I've been a regular reader of Indy Cornrows, but have not posted or commented. However, I feel last night's game warrants a few thoughts. First and foremost, the Pacers played an awful game. For the last 6 quarters of basketball, the Pacers have not played winning basketball and if they continually play this way they do not deserve a chance to win. I completely agree with Larry Bird's sentiments that the Pacers went soft, in that they did not answer the challenge on the scoreboard like they did in Games 2 and 3. That said, what I saw from the Pacers was awful, but what I saw from the NBA was worse.

Last night's game was the biggest test for the NBA to prove that they do not have a horse in the race and they failed miserably at that. All one has to do is look at how the flagrant fouls were handled and it's obvious that there is manipulation from the top in terms of how the refs view who is important on the floor and who is expendable:

Continue reading this post »

Not sure of the details, but I just saw on Facebook that Pierre Garcon is going to the Redskins, presumably to help out RG3. Well, if there was a team out there that would pay big money to Pierre, it was going to be Washington. Gotta say, I wish he would have stayed to help start the future for Luck, but hopefully he'll continue to improve and have a successful career. So long as they don't throw him slants on 3rd down, that is.

I know that everyone is pretty much ready to move on from the Super Bowl and concentrate on less depressing items like the draft and free agency, but I wanted to touch on one last question that's been haunting me the past few days.

Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but didn't Antoine Bethea have a great chance at a pick sometime during the game?  I honestly can't remember if it was the first or second half, but I could have sworn that there was a moment when I was yelling at the TV "Antoine, catch the damn ball!!!"  Does anyone else remember this?

The reason I'm asking is because there has been alot of talk regarding missed key plays in the game (i.e. the Onsides Kick, Garcon's drop, 3rd and 1, Stover's FG, and of course, THE PICK), but I haven't heard anything about Bethea missing an easy pick, which makes me think I made it up.

If it did happen, and I'm not delusional, could someone please remind me of when it happened?  I think it was early because I wasn't going ballistic over it at the time, which probably meant that the Colts had a decent lead.  But to me, that's as significant a missed play as any of the others.  If it was in the first half, then the turnover (which would have been the Colts' ONLY turnover of the game) might have lead to another scoring drive and we could have seen a possible 17-3 or 17-6 halftime lead, or even a 13-3 or 13-6 lead. 

In order to not sound like another "What If"-er, I'd like to put this into the context of Bethea's upcoming contract.  Of course I think we should sign him long-term because, quite frankly, he's a hell of a player, and I can't remember the last time he was hurt.   But this season especially it seems like his ball-hawking skills have taken a hit.  I absolutely encourage any statistical analysis that proves otherwise because I'm really just going on deceptive memory here, but it seems that there were a few times this year where Bethea failed to make an interception and I'm curious why that is. 

Any help?

There has been a LOT of discussion around these parts lately about the media's lack of "respect" for our beloved Colts.  Recently there has been a good deal of improvement in that arena both positive (Adam Schein's column), and not-so-positive (KSK's take on the "Fat Humps" from Indy).  Even Chris Collinsworth and Peter King have given some love for the Colts.   But let's be honest, the reason we as fans are upset with the media is not so much the lack of coverage of the Colts but what is said between the lines of that coverage.

The bottom line is this:  the media has always viewed our team as the "yeah-buts", despite our enormous success and continued dominance and that has us up the wall.  We were all lead to believe that if the Colts won a Super Bowl, the media would jump off their backs.   So they did.  And Peyton Manning was a great QB, and Tony Dungy was a great Head Coach, and the Colts were a great franchise.    And then the Pats went 16-0 and our beloved Colts lost at home to the San Diego Chargers, and we were once again the "yeah-buts", as if our Super Bowl win meant nothing.  Face it, the storyline has been set, and even a Super Bowl win this year and a fourth MVP for Peyton may not change it.

But before the sports analysts and talking heads begin all-too prematurely writing the Pittsburgh Steelers and New England Patriots off as the Model Franchise (I'm looking at you, Peter King), perhaps they should consider checking their facts.

Last night the Pittsburgh Steelers.... oh, excuse me, the DEFENDING WORLD CHAMP Pittsburgh Steelers, completely neutered themselves in Prime Time against the Cleveland Browns and destroyed all hope of making the playoffs.  This morning the story is one of sadness and regret for the Steelers, but also way too much discussion of the weather, as if somehow the Steelers lost because they were playing outside in the cold.  Think about that for a second. 

This loss, coupled with the fact that the Patriots are 7-5 and in no way completely assured of winning their division or making the playoffs, got me thinking about the whole "Franchise of the Decade" debate.  Now as much as I love discussing the Manning vs. Brady question until I'm blue (COLTS BLUE!  wakka wakka) in the face, I love even more the Colts vs. Pats franchise debate.  Or the Colts vs. Everyone franchise debate, to be more precise.

Granted, they've ONLY won one Super Bowl so far in the decade, but let's not let shiny things blind us to the truth:  the Colts are the Best Franchise of the Decade.  Period.  Why?   Because the two main teams trumpeted by the sports "gurus" as model franchises, the Steelers and Pats, have each missed the playoffs more than twice this decade (Steelers 4, Patriots 3).  The Colts have missed the playoffs only once (2001).   The Steelers and Pats have each missed the playoffs the year following a Super Bowl appearance twice (including this year for the Steelers), with only one of those years coming after a Super Bowl loss (Patriots, 2008).  The Colts?  They followed up their Super Bowl win with a 13-3 record and the #2 seed in the AFC, and that's after losing Dwight Freeney for half of the season.

Someone needs to explain to me how it is that a team like the Colts, a team that has set a record for most consecutive 12 win seasons, a team that has missed the playoffs only once this decade, a team that with a win on Sunday will have started 13-0 twice in one decade, a team that is one win away from  having the MOST WINS IN ONE DECADE; how is it that they are glossed over when it comes to the Franchise of the Decade debate? 

To many of us this seems unprecedented.  How can it be that our success goes largely unmentioned while a team like the Patriots, a team that has missed the playoffs in 3 seasons this decade, twice after Super Bowl appearances, gets all the accolades just because they've won 2 more Super Bowls?  How is this okay?

Well, let me ask you, when you think of the 1990's, who is your Team of the Decade?   Is it the Cowboys, or 49ers?

If you said "Dallas Cowboys", then don't complain about the media's love for the Patriots.

In the 1990's, the Cowboys were to the 49ers as the Pats are to us.  The 49ers had amazing regular season success, but continually lost to eventual champion Dallas in the playoffs.  They also lost a couple of times to Green Bay (the equivalent of the Chargers to us), and won a Super Bowl in 1995 (a few years removed from their previous Super Bowl in the 1989-90 season).   Sound familiar?  

On Sunday, our Colts will look to break the record for most wins in a decade, set by the 49ers of the 1990s.  They will also look to break the Patriots record of consecutive regular season wins, go 13-0 for the second time in the decade, and lock up homefield advantage in the playoffs.  On Monday you probably won't hear much about it, and Peter King will probably still have the Saints as his #1 team, and the Patriots as the best Franchise of the Decade. 

Don't worry about it, if the 49ers of the 90's are any indication, we're probably just on our way to another Super Bowl win.

I loved Taj Smith after watching him sell out for catches in training camp and a bit in pre-season as well.  With a number of injuries opening up roster spots, Gonzo injured for another few weeks, questions about Garcon and Baskett's abilities to catch the ball, any chance we bring up Smith from the PS? Or Giguere, for that matter.

Is there anyone else we should be bringing up from the PS to fill those empty spots?

It's being reported that Shane Andrus was cut by the Bucs today.  I realize that carrying 3 kickers on the roster is not an option, but what are the chances we add him to the practice roster in order to carry him over into next year?  I seriously doubt we hold onto Stover after Vinatieri comes back, but AV's status health-wise is in doubt and Andrus may well be our kicker for the future.  Thoughts?

Pro Football Talk is reporting that Ed Johnson was possibly cut due to his grievance stemming from last year and the front office is claiming performance as an excuse to bypass a possible second grievance by Johnson.  If this is the case, then I'm very disappointed in the front office.  However, 18to88.com has a breakdown of Johnson's performance woes against Tennesse. 

Still, I feel like there's something that's not being said.  The quality of Johnson's performance aside, our run defense has improved so much with him in the lineup that I have trouble believing it is simply a matter of performance.