They've suffered plenty. Don't forget they had the #1 or #2 draft pick THREE times in the 1990's before Manning saved the franchise.
They were also in the playoffs(including a championship game app) 2 of the 3 years before manning "saved the franchise".
In the 13 years before Manning went to Indy, the Colts record was 84-123 for a .406 winning percentage. In the 13 years since Manning got there the Colts were 141-67 for a .678 winning percentage. Yes, Manning saved the franchise. And the year they went to the AFCG they were 9-7 and had a good run in the playoffs, but they were no where near what they became with Manning.
Manning was drafted in 1998. In 1995 they made the title game in 1996 they made the playoffs From '92-'97 they had just 2 losing seasons. He made Indy better obviously and turned them into an elite franchise but he didn't rescue anything. this wasn't the horrible '80s Colts who were rescued by Eric Dickerson.
That was such a bizarre postseason in 95. The Chargers, straight off a SB appearance, getting destroyed by a rookie FB with zero rushing experience was one of the funniest things I've ever seen.
The AFC was incredibly weak in 95 & 96 and the Colts only won 9 games both years they made the playoffs. From 1990-97 they had four losing seasons and an overall record of 50-78 .391. Since drafting Elway then being forced to trade him they went to the playoffs 3 times prior to getting Manning. They went thru 5 QBs, drafted Jeff George #1 overall, drafted Steve Emtman #1 overall, and Quentin Coryatt #2 overall, Trev Alberts #5 overall after actually getting a good player (Faulk #2 overall). They were fortunate they played in a weak AFC to make the playoffs at 9-7 in '95 & '96 and actually won a couple of games in 1995. The team was a disaster - minus a couple of seasons - ever since joining the AFC and haven't been so since Manning arrived.
Yeah, that was a strange postseason and the Colts / Steelers AFCG is one of my All-Time Favorite Games.
1992-1997 they had just 2 losing seasons, what does it matter what they did in the 80s? They were putrid in the 80s but under marchibroda got things turned around in the 90s and were a competetive franchise for most of the decade. They were not getting worse every year like NE 1996-2000, they were not putrid like Bal/Indy of the 80s. he did not rescue the franchise, he elevated it but he didn't rescue it. who cares if the AFC was weak? a 9-7 team nearly won the SB in '08, we saw 10-6 teams win it all in '07 & '10. That's life in the FA era.
The AFC was bizarre in that era, the previous year w/ SD, the next year Jax beat Den, Den then goes the WC route in '97. It's amazing that we were so bad in that era(not amazing when you look at the people we had running the organization but aamzing b/c the conf was weak and we still couldn't compete).
From 1990-97 they had 4 losing seasons and had top 5 picks regularly. They made the playoffs while the AFC was extremely weak. They were a team that for 25 years prior to getting Manning had done nothing, did not and could not maintain success. Manning rescued the Colts and returned them to prominence where they hadn't been since the early 70's (outside a few seasons). You mentioned the Patriots (surprisingly) who in 1996 went to the Super Bowl and went to the playoffs in 1997 & 1998 - a much higher level of success than what the Colts had prior to getting Manning. A majority of their key players from the Super Bowl run was on the team in those years as well. If those Colts teams were playing in the NFC they would not have sniffed .500 never mind making the playoffs. So, playing in a weak AFC helped them. They were not a good team. They were an okay team that benefited from playing in a weak conference.
1990 was a previous administration. marchibroda took over in 1992 and from '92-'97 they had only TWO losing seasons(prior to '97 they had 3 straight non losing seasons) and had 2 playoff seasons including a run to the title game. So what we did the last 2 years was nothing? getting to the doorstep of the SB is nothing? In all but 2 seasons for peyton Indy has done nothing? NE was a sinking ship going from Parcells in the SB year to Carrol then to BB who was still a failure as a HC until a QB really rescued a franchise in 2001. Who cares? if this jet team was playing in the AFC back then we'd have SB apps but they played in the era they played and were successful.
The Colts had not had any level of consistent success since the early 70's until Manning arrived in 1998. Those Colts teams in 1995 & 1996 were not good teams. They were average teams who benefitted from a very weak AFC. The Colts got to the doorstep of the Super Bowl because they played in an extremely weak AFC. It was a nice accomplishment (not sure where I said that was nothing) but was not a true representation where they were as an organization. The Jets of the last two years played in a very tough AFC. Two totally different scenarios. Those Colts teams of the mid 90's would be lucky to win 6 games in today's AFC. NE went to the playoffs in 1994, 1996 (Super Bowl), 1997 (AFC East Div. Champs) and 1998 (while playing in an extremely tough division). There was a level of success already there. Don't compare a team that went to the Super Bowl with one that was lucky to make the playoffs. Many of the SB pieces were in place going into 2001 and were built during their playoff years. Parcells is the person most responsible for saving that franchise as he is with the Jets.
I'm not debating hat mannign elevated them into an elite franchise but from 1992-1997 hey had just 2 lossing seasons- that is sustained success. Do we take credit away from Indy b/c they had an easy road in 2006? They got Bal w/ no offense, the Chiefs w/ Larry Johnson and not much else, NE w/ Reche Caldwell and jabar Gaffney as Brady's weapons and rex grossman in the SB- should we take that away b/c thye had an easy road? 1996 was 5 years before Brady started, NE went from 11 wins to 10 to 9 to 8 to 5 and started 0-2 when Brady stepped in. They were a franchise in steep decline until he rescued them.
The Colts were a disaster of a franchise until Peyton arrived. The only good teams they had from 1972-1997 were 75, 76, 77, 87 & 88. The 95 and 96 teams were lucky to make the playoffs and in 95 got on a good run. Those weren’t good teams – they were ok teams at best, that were fortunate to play in a weak conference. I’m not referring to some brief, moderate, lucky success. I’m talking about their overall ineptitude of their franchise that they had become ever since Unitas left. They were a floundering franchise that were spurned by Elway, moved out of their home and away from their loyal fan base, failed on another #1 overall QB, had the #1 & #2 picks which neither panned out (one due to injury) and blew another top 5 pick. Please don’t try and compare the 1995 Colts road in the playoffs to the 2006 Colts. The Chiefs had one of the best running games in the league, the Ravens had one of the best defenses in the league, the Patriots were a TEAM who had won 3 Super Bowls, and the Bears had a great defense. On top of that the Colts went 12-4 in a tough conference with a difficult schedule that year. The 95 Colts played a coach who consistently choked in the playoffs his entire career and a team that were also fortunate to play in the weak AFC. 96 the Pats went to the SB, 97 they won the division and in 98 they won 9 games in a division where 4 teams made the playoffs. When Belichick took over in 2000 he had a lot of fixing to do for sure, but Brady wasn’t QB’ing the 98 Colts – he joined a team that had most of the pieces in place – a fortunate situation for him to jump in to.
How is a team that in the 3 years prior to Manning made 2 postseasons and 1 title game a disaster? You can make all the excuses you want about the AFC being weak but to see a disaster of a franchise during that team look at our team. That was a disaster, a team so bad that we couldn't even make the playoffs while the AFC was awful. What they did in the 80s had nothing to do w/ what they did starting w/ Marchibroda in 1992. The 2006 Colts had a cakewalk to a SB, the Chiefs weren' very good and had one player, Bal had no offense, The pats had no one around Brady(yet he still almost led them to the SB) and the bears were led by rex Grossman so if you are going to take things away from the 90s Colts be fair and consistent and do so w/ the '06 Colts. NE was consistently getting worse and worse each year. 11 to 10 to 9 to 8 to 5 to 0-2 before Brady rescued them and all of a suddent they started winning. Manning walked into a situation where he inherited Marshall Faulk, Marvin Harrison, Ken Dilger, Marcus Pollard- poor guy. It's too bad he didn't have Antowain Smith, David Patten, and company. Brady had one decent WR in Troy brown who was not a #1 WR.
I know you want to play on words, but the facts are that the Colts franchise WAS an absolute DISASTER for 25 years before Manning arrived. The Colts never had the type of success in those 25 years that they have had since Manning took over. They were going nowhere and had gone nowhere for a long time until Manning got there. The moderate success in 95&96 had nothing to do with the turnaround the team had from 99-2010. You mentioned Marshall Faulk, but Faulk wasn’t even there when the Colts began winning division titles. You mention Harrison, but Marvin was a mid tier receiver who had a ton of talent but didn’t develop into a HOF receiver until he played with Manning. You try and minimize Manning every chance you get and we all know that’s your agenda. But the facts don’t lie. The Colts were 156-239 in the 26 seasons before Manning arrived and 141-67 since he’s been there. That IS rescuing a franchise. Those 90s Colts teams couldn’t hold a jock strap to the 2006 Colts. You want to be consistent? Why not be realistic. Everyone knows the Colts had a great run in the 1995 playoffs. But it’s also not a coincidence that once the Division & conference got better in 1997 that they fell back down to earth. The Chiefs weren’t very good in 2006, but they had one player who could destroy the Colts because the Colts had no run defense until the playoffs. The Ravens offense wasn’t great but it was better than what they had when they won the Super Bowl. What’s your point? They went into Baltimore in miserable weather conditions and got a legitimate victory. The Patriots had won 3 Super Bowls in the previous 5 seasons when they never had a true #1 receiver. Why is that an excuse for the 2006 team’s failure? And what difference does it make who was the Bears QB? They were a defensive team who relied on the ground game on offense. The 2006 Colts went thru the #1, #2 and #3 rated defenses 3 games in a row in the playoffs. NE won the division/ won the division / made the playoffs when playing in a division where 4 of 5 teams made the playoffs. They had a great deal of success and had many key pieces already in place. Too bad Manning didn’t have Ty Law, Tedy Bruchi, Richard Seymour, Mike Vrabel, Lawyer Milloy, Willie McGinest, Otis Smith, Tebucky Jones, Mike Compton, Damien Woody, Joe Andruzzi and of course Adam Vinatieri.
What does 1983 have to do w/ 1995 and 1996? This was not an awful franchise in the 90s before Peyton. I am not debating that Manning took them to a new level, obviously they never had this sustained success before he got there(post Unitas) but they were a title game team and playoff team 2 of the 3 years before Manning got there. They had success. They traded Faulk and brought in some bum named Edgerrin james before adding pieces like Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark. Marvin was young WR still developing, he was one of the best young WRs in the game. I am not minimizing Manning, it's the opposite. YOU do everything you can to minimize Brady and pump up Manning when the facts don't support that. It's comical how Manning "rescued" a team that was int he title game and playoffs 2 of the previous 3 years. Who cares about the 90s Colts teams vs. the '06 one? That's not the point, you are minimizing what they did when in fact the '06 team had a creampuff ride to the SB. That one player the Chiefs had rushed for 32 yds on 13 carries(2.4 YPC) and the great Peyton couldn't put that game away until late. 2000 Bal O scored 310 pts(19.4 PPG) 2006 Bal O scored 307 pts(19.2 PPG) By the way, In games Dilfer started the '00 team averaged 22.3 PPG so we can put that theory about Bal's O scoring more points to rest. Jabar gaffney & reche Caldwell, that is all that needs to be said about the '06 Pats. Rex grossman was awful. The funny thing is it was Indy's D that carried them to that SB anyway. manning had one great half all postseason and stole the SB MVP award b/c of his name. NE hadn't been to postseason in 3 years, hadn't won a postseason game in 4 years and was consistently getting worse each season including the start of '01 before they magically started winning when Brady became the starter. Manning has only had Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge, Addai, Faulk, Saturday, Freeney, Mathis, Sanders, Dilger, Garcon, Pollard, Tarik Glenn, and some guy named Adam Vinatieri since 2006. Peyton has had AV as long as Brady had him.
This was an awful franchise before Peyton got there. Short termed mediocre success notwithstanding. Very little success for 26 seasons proves this. Your obsession with a two year stretch where they were only 1 win from being .500, when the AFC was at its weakest does not prove otherwise. I was referring to the situation they were put into from the start but I see you want to now include players they got along the way as well. Okay, well Brady got Corey Dillon, Deion Branch, Ben Watson, Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth on top of having the team invest high draft picks in Laurence Maroney and Chad Jackson but he couldn’t turn them into the players that Manning turned Garcon and Collie into. That 95 team was 3-13 in 97. What happened if they didn’t need rescuing? It was because they weren’t very good to begin with. I don’t minimize Brady, I put the realistic spin on it. Brady has benefitted from a great defense and a HOF kicker. Why is it that they haven’t won a SB ever since they began to rely on the passing game more and more? They gave him elite talent and yet still didn’t win w/ it. Don’t tell me about 16-0 because the Colts easily could have done that in 2009. We’ll never know obviously but only a Manning hater would say they weren’t going undefeated. You wanted to compare the playoff runs the two teams made. That WAS the point or are you now changing your point? Going up against the #1, #2 and #3 rated defenses is not a creampuff ride. Get real. Who mentioned anything about Baltimore’s points? They had a better QB (McNair over Dilfer) and better receivers. They scored 20 or more points in 11 games in 2006 and only 8 times in 2000. They averaged 5.0 yds / play in 2006 vs. 4.7 yds / play in 2000. They had a better offense and there’s more to factor in than just points. How many drives were set up for the 2000 offense deep inside opponent territory because of the defense? How many more times did they start near or in opponent territory due to the better PR's by Jermaine Lewis? I didn’t say the 2006 Ravens offense was great. I just noted that they were better than the 2000 Ravens offense who won a SB. Of course Gaffney and Caldwell are to blame. How is it that when Colts receivers go down there’s not hiccup in their offense? Oh wait…that's right it’s all because the players surrounding Manning are Super players. Rex Grossman was awful but he’s not why the Bears got to the SB. They won because they had a great defense, a great return game and ran the ball extremely well. Funny how if it isn’t for the Pats defense they don’t even win that first or 3rd Super Bowl. Funny how it’s actually a team sport and takes a TEAM effort to win. Who woulda thunk it. I don’t disagree on the MVP. It should have been Rhodes. The Pats hadn’t been to the playoffs in 2 years not 3. And most of the key players from those playoff years were still on the roster in 2001 unlike the 1995&96 Colts players in 1998. Well I guess we’ll see how good those players are now that it’s doubtful that Manning will play this year won’t we.
AGAIN, what they did in the 80s is completely irrleevant, they had a new reime beginning in 1992 and from 92-97 theyonly had 2 losing seasons. deion Brannch is mediocre, did nothing w/o Brady Had Moss for 1 1/2 healthy seasons and set records w/ him while going 16-0 Watson is an average TE Stallworth?:rofl: There's no doubt who has had more offensive talent around them throughout their careers. 3-13 in '97 w/o him, 3-13 in '98 w/ him. You've never seen a team go from good to bad to good quickly? The bottom line is they had success in the 90s before they got Peyton. NE relied on the passing game when they were winning SBs too and they went 16-0 and reached a SB relying on the passing game. This is a man who led an O w/ reche Caldwell and jabar Gaffney as his top 2 weapons to the doorstep of the SB. peyton has struggled doing tha w/ elite talent around him. I didn't compare the playoff runs, you were trying to take credit away from the '95 team, I simply stated a fact that the '06 team had a creampuff run. McNair '06 was not a great QB and have you noticed how Bal and all those great D's never reached another SB w/o Dilfer? I get it that Dilfer doesn't have great fantasy #s but he was perfect for that team. How did they have a better offense when they scored less pts? significantly less per game compared to when Dilfer was the QB in '00? Name me the season when Manning's 2 top weapons were anything close to Gaffney & Caldwell? The WORST weapons he has had was probably Wayne and Garcon which would be better than any NE year w/ Brady outside of '07. You can have the greatest D in the world but you still need quality QB play to win. The NFC was a joke in 2006, a 10-6 team had a 1st rd bye. if it isn't for Brady they don't get to any SBs let alone win one. He led the GW drives in the 1st 2 SBs, in none of the SBs did Brady not make big plays to win(including the onethey lost). That cannot be said for manning who was carried by the D and running game in '06 and threw away the SB in '09. It was 3 years. 1998 to 2001 is 3 years, it was 2 seasons. Curtis Martin, terry Glenn, ben Coates, Sam gash, Keith Byars, Shawn Jefferson were the key guys on O in '96. Where were they in '01? they didn't have one starter from '96 on the '01 offense. defensive starters they had a McGinest, law, Milloy, and Otis Smith. 18 of 22 starters were new. We will see though many expected Indy to take a step back even w/ Peyton but once Collins gets comfortable they will be good.
They were not a franchise on the rise. They had 26 seasons of futility. They had two mediocre years during a stretch when the AFC was weak. That team needed rescuing and fortunately they got Manning in 98. They gave Brady talented players and he didn’t get as much as he should have out of them. He never made young players better they had to keep bringing in veteran free agents for him. Manning made everyone that played for him better. Stallworth averaged 55 rec 812 yds 14.7 YPC and 6 TDs in the 3 seasons prior to going to NE and was viewed as a legit weapon. Watson was a good receiving TE. No worse than Dilger – who you brought up as a weapon that Peyton had. Manning was a rookie in 98. Bottom line was their mediocre success in the mid 90s did not rescue a franchise that needed rescuing from years of futility. Luckily they got Peyton in 98. They did not rely on the passing game the same way in 2001 that they have since 2005. Going against the #1, #2 and #3 defenses in a row is not a creampuff run. Get real. You just love to bring up fantasy #s. You do realize that Dilfer QB’d wins against a shitty Bengals team, a shitty Cowboys team, a shitty Browns team, a shitty Chargers team and a shitty Cardinals team, was fortunate Vinny threw an INT returned for a TD and 2 PR’s by Jermaine Lewis and nearly blew the game against the Titans. Garcon sucks. You’ll see how much he benefitted from playing with Manning. The Patriots won 2 more games in 2006 than they did in 2005 with a tougher schedule and with Gaffney & Caldwell as the receivers vs. 2005 when they had Branch and Givens. The Pats won SB XXXVI because the Defense scored or set up 17 points. In SB XXXVIII he was set up for the GW drive because Kasay kicked the ball out of bounds giving them the ball on the 40 and he still needed a long FG try to get the win. They made the playoffs in 1998. They missed in 99 and 00. It was only two years. Many of the key players from their 2001 run was on the team during their playoff years of 1996, 97 & 98. Well we know you already have your excuses ready of the Colts collapse w/o Peyton.
