With training camp starting next week, I am getting chills thinking about watching this team take the field again. I have buried all of my remaining emotions regarding the Super Bowl, what went wrong, and am done bashing guys like Hank Baskett, and am done shaking my head at Wayne's non-route as well as dropped endzone pass in the final moments. I have done the healthy thing and repressed it all deep inside somewhere in my duodenum. It frees me to offer up my predictions and thoughts on the season.

Continue reading this post »

Not to shove another bad journalism piece down everyone's throats, but this is just one of those that is irritatingly stupid and I had to share. First of all, I think John Clayton is a very good reporter, in the sense that he does good research and seems to always report news more accurately than most. He is also not a bad writer in terms of putting together an article that flows smoothly from top to bottom. Yet, all you have to do is look at him and listen to him speak and it's obvious that the guy is as qualified to speculate who the greatest QBs are as Rex Ryan is at giving tips on how to train for a triathlon. The guys a writer, not a football guru. Now, in no way was Clayton disrespectful to Manning, and in fact, he was very complimentary of him, but here is what irks me.

7. Tom Brady, New England Patriots: His three Super Bowl rings and 14-4 playoff record ranks him ahead of Peyton Manning, but Manning is on the rise.

 

8. Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts: Manning has changed the game with his ability to work out of the shotgun and run a no-huddle offense. He is on the verge of jumping closer to the top five and possibly the top three in the next couple of seasons.

Now, Peyton's ranking or the fact that Brady is ahead of Manning isn't what is most ridiculous in this article. Of course, it is completely stupid that anyone is still trying to make that Brady>Manning argument anymore, so in that sense, it is ridiculous, but it is the number five and six names on the list that completely takes any worth from the article.

5. Brett Favre, Atlanta Falcons, Green Bay Packers, New York Jets and Minnesota Vikings: He's throwing as well at the age of 40 as he was when he was in his early 30s. Another Super Bowl ring could put him ahead of Elway.

 

6. Dan Marino, Miami Dolphins: Marino had one of the greatest arms in the history of the game. It's a shame he went to only one Super Bowl. He was the ultimate passer and leader on the field.

I like both Marino and Favre and they were/are great QBs. I actually think Marino is top 3 and has an argument for #1 for all the great things he did on the field, and Favre, despite his primadonna tactics, is obviously still incredible. My problem is not Favre and Marino's mention, but that John Clayton is so clueless that he doesn't see the hypocrisy in his list. 

His argument for Brady being better than Manning is one we all know to be stupid, and that is Super Bowl rings. QBs don't win SBs alone, yet writers/analysts try to claim the opposite all the time. Together Brett and Dan have a combined 1-2 Super Bowl record. Marino never got one, and Favre only has one and that was 12 years ago. So, Brady is better than Manning because of 3 rings to 1 and a 14-4 postseason to 8-8, even though Manning has 10 pro bowls and a record 4 MVPs to Brady's 5 pro bowls and 1 MVP. Yet, since Super Bowls mean more than individual stats and awards according to Clayton, why does Favre (1 Super Bowl; 13-10 playoff record) and Marino (0 Super Bowls; 8-10 playoff record) get placed ahead of either of them?

Again, Clayton was in no way an arrogant ass in his article like most "writers" are these days, and I have no problem with any name on the list (just the order of them), but it is mind boggling that he completely contradicted his points like that. Is it just so he could put Brady ahead of Manning and appease a depressed New England fan base, or are ESPN drones really this mindless? If he just listed the names, it would have just been an eye-roller, but his reasoning that Super Bowls are important for only certain quarterbacks, not all, takes all credibility from that article.

The Colts are getting plenty of bulletin board material this week, and I hope they keep it coming.

(Here is the link for any who want to read the article http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4838773)

As sandsnake informed everyone earlier this week from a Peter King quote, it looks as if it may be legit. According to this newspaper, both Anthony Gonzalez and Donald Brown practiced Monday. From the Tribune Star in Terre Haute (http://www.tribstar.com/sports/local_story_355182537.html):

"Gonzalez, Brown return to practice — Wide receiver Anthony Gonzalez and Brown took part in Monday afternoon’s short workout. Gonzalez has been sidelined since suffering a right knee injury Sept. 13 in the season opener with Jacksonville. He was due back in mid-November but underwent arthroscopic surgery, which had delayed his return. Brown, meanwhile, suffered a chest injury against Baltimore on Nov. 29 and has not played since. He had been sidelined earlier in the season, missing two games with a shoulder injury that he incurred against St. Louis on Oct. 25. It’s not known whether either player will be able to play against the Jets this week."

So it looks like they AT LEAST practiced, which is a good sign. I'm not looking too hard into that last sentence, as it is not known because it likely was not addressed by any of the staff or team. Plus, its obviously not a smart journalistic move to use what is clearly a short, light practice and get the fans' hopes up. I would expect that they return against the Jets. No update on Vinny, though. It doesn't say whether he practiced or not, so we'll have to play the guessing game with him for just a little longer it seems, which I am really beginning to despise.

UPDATE: Oehser has a recap of our fearless leader, Bill Polian's radio show where he fills in a lot of the blanks for the questions we still have. http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-4450-Indianapolis-Colts-Examiner~y2009m12d22-Indianapolis-Colts-WR-Anthony-Gonzalez-an-endofweek-gametime-decision-for-Sunday. A few tidbits...

-Gonzo will practice this week. The team will evaluate how he does and he will be a game-time decision. They would like to get him as many reps as possible should he play.

-AV will kick this week in practice, or at least try to, and it sounds like Polian wants to see him out there.

-Jerraud Powers is likely going to sit out the remainder of the regular season to be fresh for the playoffs. Since he's a rookie and may be beginning to feel worn down from a longer season, this could be a very smart move.

Well, I'm ashamed I'm doing this and normally I try to be the bigger man, but I have to rant about more bad journalism. I came in today and turned the TV on, which happened to be on ESPN2 as a 1st and 10 segment was airing. I generally don't watch, but it just happened to be on, and Rob Parker and Skip Bayless were debating whether or not Philip Rivers is a top 5 NFL QB. They also had their own lists. It was like a car wreck. You know it's going to be bad, but you have to watch.

Skips argument was for Rivers inclusion, and part of his basis was that he "outplayed" Peyton twice in the playoffs. That lit the fuse. Here are the stats from those two games:

2007:

Rivers: 14/19, 264 yds, 3 TDs, 1 pick, 128.6 rating. Manning: 33/48, 402 yds, 3 TDs, 2 picks, 122.5 rating. Statistic-wise, Rivers was slightly better, but the Colts D played very poor, and did not have Freeney or Mathis. Add that in with Harrison's fumble deep in SD territory, ending a likely TD drive, and Manning's pick that went through Wayne's hands, also in SD territory thwarting a likely scoring drive. It's debatable, but Rivers did not technically "outplay" Manning.

2008:

Rivers: 20/36, 217 yds, 0 TDs, 1 pick, 91 rating. Manning: 25/42, 310 yds, 1 TD, 0 picks, 131.7 rating. Here, it's not even debatable. Rivers sucked, Manning did not. And Manning did that despite their punter putting 5 punts inside the 15, and 4 inside the 10 (one went to 5, one went to 1). Our D and Special Teams got their ass kicked by Darren Sproles' 328 total yards and they won the coin toss. Manning did not touch the ball in OT. A bunch of crappy calls by the refs gave SD their winning drive.

So although SD outplayed us, or to be biased, we beat ourselves, but Rivers did not outplay Manning either game. Also in the segment, Bayless and Parker listed their top 5 QBs. Bayless picked Brady 1, Manning 2, and Parker picked Manning 1, Brees 2, and Brady 3. This annoyed me moderately, just b/c it was Skip, but didn't send me into a rage. Skip's next comment, however, did. He asked Parker why he put Manning 1 over Brady. He asked in the same tone one would use if asking, "Why would you eat a Big Mac right before running a marathon?" Then Parker acted like it was only because he didn't think Brady was healthy (basically indicating a healthy Brady is better). Skip then got fiery and started the "rings" and postseason BS. Parker moderately shot that down by saying it's been a long time since that Super Bowl win, but still was soft in Peyton's defense. I swear, I feel ESPN rigged that "debate" just to try and put down the factual Manning>Brady debate that was settled last Sunday.

So far this season, Skip has undermined the Colts by saying (1) they're facing too much change---a stupid argument that has long since been proven false; (2) Losing Sanders and Jackson for the season would torpedo us---He clearly did not know Sanders had been out all year and played limited in 2 games, or that Powers played in front of Jackson all year (EDIT from previously); and (3) saying the refs probably got the 4th down call wrong and Wayne should have been flagged for pass interference.

Sorry for yet another one of these annoying "ESPN is evil" posts. I have basically shrugged off the disrespect most of the season, but the lack of respect (as in none at all) we received for the come from behind win all this week has been frustrating to say the least, and the moronic Bayless comments was the final straw. Regardless of the game's outcome and the Hall of Fame QB poll, ESPN chooses to keep ignoring the Colts unless they are undermining them and Peyton. I am certain if the Colts and Pats had their roles reversed this season, the media would already have crowned NE champs for this season and next. Hopefully, we can shut all these clowns up once and for all in February.

EDIT:

I had attempts and completions in the opposite fields, so it screwed up. In 2007, Manning had 97.7 rating and Rivers had a 133.2, while in 2008, Manning had a 90.4 and Rivers had a 61.9. So rating wise, in 2007 the edge Rivers held over Manning was much larger, and vice versa in '08. Thanks to P0RSKIN2.

Okay.....Phew! Got that out of my system.

Sportscenter today on ESPNBoston went on and on about Belichick, Belichick, Belichick, and how he blew the game and other rants about the VERY questionable call. The anchor (Josh something) was so visibly upset about the game, it was funny. Not even trying to hide the bias anymore. Yet no one that I have heard yet has stated the obvious. Belichick did not lose this game, the Colts won it.

N.E. was on a clear path to victory, with leads of 24-7 and 34-14 (the latter in the fourth q). If they were the better team, they would have held that lead and Belichick never would have been placed in that situation. Yet, they folded at the wrong time, and we turned it on full throttle at the right time. For three quarters, they outplayed us. Moss was killing us and was virtually uncoverable. He beat Bethea on that big score, but Bethea did provide valiant coverage regardless. Maybe 2% of NFL WRs would have still caught that pass. Then, we just kept making mistakes on offense. Addai went out for a while. The young Wide outs were clearly overcome with nerves and anxiety. Collie blew a first down conversion by tripping over himself on a screen and stumbled out of bounds which resulted in a 5yd gain that should have been 10+. Then on what should have been the conversion on a quick slant, Garcon quit running his route, resulting in an incompletion. Punt. Later on came drop after drop after drop from Garcon and Collie (and others). Wayne and Clark were getting all the attention and had trouble getting open. The Pats had much better receiver play for the first 3 qs by far. We were missing every opportunity given to us. Then, in mid third Q, the team came out refusing to lose. Brady could no longer find Moss, and was beginning to feel Mathis and Freeney's breath every play. Maroney had a BAD fumbled caused by great defense. Manning began to go into his usual refuse-to-lose mode, and was unstoppable. The Pats D was getting picked apart, and Wayne and Clark were getting more and more space. Chad Simpson played his heart out and deserves a huge token of respect. Collie made a heady play resulting in a PI (which was the right call, regardless of anyone who thinks otherwise) That last pats series resulted in a bad 4th down call because they could not do anything against us on the first three downs. Bullitt made an EXCELLENT play to basically cement the win. The way we were playing, whether it was a 70 yard drive or a 28 yard drive, we were going to win that game because we showed we had the grit that the Pats did not. 

The QBs were basically mirrors of each other last night. Brady had Moss and Welker, two vet stars who were in the zone, while it took a while for Collie and Garcon to loosen up while Wayne and Clark were getting double coverage. The numbers were similar, but Manning did more with less, and did it when it mattered. Manning had a terrible pick which if thrown straight, would have likely been a big TD to Garcon. Then was the miscommunication pick with Wayne, which may have been partially Wayne's fault. Brady had only one pick, but it was critical. Yet, he also was lucky not to have three or four. Powers couldn't hold onto two (one which would have resulted in a pick six on the third and 2 before the infamous 4th and 2, which would have resulted in Brady taking the blame), and I think had Mathis not knocked brady's hand on the last series where Brady's ball went overthrown out of bounds, it would likely have ended up in the hands of Jennings or Powers. They both had their woes and struggles, but Manning was unstoppable in the end, while Brady was feeling the heat.

Last night was a great example of two great teams going at it with everything they had, but the better teams overcome odds and win games in the fourth quarter. That is what the Colts did. Belichick's call was wrong and deserves special attention, but it is repulsive how much attention it is taking away from the game itself. I'm not saying that just because we won. The Pats played nearly as good (but not good enough). It is because that was one of the all time greatest regular season games, and may have been THE greatest in this rivalry. Yet, the media chooses to only talk about Belichick.

Weird. I was saying the other day we aren't being talked about much, which I have no problem with, but the other day Mariotti made a nice gesture our way on ATH and today Skip and Scoop Jackson on 1st and 10 talked us over as the no. 1 topic. The topic was "Are the Colts the best team?" referring to the new power rankings at ESPN.

Scoop said he thinks that right now we are and honestly does not see a game on our schedule we could not win. Skip asked him if he thought we would go 16-0, and he said we could possibly do that. Skip said that right now he is very impressed with us and mentioned the defense (though kind of gave a backhanded compliment saying they were good, but not a top 10 D), how we still have not fielded a 100% healthy team, and the fact Peyton has made weapons out of Collie and Garcon. He really gave high praise to Manning (as did Scoop). Then Scoop said we probably could not beat Pittsburgh in the playoffs and Skip said he doesn't think we could beat Pittsburgh, Baltimore, or New England. As dumb as that sounds, they actually made a decent point, saying that the past few SB winners (I believe this includes us) have been teams catching a second wind and it's hard to stay red hot all the way through the SB. I disagree and think given home field and a healthy squad, we could take anybody, but it wasn't a bad point. All in all, it was mainly complimentary with some slight criticism (postseason).

I'm starting to get one of those "Be careful what you wish for..." moments. I mentioned the other day how we were being somewhat overlooked by the media, and then Mariotti gives us (or rather Peyton) big time props, and today we are topic numero uno on 1st and 10. I hate when the Colts are disrespected, but I'm always weary of media attention as well (I'm hard to please). I like when the Colts are kind of lurking in the media shadows (and absolutely DESPISE talks of going undefeated), but it's nice to hear some positive ESPN press every now and then.

Ever since week 1, it seems that like usual, the media is virtually ignoring the Colts. They are not badmouthing us by any means, and when they do speak, it is usually pretty positive, but the team is rarely a topic of interest on any show. When talking undefeateds, the teams discussed with the most interest it seems are the Giants, Vikings, and Saints, followed by the Colts. Around the Horn on ESPN today was no different. The main NFL stories they spoke of were Den/NE and Bal/Cin, which are games that should be discussed, but once again no Colts or Peyton Manning mention. None of this is that big of a deal since no one is exactly undermining what the Colts are doing, but you get my point.

Then Jay Mariotti, who was the "winner" today used his time to talk about Peyton Manning. A synopsis of what he said was, "Peyton Manning throws for 309 yds and 3 TDs and no one mentions it. He slides past Tarkenton for third all time on TD list and no one mentions it. He has taken two no name young receivers in Collie and Garcon and turned them into playmakers, and no one mentions it. He could drag me and Woody Paige off the street and throw us TDs. He is one of the best, if not THE best QB ever and no one wants to talk about him. It's crazy." Tony Reali then made a quick joke saying, "Who's job is it to talk about him again?" indicating people in the media, like Marriotti, are responsible for such things.

Now, I like cheering for a team who is under the radar in terms of media coverage and don't care that we are not a huge media crush (but get really bent out of shape when disrespected), but I like seeing things like this. I generally do not like Mariotti at all, but it was good to see some much deserved love thrown Peyton's way, especially with the media mainly focused on guys like Favre.

After watching a very bad Buffalo team without their starting RB and without 2 defensive starters choke away a game they should have won against an obviously overrated Pats team, I was disgusted. Not due to the loss, but due to the fact that Brady got all the credit, despite a mediocre performance. They used the word "heroics." If Brady punching it in inside the 30 with plenty of time against a crap team (at home, nonetheless) is "heroic," then Albert Pujols beating Shaq in the home run derby on Shaq Vs. was heroic. Brady lost the game until McKelvin gave it back to him. Nothing heroic there. I bet Brady even went ahead and assumed a loss.

I would have been much more riled up about the Brady slobbering, except for one thing. I had the TV muted the entire 4th quarter. I heard Peyton does this when watching games. It is brilliant. I can watch the game and not listen to subjective drivel from ESPN drones. I don't know why I hadn't done it before. Now, though, I have decided to not read any articles regarding the NFL aside from brief recaps. Just to be safe.

This makes watching non Colts games and Colts games so much easier. More greatness from the best in the game. Now, I know he couldn't make McKelvin fumble like Brady did, but that's a rarity.

Well, ladies and gents, it is officially the start of the NFL season and I'm sure everyone is excited. It is also that time of year where all the sports writers get together and decide to unanimously decide to slobber over the patriots. Now, many of us here like to bash networks like ESPN and the NFL Network for their not so discrete bias towards the men up in Foxborough. Yet, a network just as deserving of eye rolling is CBS Sports and the geniuses who write for them. In this case, we are going to go with Clark Judge and Pete Prisco.

From Judge's prediction page:

MVP: Tom Brady, QB, Patriots. New England goes nowhere without this guy, and last year proved it. So the Patriots went 11-5 with an inexperienced Matt Cassel making the throws. That was remarkable. But they still missed the playoffs, and that doesn't happen with Brady. The year before they were 16-0 with the guy throwing 50 touchdown passes. Aside from Randy Moss, tell me another player on this team who is Hall of Fame worthy. There isn't one. Brady is the key to New England's success, and that's not exactly a revelation. If it were left up to me I'd make him a finalist every season.

Really, Clark? Let's dissect this for a second, shall we?

"New England goes nowhere without this guy, and last year proved it." Um...they went 11-5....with a guy who hadn't started since high school and rode the bench at USC. This indicates what most believe: that Brady, although a great QB with a winning attitude, is a system QB and is not as valuable as the folks in Bristol and elsewhere have tried to brainwash you into believing. Judge writes this bit as if they barely had their head above water.

"So the Patriots went 11-5  with an inexperienced Matt Cassel making the throws. That was remarkable." Um...I thought NE went nowhere...what?

"But they still missed the playoffs, and that doesn't happen with Brady." Ohhhh....because only Brady could take that team to the playoffs. I mean...if an inexperienced QB who hadn't started since high school couldn't do it, no one else but Brady could. There is definitely no way a decent QB with starting experience could have taken them there. Only Brady could. Right. And um...key players fromt the '07 team, particularly the defensive secondary, were not there anymore. Maybe...just maybe....defense matters a little more than you think in making the playoffs. That, and the Dolphins were very good (not the 1-15 debacle the previous year) and Favre had a pretty good run with the Jets and they were also much improved. But no, you're right. Brady is the only reason they missed the playoffs by half a game.

"Aside from Randy Moss, tell me another player on this team who is Hall of Fame worthy. There isn't one." Talk amongst yourselves on this one.

"Brady is the key to New England's success, and that's not exactly a revelation." Just like Cassel was the key to New England's success last year. That Belichick guy has no idea what he is doing. Definitely not a revelation.

"If it were left up to me I'd make him a finalist every season." Yeah! Screw season stats and performance. Brady's awesome! Why wasn't he a finalist last year?! Haters! Tom should be at least have the final say on who gets the award. How could we blame him if he picked himself? YAAYYY BRADY!!! BOOOOO LOGIC!!!

(Prisco after the jump) 

Continue reading this post »

Welp, I let my homerism get the best of me in my fantasy football draft and drafted Addai in the 5th round. Of course my plan was to take him, then grab Ray Rice in the next round and scoop up Chris Wells in a later round. Unfortunately, I underestimated my opponents and both were grabbed prematurely and I didn't get either. However, I do believe Addai will have a resurgence this year and Brown will push him to succeed again. The o-line is a big question mark, but with Pollak looking solid and Lilja back, he should be getting a little more fantasy boom. I argued for him after the pick and no one could really make a counter argument for the facts I was presenting other than, "Colts suck," and the such. I wouldn't consider it a bad pick (like my Derrick Ward pick whom I thought would be starting...sheesh).

My question is....what kind of fantasy season do you predict Addai will have? Will it be similar to Deangelo Williams last year when rookie Jonathan Stewart pushed him to success? Or will it be as bad as last year? Or somewhere in the middle? And also.....anyone else take a chance on him?

I was ready to watch the game, then at last minute was asked to help my grandma move furniture for a couple of hours (no one should say no to that). But it's okay, it set the DVR on the NFL network which stated "Live, Indianapolis at Detroit."  I get home at about 3. Start the tape, and guess what I get? The f***ing replay of the f***ing eagles/jags game with michael f***ing vick's debut. If I had a gun, I would have shot the TV I was so pissed. I then find out the game was playing on another local channel. I flip it on just in time to see Peyton replaced with Sorgi. I saw none of the game that mattered. F**K the NFL network. Anyone else have this happen to them or this some sort of conspiracy targeted at me?

According to ESPN's front page, Peyton is just not MVP caliber. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?page=hotread13/mvp&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab2pos1. This is of course a true statement, as it is provided by the all knowing, never wrong ESPN Pulitzer caliber journalists known as the "bloggers," who is basically the scout team over there. Not to knock bloggers (obviously), but just ESPN's. I should also say that I have no problem with Peyton not getting the MVP, although he is more than worthy, but there have not been nine players more valuable this year than him. Yes, his numbers are down. But guess what? So is his health as well as his team's. Without him, the Colts would be 3-10, maybe. To me, MVP is not about stats, but what you do with what is given to you. It's about winning games you shouldn't win and lifting your team back up when they're knocked down, which Peyton has single handedly done, while being injured himself. What other player has done that?

Warner has amazing stats and without a doubt should be among the top choices, but who has Arizona really played? Or therefore, beat? And is it him, or Boldin and Fitzgerald who are responsible for the success? Eli outplaying Peyton? Sure....I like Eli, I do, and he should be in the running, but by "outplaying" Peyton, I assume that means playing with a hungry, healthy, young, uber-talented team coming off a Super Bowl victory and then losing your top target and choking against Philly. Eli has played with all this, then lost his favorite target and lost. Peyton lost his most trustworthy player, Saturday, as well as Lilja and Jake Scott, as well as the other injuries to the line. He missed all of training camp and preseason and played the first quarter of the season (at least) in a lot of pain and has had trouble realigning himself with Harrison after missing so much time together. So how does he react? He pushes forward and wins. He has done more with less than any player in the league. The only other player you could make a case for in that category is Favre. Aside from Peyton, I think Favre, Brees, Eli, Warner, and Turner should be the biggest competitors.

What Peyton lacks in the statistical category, he has more than made up for in clutch plays, clutch wins, and all around leadership on a team that without him would be nowhere near a playoff spot. This cannot be overlooked. Hell, even Bill Simmons, who moronically has picked the Colts to lose something like 10 games this season for no other reason than he hates them, even admitted that Peyton was the MVP thus far. If that doesn't count for something at ESPN, I don't know what does.