[edjr]

When asked why they didn't try and go 19 - 0 that is what Polian said.

Last 10 years.

Patriots 3, Colts 1

You owned yourself there buddy.

[FeelingMN]

Last 4 years:

Colts 1, Patriots 0


Maybe next year will be the Patriots year.....if Welker can come back strong.....they really seemed to struggle without him.....and if the defense can improve.....and if they don't let go of too many veteran players....because they don't want to sign 'em....and if Moss isn't done....he's kinda lost a step.....and if they find a running game....carrying 8 different backs isn't gonna cut it anymore Bill....and if Brady isn't afraid of playing quarterback and getting hit.........

But BB is a genius and Brady is the best so you guys should be fine.

[9-Route]

edjr, on Feb 8 2010, 03:51 PM, said:

When asked why they didn't try and go 19 - 0 that is what Polian said.

Last 10 years.

Patriots 3, Colts 1

You owned yourself there buddy.

how do the next 10 look??

[mambokings]

Quote

"The regular season doesn't matter, only Super Bowls do"

(cont'd, IMO)

Quote

- "so let's follow the same course of action that has lead to us NOT winning a Super Bowl: rest our starters and lose games on purpose"

Bottom line: the fact still remains the only time Indy won a championship was the year they did NOT rest starters but instead played on through.

[FeelingMN]

mambokings, on Feb 8 2010, 03:29 PM, said:

(cont'd, IMO)
Bottom line: the fact still remains the only time Indy won a championship was the year they did NOT rest starters but instead played on through.

But that's like saying Indy would have won the SB if it was raining...because the only time they won the SB, it was raining. Correlation is not causation.

If Indy had lost against Baltimore, then I'd agree with you 100%. But they played well throughout the playoffs and their decision to rest players had no effect whatsover on the outcome of the game.

If Indy was 18-0, would New Orleans have fallen behind by 20 instead of 10? Would Payton still have called for the onside kick? Does Garcon hang onto the ball on that 3rd down throw? Does Indy score on every possession? Does New Orleans turn the ball over their first three possessions?

Both teams were comparably rested...and well matched. The better team won....and it's not like the Saints barely squeaked into the playoffs and took Indy by surprise. They were arguably the best team the first 10-13 weeks of the season. They deserved to win the championship.

And you can say Indy choked...yet again....but the fact is they almost always lose to the eventual SB champion. Whether it be New England.....or Pittsburgh....or New Orleans.

I just don't see how a team chokes when they lose to the best.

[mambokings]

FeelingMN, on Feb 8 2010, 03:46 PM, said:

they lose to the best.

My point all along, in response to the "decade of dominance" phrase thrown about to describe Indianapolis. A team is hardly dominant if they have only 1 ring to show for having been in the playoffs 10 of the past 11 seasons. Clearly, they've been a good team, at least in the regular season, but they need to demonstrate the ability to be more than a good regular season team if they're to be given the label of "dominant".

[Joey Gladstone]

Yeah, scanning all the topics on the main page I can totally see how necessary this one is.

big time burn bro!

[FeelingMN]

mambokings, on Feb 8 2010, 04:54 PM, said:

My point all along, in response to the "decade of dominance" phrase thrown about to describe Indianapolis. A team is hardly dominant if they have only 1 ring to show for having been in the playoffs 10 of the past 11 seasons. Clearly, they've been a good team, at least in the regular season, but they need to demonstrate the ability to be more than a good regular season team if they're to be given the label of "dominant".

Sure, I can see that. I don't think they're a dominant team by any stretch....but that's not exactly the same thing as saying they're choke artists which is also what you're trying to argue for.

[donhaas]

edjr, on Feb 8 2010, 02:51 PM, said:

Last 10 years.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=6vQpW9XRiyM

[mzf5c5]

Hello, my name is Edjr and I am having issues with people not paying attention to me and my Pats team, because we both suck now. Please pay me attention with all these threads about the Colts and Saints I am trying to bait people with.

[Fumbleweed]

mambokings, on Feb 8 2010, 05:54 PM, said:

My point all along, in response to the "decade of dominance" phrase thrown about to describe Indianapolis. A team is hardly dominant if they have only 1 ring to show for having been in the playoffs 10 of the past 11 seasons. Clearly, they've been a good team, at least in the regular season, but they need to demonstrate the ability to be more than a good regular season team if they're to be given the label of "dominant".

Dominance needs to take on a different meaning in the salary cap era...

[Chronic Husker]

donhaas, on Feb 8 2010, 08:06 PM, said:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=6vQpW9XRiyM

[edjr]

FeelingMN, on Feb 8 2010, 05:08 PM, said:

Last 4 years:

Colts 1, Patriots 0
Maybe next year will be the Patriots year.....if Welker can come back strong.....they really seemed to struggle without him.....and if the defense can improve.....and if they don't let go of too many veteran players....because they don't want to sign 'em....and if Moss isn't done....he's kinda lost a step.....and if they find a running game....carrying 8 different backs isn't gonna cut it anymore Bill....and if Brady isn't afraid of playing quarterback and getting hit.........

But BB is a genius and Brady is the best so you guys should be fine.

Wes Welker ain't walkin' through that door folks