Vet Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 One sign of a truly good team is the ability to play poorly and still come away with a "W". The Colts have played poorly at least two weeks in a row now, and they are still undefeated. If I was a Colts fan (or, like Swerski, a Colts and Bears fan), I wouldn't be worried at all. This team will win 12-13 games easily. Dungy, however, will choke on his own vomit in the playoffs like he does every year and the Colts will bow out in the AFC Championship game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 (edited) Keep in mind the Colts have a ton of money invested on the offensive side of the ball so I'm not sure if they can shore up their defensive weaknesses. Also, isn't Freeney looking for a big contract? I'm assuming they are near the cap so how do they fill their defensive needs going forward? Manning might need to re-structure that mammoth deal he has. All these big contracts were going to eventually catch up with the Colts balance and depth at some point. Um, if the Colts have waaaay too much cap space occupied by their offensive players, how were they able to give Corey Simon a $30 million deal last summer? And that was with a highly-priced, franchised-tagged Edge contributing to the cap. The Colts pay Manning and Harrison a lot of money because they're worth it. And IIRC, Manning's contract currently counts something like $13 million against the cap and Marvin's is something like $9 million. They're expensive, but they're still cap-friendly. Reggie's deal (6 year, $39 million) is far from restrictive and, IIRC, is equal to what the Seahawks are paying Deion Branch. Contrary to what the Manning-haters preach here, his deal isn't stifling Indy's ability to sign high-quality defensive talent (e.g., Simon). Edited October 9, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishFreak Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Um, if the Colts have waaaay too much cap space occupied by their offensive players, how were they able to give Corey Simon a $30 million deal last summer? And that was with a highly-priced, franchised-tagged Edge contributing to the cap. The Colts pay Manning and Harrison a lot of money because they're worth it. And IIRC, Manning's contract currently counts something like $13 million against the cap and Marvin's is something like $9 million. They're expensive, but they're still cap-friendly. Reggie's deal (6 year, $39 million) is far from restrictive and, IIRC, is equal to what the Seahawks are paying Deion Branch. Contrary to what the Manning-haters preach here, his deal isn't stifling Indy's ability to sign high-quality defensive talent (e.g., Simon). I never said these guys weren't worth it. That's the price teams decide to ultimately pay or not pay when you find yourself with super stars on the team. The salary cap sustains parity but guarantees loss of talented players year after year. That's what has made the Pats run so impressive. Sure these guys are worth it but when you have that much money invested in one side of the ball (offense), other areas of the team's depth will suffer. You just can't pay and afford everybody unless a lot of guys take less than market value. The Colts were stacked and built to win last year...and didn't. They have less to work with this year and are having to work a lot harder to get wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 (edited) I never said these guys weren't worth it. That's the price teams decide to ultimately pay or not pay when you find yourself with super stars on the team. The salary cap sustains parity but guarantees loss of talented players year after year. That's what has made the Pats run so impressive. Sure these guys are worth it but when you have that much money invested in one side of the ball (offense), other areas of the team's depth will suffer. You just can't pay and afford everybody unless a lot of guys take less than market value. The Colts were stacked and built to win last year...and didn't. They have less to work with this year and are having to work a lot harder to get wins. With Edge gone, they have more cap room now than they did last season. And after Corey Simon and possibly Mike Doss are cut next season, they'll have even more resources available to re-sign their premiere talent (Freeney, June, Sanders, etc.). You act like the Colts are the only team that has high-priced offensive players and that it means that their defense is automatically going to suffer because of it. Reality says that you're wrong. Vick makes almost as much as Peyton, yet the Falcons were able to sign Grady Jackson, John Abrahman, and Lawyer Milloy this offseason. And that's IN ADDITION to not-very-cheap guys like Brooking and Kearney. The Seahawks have to pay Hasselbeck, Alexander, Walter Jones, Deion Branch, Nate Burleson, and Darrell Jackson some serious coin, yet they can still afford veterans like Grant Wistron, Julian Peterson, Bryce Fisher, and Marcus Trufant. Edited October 9, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted October 10, 2006 Author Share Posted October 10, 2006 Peyton's cap number is very managable the next few years. In fact, he has a lower cap hit than Tom Brady this year. Vick's contract is more than Manning's. And several other QB's have over $100 million deals including McNabb. Culpepper did too at one time, not sure how that went after being traded. The Colt's cap situation is fine. This has nothing to do with them not being able to AFFORD defense. Like Bill mentioned, they went out and signed Corey Simon on the eve of the season last year. My points was they continue to draft for speed. And they continue to get smaller in their defensive front. That's all well and good if you can play with a lead. But teams are learning to pound the ball. Shorten the game. Put more pressure on the offense to score on each posession, or risk not getting the ball back for a while. The Colts are also not being patient with their own running game. Case in point, on the opening drive against Tennessee yesterday, they are running the ball down the Titan's throat. They cross the 50, and for some reason decide to start bombing it downfield. The Titans were still playing pass. They should have done what the Titans did. RUN EVERY PLAY until they commit more guys to stopping it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishFreak Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 With Edge gone, they have more cap room now than they did last season. And after Corey Simon and possibly Mike Doss are cut next season, they'll have even more resources available to re-sign their premiere talent (Freeney, June, Sanders, etc.). I don't know the Colts exact cap figure right now but that's not necessarily true. Most contracts are back ended especially big contracts for aging players. So as the years go on, it's likely that guys like Harrison, Manning etc. will count more and more towards the cap. Plus I'd have to look into all the off-season signing and current Colt contract situations and dig a bit deeper. I'm ASSUMING they are at or near the salary cap knowing they have a championship caliber team with a closing window of opportunity. You act like the Colts are the only team that has high-priced offensive players and that it means that their defense is automatically going to suffer because of it. Reality says that you're wrong. Vick makes almost as much as Peyton, yet the Falcons were able to sign Grady Jackson, John Abrahman, and Lawyer Milloy this offseason. And that's IN ADDITION to not-very-cheap guys like Brooking and Kearney. The Seahawks have to pay Hasselbeck, Alexander, Walter Jones, Deion Branch, Nate Burleson, and Darrell Jackson some serious coin, yet they can still afford veterans like Grant Wistron, Julian Peterson, Bryce Fisher, and Marcus Trufant. That's not what I'm saying at all. It's just most likely to catch up with you eventually with depth or one side of the ball. Most teams have two big contracts on one side of the ball or sometimes both sides of the ball. The Colts have three big contracts currently on offense and therefore couldn't re-sign James. They elected to invest in a younger Wayne and give Freeney the money he is going to demand. Typical salary cap decisions. However, when your top guys are locked in with big deals you have to make wise picks and have less money to spend in other areas. That's just basic math and I'm giving a logical reason as to why the Colts D is slipping or bound to get worse. The Corey Simon injury didn't help but then that goes back to the point I was making about depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted October 10, 2006 Author Share Posted October 10, 2006 I think it has more to do with drafting than cap space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 That's not what I'm saying at all. It's just most likely to catch up with you eventually with depth or one side of the ball. Most teams have two big contracts on one side of the ball or sometimes both sides of the ball. The Colts have three big contracts currently on offense and therefore couldn't re-sign James. They elected to invest in a younger Wayne and give Freeney the money he is going to demand. Typical salary cap decisions. However, when your top guys are locked in with big deals you have to make wise picks and have less money to spend in other areas. That's just basic math and I'm giving a logical reason as to why the Colts D is slipping or bound to get worse. The Corey Simon injury didn't help but then that goes back to the point I was making about depth. The Colts do not have "three big contracts." Reggie Wayne is only making an average of $6.5 million/year. The 49ers, Cowboys, and Broncos were able to pay top dollar to 2-4 offensive skill-position players in the salary cap era and win Super Bowls. So why can't the Colts pay Manning and Harrison top dollar and do the same thing? Hook is correct that the Colts' problems with their front 7 have to do with size, not a lack of cap room. And pretty much any team is going to suffer when losing an elite run-stuffing DT like Simon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Well, I've been thinking about this post for a few weeks now. The Colts defense is god-awful. Horrible. Horrendous. They simply cannot stop the run against anyone. They are bad, and I don't see how they can get better. Last year, despite their ranking, they were truly an average / slightly-above average defense. Then they let David Thornton go to Tennessee. Now Corey Simon is out for the year. Bob Sanders is hurt, had arthroscopic knee surgery, and should be back after the bye. We'll see. They are undersized. They are not tackling well. They can't stop a draw play to save their lives. Especially if it's out of shotgun formation. Peyton Manning has willed this team to 5 wins over average (at best) opponents. They haven't faced a balanced team all year. When they do (after the week 6 bye) the losses will start piling up. Washington, Denver, and New England will run all over these guys. Plus, they have the passing game to go along with it. The only reason the Colts are winning right now is that they can bring their safeties up to help with the run because David Carr, Byron Leftwich, and Vince Young are not very good. They lucked out against Jax and had a punt return, or they probably would have lost. Manning had to pull two fourth quarter miracle drives to beat the Jets. Vince Young ran about 8 different plays all day, yet the Colts couldn't figure it out, trailed 10-0 at the half, and held on to win by 1 at home. They have been outplayed statistically in 4 of their 5 wins, but have still won. It won't last. I'm not sure they are even a play-off team. Thank goodness we're in the AFC South. If the Colts make the play-offs, it'll be one and done again. If ANY of your runningbacks are facing the Colts, start 'em. All very true.....and all very much old news. Paid for by the GDB Polian Group, all rights reserved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 All very true.....and all very much old news. Paid for by the GDB Polian Group, all rights reserved. Cap, how do you feel about this after last night? I think the Colts are playing closer games, but are showing they have ddevellopped (and still developing) a tougher, blue collar way to win tough games. I think they have a much better chance in the playoffs BECAUSE of these close games. Without the luxury any week of sitting back and blowing the barn doors off, they are developing quite a hard nose I thinkn that will serve them well this year. (I know... I'm a Raider fan with a big hard on for Manning, Harrison and LT) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 The Colts are the worst undefeated team in the NFL this year by far... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 The Colts are the worst undefeated team in the NFL this year by far... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitpdub Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone get the feeling that Bellchick doesn't want to show his hand just yet, and didn't pull out the full game plan against the Colts? They will face each other during the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 If the Colts go 19-0 and win the Superbowl, they will be the worst team to ever go 19-0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showtyme5 Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 I agree. OVER-RATED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone get the feeling that Bellchick doesn't want to show his hand just yet, and didn't pull out the full game plan against the Colts? They will face each other during the playoffs. That's what Colin Cowtard (another ESPN Pats homer) tried to argue this morning. My counter-argument to that is that these two teams are playing for home-field advantage. It would've been in Blichick's best interest to win this game. He doesn't want his team facing Manning in the Dome in January. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 That's what Colin Cowtard (another ESPN Pats homer) tried to argue this morning. My counter-argument to that is that these two teams are playing for home-field advantage. It would've been in Blichick's best interest to win this game. He doesn't want his team facing Manning in the Dome in January. What he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone get the feeling that Bellchick doesn't want to show his hand just yet, and didn't pull out the full game plan against the Colts? They will face each other during the playoffs. oh wait, you serious Clark? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msaint Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone get the feeling that Bellchick doesn't want to show his hand just yet, and didn't pull out the full game plan against the Colts? They will face each other during the playoffs. some caller suggested that on weeei this a.m. -- not sure if that's where you heard it, if you're local -- but i don't think so, at all. he simply coached a subpar game. regardless of falling behind, in this case, pats should have kept running and running. maroney would have eventually busted one loose, i think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 some caller suggested that on weeei this a.m. -- not sure if that's where you heard it, if you're local -- but i don't think so, at all. he simply coached a subpar game. regardless of falling behind, in this case, pats should have kept running and running. maroney would have eventually busted one loose, i think. You blame the coach for Brady's 4 picks? Interesting.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone get the feeling that Bellchick doesn't want to show his hand just yet, and didn't pull out the full game plan against the Colts? They will face each other during the playoffs. I think this is precisely why the Bears lost too ... they didn't want to show all of their hand yet and then have the pressure of staying undefeated the whole season. They are much better off now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 You blame the coach for Brady's 4 picks? Interesting.... IMO Brady must have talked to Roethlisberger sometime in the past week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 You blame the coach for Brady's 4 picks? Interesting.... I think Bellichick went to Brady and said, "I want you to suck tonight. Throw a bunch of interceptions. Let them win. That way, when we play them in January in their building they'll be lured into a false sense of security." Then I think he laughed like this: "BUUUHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!!!!!!" The guy is a supergenius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 I think this is precisely why the Bears lost too ... they didn't want to show all of their hand yet and then have the pressure of staying undefeated the whole season. They are much better off now. The Steelers are the smartest of all. Giving away these games on purpose to get a great draft pick and then win it again next year !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 I think Bellichick went to Brady and said, "I want you to suck tonight. Throw a bunch of interceptions. Let them win. That way, when we play them in January in their building they'll be lured into a false sense of security." Then I think he laughed like this: "BUUUHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!!!!!!" The guy is a supergenius. I think I heard the same thing. I've got really good surround sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.