Obviously you don't know what a fact is. How is it a fact that the '95 Colts were very weak and faced a weak sched? They only played 5 games all year against teams w/ a record worse than 7-9(2 were against 6-10 NE, 2 against 3-13 NYJ and one against 4-12 Jax). Their sched wasn't very weak. The Colts did win a division title in 1987 so they didn't stink throughout the 80s so I guess that isn't a fact, huh? So were we a eak team that got on a lucky run in 2009? we were 9-7? we faced an easy sched, we faced a not great team in the WC rd and a choking coach in the 2nd rd- are you saying we were weak in 2009? so if you are better and don't get blown out in the next seasons playoffs it legitimzes your previous season even though each season is a new season, got it:up: Again, Peyton rescued them from making 2 of 3 playoff apps and reaching the title game(where SuperPeyton wouldn't guide them again until 2003) Here we go again, using schedule excuses. What about postseason? where they weak teams too? Bal has had great D's for most of the last decade yet they haven't even been close to a SB since Trent was their QB- maybe he deserves a tad more credit. Any way you slice it the '00 ravens O led by Trent was better by a significant margin than the '06 Ravens O. Isn't it a fact that Norv Turner led teams choke in postseason too? I would say the '00 ravens were an aberration so Billick led teams choke in postseason too. Outside of '00 his Raven teams won just ONE playoff game. You can bring up all the meaningless stats you want but SD '95 won 9 games and earned the right to host a WC playoff game. They also played in a 5 team division where the last place team won 8 games. Chi and Infy '06 were certainly led by their Ds but you still need offense to win or else Baltimore would have 3 or 4 SBs by now. Peyton played great in the 2nd half vs. NE but he was also a major reason why NE had such a big lead. We are 2 games into a season, they signed a QB off the street 3 weeks ago. Give them a little time. They had chances to win yesterday and they got blown out at Hou just like they did w/ a healthy Manning a year ago.
You forgot the Bengals, Panthers, Saints and Rams who were all under .500 and that they lost to the EXPANSION Panthers. They had an easy schedule only playing 6 games against teams w/ over .500 records. Those are FACTS. The Colts sucked for nearly all of 26 seasons before Manning. I listed the 5 teams they had that would be considered good teams and the 1987 team was one of them. The 95 and 96 teams weren’t. We got lucky in 2009 that the Colts sat their players or we wouldn’t have made it to the postseason. The 95 Chargers were not as good as the 94 Chargers so using their Super Bowl run from the previous year is irrelevant. Who on the 95 AFCCG team was even on the team when they went to the postseason w/ Peyton in 99? Maybe 7 guys? 2 or 3 starters? How many were even there in 98? Peyton rescued that franchise. One mediocre run in 95 did not. Neither did 26 seasons of mostly mediocrity. The facts are he beat up on a bunch of shitty teams at the end of the season. Do you not see how that would help inflate their offensive numbers – the same numbers you are trying to use to prove that they had a better offense in 2000 than in 06 despite scoring fewer TDs, having a worse 3rd down conversion rate, and gained less yards per play? No, the 2000 Ravens O was no better at all than the 06 Ravens O. Of course they’re meaningless stats A 9 win team that hosted a playoff game is proof of how weak the AFC was. You aren’t showing evidence that the 95 Chargers were anything more than average. Chi and Infy? The Ravens and Bears got to the playoffs by defense and running the ball. Their offenses weren’t designed to put up a bunch of points and they won a lot of games that way. So that’s another irrelevant point. The Patriots had a lead in the 2nd half of the 2006 AFCCG with Gaffney and Caldwell as their top 2 targets. Another excuse debunked. Another excuse. Collins has played in many systems in his career. They aren’t expecting him to run the entire offense immediately but he should be able to get the ball to all this talent that has “lifted” Manning up from mediocrity his entire career.
The bengals were 7-9, the Panthers were 7-9, the Saints were 7-9, the Rams were 7-9. 7-9 in't great but it's not bad either, those were mediocre teams. they didn't play an easy sched. They played only 5 games against teams worse than 7-9. The expansion Panthers were 7-9, the best expansion team in league history, they were int he NFC Title game a year later(bringing it back to the topic of the thread kerry Collins was their QB). "Nearly" but they were good most of the 5 years before he got there including 2 playoff apps and a title game app in the precious 3 seasons. Did we also get lucky to play Cincy and play a team w/ a choking HC? I guess we can only use the next year if you say so. The Jets make the title game again it proves something about '09 but if it hurts your argument we can't use it, do I understand this correctly? Yes he clearly rescued them from the depths of the AFC Championship game. Interesting note; 3 years before Peyton: 2 playoff apps, 2 playoff wins, 1 title game app peyton's first 3 years: 2 playoff apps, ZERO playoff wins whch was better? NE 3 years before Brady: 1 playoff app, ZERO playoff wins NE 1st 3 yrs w/ Brady: 2 playoff apps, 2 Super Bowl wins which was better? he got it down in January in 4 playoff games, does that not count? How does a team that scored more PPG in the reg and postseason not be considered a better O? You act like the '06 team played nothing but top teams. They played 4 teams w/ winning records all reg season long. Back then WC teams could host playoff games, this was before the latest expansion and before you had to win a div title to host a playoff game(by the way a 7-9 team hosted a playoff game last year). I'm not claiming SD '95 was great, just pointing out a fact that they were int he SB the previous year. You don't grasp this concept that even the greatest defenses need offense. Have you noticed the great Bears Ds of the 80s only reached one SB? the great Ravens D's of the 00s only reahed one SB? the great TB D's of the late 90s/early 00s only reached one SB? I wonder why that was? They did have a lead but the typcial pats choking D showed up and Brady couldn't get anything done w/ those 2 awful WRs. One of them dropped an easy TD late in the game that could have been the difference. Collins was retired until a few weeks ago before they dangled $4 mil in his face. he clearly came back for the money and the lifelong health benefits he will now get from the latest CBA. He has been awful but give him a little time, he may still suck a month from now but 2 games does not make a season.
They only played 6 games against teams with a .500 record or better??!?! That is NOT a difficult schedule. The 1995 & 96 teams were not good. The only good teams they had after Unitas and before Manning were the 75, 76, 77, 87, 88 teams. Our 09 team was lucky to make the postseason. They were fortunate that the Colts benched their entire team. The 1995 Chargers were not as good as the 94 Chargers. It’s irrelevant to use the 1994 team in this debate. He rescued the Colts franchise. A mediocre 1995 team and their AFC title game run didn’t. They needed someone to rescue that franchise from 26 seasons of futility and they got it when they drafted Manning. There are many ways to determine which O was better. The 06 Ravens scored more offensive TDs than the 00 Ravens. Considering the 00 Ravens scored more FGs it is likely the 06 Ravens had a better Red Zone TD%. Admittedly I did not research that. They gained more yards per play. They were better in 3rd down conversion. Dilfer came in at a time when they played extremely weak competition which inflated their scoring output (27pts against 4-12 Cin, 27pts against 5-11 Dal, 44pts against 3-13 Cle and 24 pts against 1-15 SD) After looking at other measurements than just total points the 2006 Ravens offense comes out as the better offensive team. The 06 Ravens played 10 games against teams with .500 or better record. I know that back then there was a WC team that hosted a playoff game. I also know that a 9-7 team hosting a WC game is proof of how weak the AFC was just like a 7-9 team winning a division proves how weak that division was. And how is it relevant that the Chargers went to the SB the year before? Those teams weren’t built to win by their offense. They were built to win by defense just like the 06 Ravens and 06 Bears. Of course it’s the defense’s fault despite Brady getting the ball with great field position regularly and only coming away with FG tries. Let me guess it’s Caldwell and Gaffney’s fault right? The excuses never end. Sometimes you have to win a shootout right? Brady had many opportunities to get TDs and he didn’t get enough. No, two games doesn’t make a season. But Collins is a veteran and former SB QB. He should easily be able to get the ball to all this talent that has propped Manning up all these years.
But only 5 against teams w/ a record worse than 7-9 and the '06 Ravens only played FOUR teams w/ winning records. They were good enough to make back to back postseasons and reach an AFC Title Game. You are avoiding the question- were we also lucky to play Cincy then face a team w/ a choker for a HC? Rescuing would be saving a franchise that was consistently getting worse, a franchise that had NEVER won a SB not saving a team that just was in the title game 3 years earlier. It's about scoring points, '00 scored more points by a significant margin when dilfer was inserted at QB. They played just FOUR games against teams w/ winning records. so does a 9-7 reaching the title game 2 years ago prove the AFC was weak? It is as relevant as what the jets did in 2010 w/ regards to 2009. Those teams were driven by their D's but they still needed good offense to win, that's why each only made one SB instead of multiple like they all should have. The D was great, blowing a 21-3 lead. Has NE's D;s ever done anything wrong? Brady gets his share for that game BUT he did put up 27 pts w/ Gaffney & Caldwell as his WRs, manning has averaged 14 PPG in playoff losses w/ much greater talent. Collins was on his couch a few weeks ago. Give him time to get into shape.
The 95 Colts played 10 games against teams with a losing record. The 06 Ravens played 10 games against teams with a .500 record or better. More like the AFC was weak where a weak team can get a 9-7 record and make the playoffs two years in a row Yes, we were lucky to play a weak Cincy team and a choker HC, no doubt. And we were lucky to even make the playoffs because the Colts sat their players in the 2nd half. Manning rescued a franchise that had been terrible for 26 seasons. Dilfer played against some of the worst teams in the league. Points alone does not prove one offense was better than the other. The 2006 Ravens offense was much better than the 2000 Ravens offense in many different facets. They scored more TDs, better at 3rd down conversion and averaged more yards per play. They also improved after the firing of Jim Fassel who was fired after 6 games. They played 10 games against teams who were .500 or better. An 8-8 record was okay when you were trying to pump up the 95 Chargers Do you really think that being 9-7 in the AFC in 1995 is the same as being 9-7 in the AFC in 2009? What do those teams have to do with the 2006 Ravens & Bears? The 06 Ravens and Bears won because of their defense. I didn’t say the defense didn’t deserve their share of the blame but your excuse for the Pats losing was because Brady’s top two targets were Caldwell and Gaffney when they won 2 more games w/ those two than they did the previous year AND had the lead in the 2nd half with those two as his top targets. Okay. We’ll give Collins time (because his stamina is the reason the Colts suck right now)
They played only 5 games against teams that didn't win at least 7 games. '06 Bal played FOUR games against tems w/ winning records. It doesn't matter how weak the AFC was or wasn't, Indy dd what they had to do and they earned the right to play for the AFC title. So terrible they were a playoff team and title game team 2 of the 3 years before he arrived. 2006 Baltimore averaged 19.2 PPG 2000 Bal w/ Dilfer starting averaged 22.3 PPG 2006 Bal O in postseason: 6 PPG 2000 Bal O in postseason:17 PPG The '00 offense was better, it's great that '06 may have had a better 3rd down % but it's about scoring points and winning games. Dilfer helped them win 4 postseason games, their O scored more and helped them win more. The '00 O was better. You are ignoring the point, I am using your flawed logic. I know we earned our spot in 2009 and we earned our title game app just like Indy did in '95. It's proving a point that no matter how great of a D you have you must have a quality offense to win. '00 Bal had it, '06 did not. Of all the great things Brayd has done in his career guiding NE to the title game w/ Gaffney & Caldwell as his 2 top weapons may be the most impressive. He needs to get a feel for the offense, get used to his teammates and get back into football shape. Again, this guy was on his couch a few weeks ago. he may still suck a month from now but he deserves some time.
The 95 Colts played 10 games against teams with losing records and the 06 Ravens played 10 games against teams the DID NOT have losing records. It certainly does matter. That was not a playoff team in today’s AFC era. That was a weak team in a weak conference who drew a weak opponent and a weak playoff coach. So terrible that in 26 seasons they only had 5 quality teams which do not include the 95 & 96 teams. Dilfer led the Ravens against some of the worst teams in the 2000 season which inflates his numbers. Against the Titans in the Reg Season he nearly blew the game with an INT returned for a TD (PAT was missed) then was fortunate to get a Def PI penalty that set up the GW TD. In the playoffs the Defense held the opponents to an average of 209 yards per game. The Defense and ST’s SCORED 4 TDs including two against the Titans that gave them the victory. It was the defense setting up the offense with great field position in each of those games. The DEFENSE was the reason they won the playoff games. They shut down the other team and consistently gave the ball back to the offense with great field position. We were fortunate to play against weak teams and a choke artist coach that got us to the AFCCG in ’09. We weren’t beating a top team that year which was evident in the AFCCG. It was still a fun ride though and I loved every minute of it before we got knocked out. 2000 Ravens did not have a quality offense. They had a barely adequate offense that didn’t mess it up for the defense like they did when Banks was the QB. The 2006 Ravens offense was better in a numerous ways. They aren’t sucking because he’s “not in football shape”. C’mon he has all this talent around him how can they suck?! I mean these are the same guys that MADE Manning. How hard is it really? Clark and Wayne and Garcon and White and Collie and Brown and Addai are all super players that Manning was fortunate to have around or he would have been out of the league years ago. Surely they can help poor ol’ Kerry Collins.
The '95 Colts played 6 games against teams w/ winning records, the '06 Ravens played 4. It wasn't today's AFC era. They did what they had to do to make it to the title game. Beating the previous AFC Champs and barely losing to the current AFC champs on the road. 26 seasons has nothing to do w/ the 90s Colts. They were a different franchise undre Marchibroda. Were some of those worst teams in postseason? Both teams were led by their Ds, only one of the Os stepped up to help them win in January- it was the one led by Dilfer. D was the best team in the AFC 2 years ago so we did beat a top team. We also happened to face a choking QB in the title game but still lost. The '00 Ravens O was good w/ Dilfer as their QB, they wouldn't have won the SB w/o him. He was on his couch 3 weeks ago, give me a break. It took the great Peyton half a season to get going in '08 off the injury. Whatever happens w/ Collins it's not going to change the fact that manning has had elite talent aurrounding him his entire career.
Ah, the Pete Carroll era. Certainly Brady was part of the turnaround, but so was the jettisoning of Pete Carroll who is now well on the way to running Seattle into the ground.
They did go from 8 wins w/ Carroll to 5 w/ Belichick then started 0-2 including losing to eventual 6-10 Cincy opening week. Brady turned that franchise around. They also gave Bledsoe a $100 mil deal fatre the 2000 season when they went 5-11 so I'm not sure how much we can credit him w/ discovering Brady.
The ’95 Colts played 9 games against teams with losing records and the ’06 played 6 games against teams w/ losing records. They played in a weak era and struggled to get 9 wins. The previous AFC Champs were not the same team they were the year before. They were not the team or did they have any players that saved the franchise. That didn’t happen until Manning got there. 26 seasons of futility. The difference Marchibroda brought to the Colts didn’t stay long and they immediately went back to 3-13 until Manning saved them and brought them to heights they didn’t see for 30 years. Dilfer nor the O were not the reason the Ravens won the SB. They won mainly because of their defense. The Ravens O w/ Dilfer beat up on the shit teams and inflated their point totals. They wouldn’t have won the SB with Tony Banks no doubt. SD had their choking coach and consistently under achieving team. They always fail in the postseason and did again luckily for us. The Colts aren’t sucking because Collins needs to get into football shape. Peyton’s injury was a much different situation. That same elite talent surrounds Collins now. Why are they struggling when he has all these super players around him?
Caroll and specifically Grier and the ridiculous contracts they gave some of their players that Belichick and Pioli had to deal with when they got there.
The '95 Colts played 6 games against teams w/ winning records, the '06 Ravens played 4. 26 years doesn't matter, in recent, relevant times before Manning the Colts had a good franchise. They had one bad year after 2 playoff seasons. Only 2 losing seasons 1992-1997. Obviously reason #1 was b/c of their defense but again D alone is not winning. You still need offense, Dilfer was vital to that SB run. Isn't it funny how SD never choked against a certain choking QB? The Colts are sucking b/c collins is sucking since he was on a couch 3 weeks ago thinking he was retired.
The ’95 Colts played 9 games against teams with losing records and the ’06 played 6 games against teams w/ losing records. The Colts were 50-78 in the 90’s before getting Manning. Keep hanging your hat on the fact that they went to the playoffs with a weak team who had a weak schedule and weak opponents in the playoffs. That was not a good franchise. 26 seasons of mainly futility before being rescued by Manning. Dilfer was not vital to that run. The Defense was vital to that run. Dilfer did a better job than Banks and that’s about it. Okay so your current excuse is that Collins was sitting on his couch four weeks ago. Got it. In a few weeks what will be your next excuse? All these years all we heard from you is that Manning had all this talent around him and that they basically made him better. How could he fail with all that talent. Now all of a sudden with a veteran former SB QB they suck. I’m shocked. With all these Super Players around him you would think it was so easy to win with them.
The '95 Colts played 6 games against teams w/ winning records, the '06 Ravens played 4. You are including 8 wins total in 90 and 91. Under Marchibroda they had just 1 losing seasons in 4 years and from '92-'97 just 2 losing seasons PLUS I believe someone mentioned they made the playoffs 2 of the 3 years before Manning arrived including a trip to the AFC Title game. Dilfer was vital, again obviously the D keyed the run but you still need quality offense and Dilfer gave them that. If it was all about D Bal would have 3-4 SB titles by now. No excuses, just facts. You expect a 40 yr old who was retired a month ago to step into a new system and be ready to go from day 1? is that being fair? That's like saying Peyton should have been ready his rookie year instead of throwng nearly 30 INTs and winning just 3 games w/ Harrison, Faulk, Dilger and company.
The ’95 Colts played 9 games against teams with losing records and the ’06 Ravens played 6 games against teams w/ losing records. 26 seasons of futility outweigh 2 playoff seasons in which they didn’t win the Division Title OR Win a Super Bowl. You are trying to minimize Manning’s impact on the Colts and how he rescued that franchise from years and years of futility. Dilfer wasn’t vital. He was just better than what they had in Tony Banks. Banks was awful, Dilfer wasn’t. That was the difference. Dilfer didn’t run a quality offense. It was just less ineffective. Did the Ravens have the same defense the next 3 – 4 years? There was a dropoff from 2000 to their 2001 season where they gave up an additional TD a game. 3 of the 4 starting DL were over 30 and Burnett did not have as good of a year. They have built their team thru the years on great defense but none was ever as good as the 2000 team. Would they have won w/ Dilfer in 2001 instead of Grbac? I don’t know. I didn’t think it was a wise move for them to make at the time simply because Dilfer was a good fit for them. But don’t mistake that by thinking they had a quality offense based off of point totals because they inflated the point totals beating up some very weak teams. The 2006 offense was a better offense. Neither offense was great but 2006 was the better one. Collins has been in many systems and the Colts aren’t expecting him to operate that system like Peyton. They aren’t expecting him to know everything about that system. But with all that talent he has, that has surrounded Peyton for years, how hard can it really be right? Are you seriously comparing a veteran, former SB QB to a rookie QB?
Considering the players on Indy only know one way and that is w/ Peyton don't you think there would be an adjustment w/ a brand new QB?
