that is blatently wrong and should be required to issue some sort of statement explaining themselves.

Poor analysis or irrational statments, like the Jets being ranked #1 in pre-camp polls, dont bother me so much and add fuel to the conversation, despite how absurd it may be. But this type of reporting, coupled with zero accountability infuriates me and makes me question why some of these individuals have a job. As a student working on his Masters in journalism, it further enrages me as its the kind of story that would get me an 'F' from my professors due to it being an unsubstantiated statement.

I want to hear what Lombardi has to say for himself. Somebody let me know if you have heard anything.

I recently heard a pundit say that the Colts DTs needed improvement to help what was essentially a poor rushing defense last season.

I disagree. If you really look into the number, you will see some discrepancies. 

126.5yds rushing allowed per game last season put the Colts at 24th overall. Thats over all 16 games. Two of those games were played without the starting rotation for a majority of the game and with key players being held out.

If you remove the Jets (202yds rushing) and Bills (248yds rushing) from season totals the average drops to 112.4 yds rushing allowed per game. This would have tied the Colts for 12th in rushing defense.

Those number include the Miami game. Where the Colts gave up 239 yards on the ground with Miami utilizing the Wild Cat offense. If you chalk that game up to poor game planning, or general poor play that was rectified in the next couple week (24, 49, and 90 yds given up the next 3 weeks) and remove the game, the number look better. The average drops to 102 yards rushing per game. This would put the Colts in the top ten.

Chris Johnson gained 147 yards against the Colts last season. 73.5 yards a game average. He averaged 124.4 yards a game last season. That is a 51 yard difference. His longest run against the Colts was for 11 yards. That was a player who excelled at long runs last season.

I predict a much better run defense this season. More experience with our DTs and a more effective rotation, coupled with the return (and hopefully extensive play) of Bob Sanders could make rushing against the Colts a chore.

Don Back, of Sports Illustrated, posted his NFL Pre-Camp Power Rankings today and I am confused.

He ranks the Jets #1.

I'll let that soak in for a second.

The same Jets who were shredded by Manning in the AFCCG. The same Jets who have a QB in his second year and who nearly set a record for rookie picks in a season. Just, no. I'll give you that they will probably win the AFC East, but best in the AFC? Not a chance.

The Saints are second. No problem here. Except for saying that there was nothing fluky about them winning the Super Bowl. I think recovering a trick onside kick and a rare miss by Manning and Wayne would qualify as fluky.

The Ravens are #3. Another team the Colts beat (and have owned for most of the decade) in the playoffs. Boldin is a really good move for them, but adding Marc Bulger doesn't seem all that stellar. At least not enough to vault them above the Colts. They still have some issues at CB, and last time I checked, it was a passing league.

The Colts are #4. I'll let Don explain why:

But I don't see where the Colts really improved this offseason, and the status quo can sometimes be the enemy in the NFL.

Apparently Don hasn't been paying attention to the Colts in the Manning era. They epitomize the status quo and it has led them to win more games than any other team in the league. Generally injuries have kept us out of the Super Bowl, not a lack of offseason moves. Does getting a healthy Bob Sanders (former defensive MVP) and Gonzo not count as something that could possibly improve a team that got to the Super Bowl without them?

The rest of the list seems fine, however I think Green Bay is ranked a bit high. This is a common trend on a lot of people's lists. They are #5 and ahead of the Vikings. If Farve comes back and Peterson learns to hold the ball, the Vikes have that division locked up. Greenbay seems solid, but not an elite team in the league. The still have a poor defense, one that gave up 51 points in a post season loss to the Cardinals. Al Harris may well never play football again, or at least not at a high level. Rodgers has a nasty habit of picking himself off the turf far too often and its not just O-line problems. He holds the ball for a looong time and its very hard to break habits like that. "If" is a bad word to use when you rank a team 5th, but Don uses it to describe O-line protection. "If" does not inspire confidence, but rather trepidation. Lots of people say they have an elite offense, but "if" you cannot keep your QB clean then there is a good chance you will lose.

IU's Memorial Stadium is going to be getting a new scoreboard. It will be the second largest in the Big Ten and one of the largest in the nation. The new scoreboard will be ready in time for the season opener.

Former IU wideout-turned-cornerback and return man Ray Fisher has signed a deal with the Colts.  Fisher is the first of the Colts draft picks to sign a deal. Hopefully Fisher can make the team and improve the Colts return game.

Has anyone tried a dynasty with IU in NCAA 2011? They really did the school no favors. The team ratings are fine, but there are a few problems.

1. The stadium isn't updated. For a game touting the real experience, they dont even have an up to date stadium.

2. The players dont touch the rock as they go onto the field. I know this isnt really a tradition, but still, it goes back to the real experience deal.

3. This was the worst one for me: Campus Lifestyle C+. What metric are they using? I had more fun in four years in Bloomington, than any other time in my life. The campus is amazing and its what movies and television typically use to style their fake campus' off of. I have visited a number of colleges and I can easily say that IU is amazing. Its beautiful and has great facilities.

I know its a few small issues, but still kind of annoying. Outside of those things, its a pretty good game. I still have issues with how defensive linemen are able to release at the drop of a hat from a blocker, but still good overall.

The Colts were ranked #1 in ESPN's Ultimate NFL Rankings. There doesn't appear to be a link on ESPN yet, but they talked about it on Sports Center inbetween LeBron coverage.

Interesting notes: Saints were #5, which I think is a bit low, considering the Jets were #4. Dallas was #2, I think they are overrated due because even though they have a lot of talent, they under perform in the playoffs, and randomly throughout the season. Romo is a good QB most of the time, but has a habit of single handedly losing games for his team. Vikings were #3, if Farve comes back.

Nice to see the Colts end up on top of one of these lists. Lets hope they live up to the hype.

Marvin Harrison had a 9mm handgun confiscated in a routine traffic stop on June 16th, ESPN reported. It appears that the Philadelphia police department is looking to do balistics test to see if the gun is related to the 2008 shooting. Once again, the report seems slanted against Harrison in what is becoming typical ESPN fashion. This doesn't look particularly good for Harrison but there still is not much of a case against him.

According to Dan Dakich, of 1070 The Fan radio network, Dwight Freeney is "fine and will play in the Super Bowl."

He would not reveal his source and stated that this is coming from his contacts through the coaching world and not the mainstream media. He seemed extremely confident and cited that the only thing the Colts had officially said was that Freeney was Questionable for the Super Bowl.

ESPN stated that Freeney was 'hobbled' as he walked through a crowded media room in flip flops. To me, he wasn't hobbling around, we was weaving his way through a crowded room. Wearing flip flops does not seem to support the idea that he has a serious ankle sprain.

It seems like either the reporters were premature in their story, have a bad source, or are flat out worng about Freeney. Either way it looks like someone isnt being completely truthful.

Hopefully Freeny will be able to play and be effective come Sunday.

Thoughts?

Media bashing seems to be extremely popular here lately and I thought I should continue this trend.

Gregg Doyel of CBSSports.com, compares the Colts and Saints based on their wins over the Patriots.

Or you could sit there and read some common sense, which is this:

New Orleans is better than the Colts. Possibly a lot better. If we're lucky, we'll find out for sure on Feb. 7. That's the date of Super Bowl XLIV.

I'm not entirely sure that 'common sense' dictates that the Saints are, in fact, the better team. It is hard to say who is actually the better team. Both are playing at an extremely high level. But if the Colts have a significant first half deficit in the Super Bowl, do you really think the game is over? There have been far too many games that the Colts should have lost this season. A hard-fought win over a good team is better than a blow out any day. Any coach will tell you that it builds character and shows you what your team is made of.

Doyel goes on to say:

If you'll recall Nov. 15, the Patriots competed fairly well with Indianapolis at Indianapolis -- leading the Colts by 17 in the fourth quarter, and infamously going for it on fourth-and-2 from their own 28 with 2:08 left, a gamble that failed spectacularly and allowed the Colts to rally for a 35-34 victory. Indianapolis had the better record, but New England had the better team. That game, basically, was an upset.

...

Not one-point better, like Indianapolis was on Nov. 15. Not "a freak comeback thanks to an enormous coaching mistake" better. New Orleans is a lot better than New England, and not just because Belichick says so. New Orleans is a lot better than the Patriots because, frankly, New Orleans is a lot better than the Patriots.

There are a number of problems with his statements. Here is the meat of his inaccuracy:

1. He states that the Colts were down by 17 in the fourth quarter, but then cites the fourth-and-2 Belichick call as if it was the only play in the game that allowed us to complete the comeback. That is flat-out wrong. The truth is that this team simply outplayed the Patriots in the second half by making some excellent defensive adjustments. Scoring 21 points in the fourth quarter is what won the game. And even though the fourth-and-2 play failed, the Colts still had to put the ball in the end zone to win.
2. Calling the game an upset when the Colts were favored to win is foolish. Being outplayed for 45 minutes only to lose in the fourth doesn't qualify as an upset. You have to play 60 minutes. The fact of the matter is that the Colts are the better team, and the better team will find a way to win.
3. "Freak comebacks" based on a single play when your team is down by 17 doesn't make sense. That's still three scores and some solid defensive stands to tie or take the lead. Either the Pats punt or the fourth-and-2 play happens. Either way, the Colts have the ball back with plenty of time to march down the field and take the lead. 
   
4. The Patriots' defense is OK at best. They played an admirable game against Indianapolis, but in the fourth quarter their secondary was exposed. They were exposed again against an explosive New Orleans offense. However, the Colts were not spotted 14 points like the Saints were. Two pass plays for touchdowns were for over 60-yards. Giving up big plays like that, especially the Henderson 75-yarder, is inexcusable. Give the Colts 14 easy points early in the game and the Colts can run away with it.
   

No disrespect to the Saints. They are clearly an excellent team and came to play on Monday night. They beat the Pats. I wish every team would do us the same favor. But if you're going to cite the Pats as a benchmark for the way the Colts and Saints compare to each other, then you have to include the other common opponents. The games against the Rams and the Dolphins need to be included, and so will games against the Jets and the Bills later on. (DevilsReject does a good job making comparisons here.)

Hopefully we can find out if the Saints or the Colts are better come February.