Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Week 9 Game Discussion Thread

This thread is for discussion of action on the field before, during, and after Sunday's games. You can talk about who you think will win or lose before the games start and last-minute news on Sunday morning. Then during the games, discuss strange plays, great performances, and stupid announcers (of which there are plenty). After the day is done, we'll discuss the results of the week Sunday night and Monday before our weekly commentary articles appear.

NOTE: Please do not get into a discussion of which quarterback is better, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. They are both great. If you want to have that discussion, it goes in the Irrational Brady-Manning Arguments Thread. Otherwise, really, we're all sick of it and don't want to talk about those two guys until Monday night at 9pm. Thanks.

Comments

301
by tunesmith (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 6:27am

Philly isn't the worst team in the league. Objectively, according to wins and losses (who they've beaten and who they've lost to) I have then ranked 13th, ahead of teams like San Diego, KC, Tampa Bay, Miami... although the graph could change after tomorrow's game. (See the link at my name.) This loss really hurt, though. I can't wait until Washington actually starts getting what's coming to them. They're ranked pretty high right now but it just seems like they're balancing precariously on a ledge. Plus, I want them low so Denver gets a good draft pick!!

302
by tom (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 7:35am

re #290, I think you've got it right, and of course it's all interconnected. with the special teams doing better last year, the defence always had more chances to go for the pick, so could afford to be more aggressive. Ongoing, too, I think the key issue on the offence might actually be Tight End. LJ Smith isn't that good a blocker, which probably influences the run game a lot. Tight end is a critical part of the Eagles' passing game, as well. Every game the eagles have lost this year, he's had a significantly low number of receptions. That says to me, stop LJ Smith, and you have a good chance at stopping the Eagles offence from marching down the field. and now, well, he might have a concussion. go go Stephen Spach!

303
by real freddie eddelstein (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 8:33am

tunesmith,

Love your beatpaths.

What would it look like if you only used road wins?

304
by andrew (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 8:59am

I know many commentators like ripping on TO (and deservedly so), but sometimes it seems a tad hollow. After the Sunday night game was over they put on Salisbury to analyze how the Philly offense did without TO. He showed a couple catches, and then stated that the Eagles don't need TO, they are fine without him, as part of his ongoing diatribe that anything other than banning him for life, and deporting him from the country would be ludicrous.

Now, it may well be that the right thing to do is to do a Keyshawn on him. However, whatever analysis you use, the Eagles scored 10 fricking points. They do miss him on offense, no matter how you spin it. They sure could have used his production. They don't want everything else and that's fine, they decided its not worth it for now. I just don't think Sean was being objective in his analysis.

305
by Matthew Furtek (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 10:31am

Re: Eagles didn't miss TO

I don't know what Sean Salisbury was smoking. How come he didn't break down the Eagles near the goal line? None of their receivers got open. They clearly missed TO at the end of the game.

306
by james (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 12:14pm

matt and andrew,
Agree with you both totally. You can get away with "average" targets/runners in between the 20's. Once in the red zone you need a T.O type playmaker. Or else 10 points is all you get.

Philly has a huge dilema and I think they played the situation wrong. If they were gonna make an exception to their normal policy to bring T.O in last year they should have continued to make exceptions for him or release him. This is a guy that you can't have it both ways with. Do things his way and he produces. Play hardball and get sabotaged. Why bring in T.O if you aren't going to treat him with kid gloves. As a skins fan, I can only say how happy I am that the Eagles completely botched this move.

307
by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 12:22pm

The single biggest issue this year is McNabb’s injury. The Eagles made a huge mistake by not getting McNabb’s groin fixed before the bye and chancing it for a few weeks afterward.

No. No, no, no, no, no. McNabb injured is better than McMahon healthy - I have no doubt of this, because Reid sees it every week in practice.

McNabb getting the surgery does not guarantee him coming back for the season at all. In fact, it's unlikely. Two out of the three guys on the Eagles team who have had sports hernias other than McNabb had the surgery and it didn't fix it - Johnson and Owens (the one where it did work was Sheldon Brown).

308
by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 12:23pm

As a Skins fan, I think you should be more happy about the fact that Brunell played out-of-his-mind good last night.

309
by RowdyRoddyPiper (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 12:59pm

Pat, McNabb injured cannot effectively run the Eagles offense. It's being proven any way you look at it, unless you want to use 300 yard passing games as your only measuring stick.

My point is this: the Eagles may be able to stumble through the season with an injured McNabb and back into a playoff spot. In the playoffs, they will not stand a chance. The competition is too good. I view this as playing to keep the score close, not playing to win. Get the surgery after week 5 (when the wheels were clearly coming off) rest up till week 10 or 11 and hope to play .500 ball in the interim. I hate to disagree with a coach who has had such success, but the notion that Reid knows best because he sees it in practice everyday is flawed.

310
by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 1:39pm

Get the surgery after week 5 (when the wheels were clearly coming off) rest up till week 10 or 11 and hope to play .500 ball in the interim.

The six-week recovery time for a sports hernia is complete bull. In fact, rushing the recovery can sometimes force more surgery.

That's my point. McNabb gets surgery and he's done for the year - in Week 6, Week 3, or Week 1.

I don't buy that McMahon/Detmer can run the offense better than McNabb. McNabb looked pretty darned good last night, although the failures inside the red zone have to be worked on. Inside the 20, run the damn ball. Field goals are better than nothing.

311
by doktarr (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 2:47pm

There's no guarantee that McNabb comes back. And injured McNabb is better than whoever else they have. I don't dispute either of those points.

But, for a team that's been as good as Philly, there are only two outcomes this season - playing in the Superbowl, or not. And at this point, getting the bye is very unlikely anyway. So, unless you think that injured McNabb is likely to win three road games and get you there, it's probably better to put him under the knife and cross your fingers.

And the idea that TO is not important to their offense is ridiculous, really. Subjectively, he could be the only WR in the league that can take over a game the way a QB or RB can.

As a 'skins fan, I love that Brunell played well while simultaneously managing to not put up great fantasy numbers against me. Quite a trick, really.

312
by Andrew (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 2:49pm

andrew #304, james #306:

The Eagles offense with TO only scored 10 points against Atlanta, 13 against San Diego, 3 against Dallas. Excluding the Champ Bailey/Mike Shanahan gift-wrap of a 91 yard TD, they only put up 14 on Denver.

A bigger problem last night than TO missing was that LJ Smith knocked himself out with a big hit, and thus was unavailable as a red zone target. Since 2004, McNabb has typically thrown only to Owens, LJ Smith, or Westbrook when in the redzone (25 of 32 TD passes), or McNabb or Levens ran it in (7 of 10 rushing TD's). Owens was suspended, Smith knocked out, Levens was not resigned this year, McNabb is not running, and Westbrook inexplicably was not called for action by the coach. Had LJ been in the game, either he or Westbrook probably would have scored.

Also in 2003, the Eagles typically came out of the backfield on the goal line, with 33 of 39 touchdowns coming from Westbrook, Staley, Buckhalter or McNabb rushing (23 TD's in total), or Westbrook, Staley, Buckhalter, or Ritchie receiving (10 of 17 TD passes). That's 82.5% of TD scoring coming from a backfield that no longer exists.

You have to go back to 2002 to find what the Eagles offense is about to start looking like, and even there, you have to remove McNabb's running threat.

313
by Freddie (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 3:01pm

I am a Falcons fan but do
agree with Aaron on the fumbles issue. Maybe it has to do with what position player is fumbling. Do quarterback fumbles statistically get recovered by the offense more often than a receiver or running back fumble? Maybe this explains why atlanta recovers so many of there offensive fumbles (Vick's fumbles). P.S The falcons are the best team in the NFC.

314
by Andrew (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 3:02pm

Adam #238:

Please keep it up with your parodies of the three stooges. This is probably my favorite part of SNF now.

315
by Freddie (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 3:16pm

Response to #289
I do beleive that Vick is a much better QB than DVOA shows. Football does not lend itself to statistics as well as Baseball does. There is just too many intangibles. For instance, just the threat of Vick running does so much for ATL's offense. Or that Atlanta came out flat against Seattle because an emotional Monday night win against the Eagles combined with a short week and traveling all the way to the west coast.

316
by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 4:15pm

So, unless you think that injured McNabb is likely to win three road games and get you there, it’s probably better to put him under the knife and cross your fingers.

I don't think McNabb is likely to win three road games.

I think their defense is still capable of doing it. Or, at least, I think the Eagles think their defense is still capable of doing that.

317
by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 4:19pm

Freddie: DVOA only shows that Vick is a bad passer, not that he's a bad QB.

Although right now he's so bad as a passer that he's not even making up for it with running. That part should be evident by the fact that his touchdown to turnover ratio, even including rushing touchdowns, is only 1:1 (8/8).

318
by Becephalus (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 7:07pm

Just had to mention that Mr. Kriedler's article on ESPN about the rarity of games with as much meaning as IND/NE. While it is true that such games are rare, I think the article is a joke. Basically it sounds as though he is bored with football and is not happy there is no spectacular matchup every week. He seems to think that in the past there were a lot more meaningful games, but then dismisses games like this weeks KC/OAK becuase in "the teams are not among the elite". Newsflash Mr. Kriedler, even in the 70s and 80s there were only a few teams which were elite in any given year. That is what what being elite is. I doubt the amount of high quality matchups has changed over the years given his strict definition. In fact with more games and more teams one would expect a slight increase in the number of high quality games. If he cannot get excited for your standard division rivalry or home field advantage deciding games then perhaps he should stop tyring to be a football fan. Sometimes people tire of things, I stopped watching the NFL from maybe 95-99 for instance.

Anyway the article just seemed completely worthless to me and I am sorry I watsed 5 mins reading it.

Oh and to keep it on topic GO EDGE! I will take IND to win but not cover :)

319
by stan (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 9:44pm

re: Colts-Pats

Even banged up, the Pats defense is better than the Colts defenses of 2003 and 2004. Even banged up, the Pats Off. line is better than than the Colts Off. line of 2003, 2004 and 2005 (especially 2004 when the Colts had 3 starters miss a number of games with injuries).

320
by Jeff F (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 9:59pm

stan - DVOA would completely disagree with you on the Pats defense this year, which has been utterly abysmal. They are allowing yards and points just as badly as the Colts defense last year, and generating almost no turnovers, to boot. The Pats offensive line, this year, is hardly "much better" than the Colts, except perhaps when the three starters were out. The Pats are playing two rookies on the outside, two guys that aren't exactly high caliber players, and have a great center. Brady has been pressured quite a bit this year, and there have been no holes for the running game. You can't exactly say the same thing for the Colts, this year or last.

The Pats defense of 2005 is like the Colts defense of 2004 with almost no pass rush. They will be playing Indy without Dillon, Faulk, Light, Seymour, Harrison, Gay, Poole, Pass, McGuinest is questionable, I think, and there are a number of lower caliber players that are injured, too.

Frankly, I don't think they stand a chance, and I picked them in the football pool.

I'm a big Pats fan, but a Pats loss earns me $220 or so. Go Colts! D:

321
by Adam (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 10:39pm

Tonight I am going to count how many times "Tedy Bruschi" is said during the actual game broadcast.

I should have done it last week in his first game back, but i'm not quick enough.

Tonight i'm prepared.

Michael Irvin and Tom Jackson each said his name two seperate times in one sentence.

This is going to RAWK!

322
by jeffd (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:08pm

Someone should have pointed the MNF production crew at the Brady-Manning thread... HUMPS!

323
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:08pm

Is it just my imagination, or did Madden just quote Ric Flair? Although he left one part out. John, it goes like this...

To be the man... WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! you gotta beat the man!

324
by BillyB (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:20pm

That first drive was a perfect example of how Manning just pads his stats. Everyone knwos you run near the goal line, but Manning would rather get another TD pass.

325
by stan (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:20pm

After watching Brady against the Dolphins last year, how could Madden just say he is the calmest thing you have ever seen in the pocket. Against Miami, he was the worst QB anyone has ever seen.

326
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:21pm

Apparantly stan has never seen Criag Krenzel.

327
by admin :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:26pm

Are the Colts not aware that Nick Kaczur is a rookie? Why are they stunting Freeney to the other side so much?

328
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:26pm

Cause he doesn't want to get punched in the nuts?

329
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:33pm

How does a 325 lb nosetackle fail to tackle a running back?

330
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:35pm

I thought that was a bad spot. Indy really should go for it here regardless, unless they're really confident in Smith's ability to pin inside the 5. But since he punts like 12 times a year, how much can they really know about him?

331
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:37pm

What is that thing on the field near the sidelines at the 48 yardline?

332
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:39pm

It's a lighthouse

333
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:40pm

OK. Um, why do they have a lighthouse on the field?

334
by Michael David Smith :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:41pm

Don't you just love it when a game you've been anticipating actually lives up to the hype? That was a fun first quarter.

335
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:41pm

I hate to say it, but Bruschi doesn't look good at all out there. He's way to tentative.

336
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:42pm

333: Same reason they have one as part of the stadium. Lighthouses are a symbol of New England.

337
by admin :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:44pm

Don't celebrate, jackass, he just got the first down. Yay, I gave up a first down and smacked a guy.

338
by The Patriotic Lighthousekeeper (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:45pm

Re: 333

Duh, because they're the PATRIOTS.

339
by LTA (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:45pm

Why the heck is Samuel celebrating that hit on Dallas Clark? Note to Asante: You gave up a first down on that play.

340
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:46pm

Agreed on Bruschi. There have been a few plays where he's been too hesitant to take on James, or has gotten blocked too easily. It looks like he's reading the plays well, but isn't quite able to get there or hold his ground. At least it's limited the three-headed hype monster to two heads so far, though.

341
by Fnor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:46pm

Is it too late to join the Dwayne Starks fan club?

342
by B (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:47pm

fnor: You can be the charter member.

343
by Josh (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:47pm

Moral of the first quarter + (and KC yesterday): it pays to have balls! Both teams score TDs here after going for it on 4th and short.

344
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:49pm

How many guys now have a Panthers-specific NFL fantasy? Too bad they probably won't reshoot that commercial for the HBO NFL show.

345
by Ivarsson, Sweden (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:55pm

You think TMQ is going to love this game?

346
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2005 - 11:57pm

Madden never was a big screen guy? Would he have been allowed to call screens while coaching for Al Davis?

It seems like if you've got a team with a nasty pass rush, you've got third and long with two rookies on one side of the line, and you think the D line is gonna be rushing extra hard, a screen is a pretty good call. If nothing else, it might slow them down a little bit later in the game.

347
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:00am

Wasn't Scott pulled for excessive suckitude, not injury?

348
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:05am

Not a good pass by Manning. He throws it so bad when his feet aren't set. Bad mechanics = bad pass.

And nice catch by Vrabel. Maybe they should think of using him as a receiver in short yardage or something.

349
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:07am

It was nice of the Patriots and Colts to agree to play without corners.

350
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:09am

who's down by contact? must be david

351
by seven year lion (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:09am

Wow, if they call Dillon down by contact that might be the worst call of the year so far.

352
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:10am

Wow. If they ruled Dillon down it's about the worst call ever.

I don't think that spike/pass by David was going to be allowed to advance the ball for Indy though.

352
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:10am

screw the rules! Get two balls, have the entirety of each team on the field at the same time! Then we can have a real fight!

354
by seven year lion (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:10am

Ok, that's way more believable.

355
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:11am

Yea, if David wasn't downed by contact, it would be an illegal forward pass.

356
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:11am

If David hadn't been down, what would the rule have been on that David spike/throw? I imagine it would be an illegal forward lateral, I guess.

357
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:13am

I know the Patriots' fans haven't been too pleased with their secondary this year, but when the Colts don't get a pass rush and he actually has to cover someone, is there a worse cornerback in the league than Jason David?

358
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:16am

Well, David can throw the ball pretty far at least.

Hey, look at that halftime show! There's no way I'll change the channel or take a dump or anything and risk missing that!

359
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:19am

Quick moving first half. Guess that's what you get when you have long drives, few incompletions stopping the clock

360
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:20am

Only in the NFL could a QB fumble the ball 10 yards behind him and still have a "perfect" rating.

361
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:20am

Proof Manning is better: His MNF picture is ANIMATED!

362
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:20am

think that was catch, but you have to review that!

363
by andrew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:22am

Wow. Great catch. He was definitely in.

364
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:27am

I guess it's appororiate that with all the talk of Manning & Brady, this game will come down to Dillon's fumble.

365
by RowdyRoddyPiper (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:33am

Tim McGraw...he haunts my dreams. Do you think he has a team of Nashville starving songwriters glued to the Ticket's Sunday Mix to come up with this. Also, is it just me or is it nearly impossible to take Jimmy Kimmel seriously in a suit and tie?

366
by Tim L (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:36am

Tim McGraw? I was listening to Shock G's solo CD. What did I miss?

367
by Justus (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:40am

I think the Patriots have lost their swagger. That is clearly what has happened.

368
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:41am

The problem is they replaced thier swagger with strut.

369
by Matt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:42am

Cato June had good coverage on those last 2 plays. No wonder he has five picks.

370
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:43am

I like how Al Michaels makes a point of saying how short the opening possession was, but ABC still goes to a commercial. Does anyone know if the new TV contract increases the number of commercials? I haven't heard, but I'm betting it does because the networks do everything in their power to make short-term grabs for cash that make the games less fan-friendly in the long term.

371
by Towwb (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:43am

They're sitting Dwayne Starks. About 9 weeks too late.

372
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:46am

PM underthrew that by 5+ yards.

373
by Ron Mexico (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:49am

Who takes Jimmy Kimmel seriously ever?

374
by Matt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:51am

I like how refs explain things now. "That man did not get off the field."

375
by johnt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:52am

As Tedy Bruschi gets dragged for 3 yards after hitting Edge. I suspect the only measurement in which he is playing well is the key ESPN statistics of "hits".

376
by TMQ (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:54am

Can you hear that scratching? That's me writing "Game Over" in my notebook.

377
by ABW (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:54am

I've been hating on Duane Starks as much as the next Pats fan, but Marvin Harrison is doing a pretty good number on Asante Samuel tonight. I guess it is Marvin Harrison, but still. Of ocurse, not like Starks is doing great on Wayne.

Mike Stone(the strong safety flavor the week apparently) is not that good. Not sure whether he's worse than Arturo Freeman, last week's warm body.

378
by jeffd (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:56am

By my count, Indy has faced 3rd down 12 times thus far.

Pats have stopped them twice. One of those times the Colts managed to convert the 4th down.

I haven't counted, but most of the Colts third down plays have been third and short.

379
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:56am

That explanation was good, it was simple, direct, and generally said the ref knows what he's doing and has control. If all refs took charge like that, they'd be a lot better off.

Compare that with the ref from the Baltimore game yesterday. Every time I see that guy, his crew botches some big calls, and he gives ridiculously long and non-confident explanations that just make you think he has no clue. If the crew is going to be wrong (and that one often is), they should at least try to sell it as if they know what they're doing. Fool us into believing you have a clue and just happened to miss one! Don't give us wishy-washy crap and expect us to buy it.

380
by stan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:57am

Aaron,

You need to figure out away to have PAR and DVOA account for first downs and yardage gained by QB IQ. Manning just picked up a key first down by forcing the Pats into a penalty.

Of course, since he's the only one who regularly does that, you might have to make a separate category just for him.

381
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:00am

Trogdor: And that is why Ed Hoculi is awesome. That and he looks like he'll come to your house and beat you up if you disrespect his officiating.

382
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:01am

380: Would that also count QBs who get the other team to jump offsides with a quick or silent count?

383
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:02am

And the pats pull back to witthin 14! Ummm yay? Is it too early to onsides kick?

384
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:04am

Way to go, B. You're fired.

385
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:04am

Guess not.

386
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:04am

wow, good call 383! Bad call Belichick

387
by Stevis (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:04am

383: Apparently not.

388
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:06am

Great call, B. Too bad the Colts were just as ready for it as you were.

389
by Matt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:06am

378: I noticed the same thing about the third and shorts. These third downs show why Indy is dominating NE. Just went through the game stats and it looks like they've had five third downs of six yards or longer on about 11 or 12 third downs.

390
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:06am

But here's a hint John Madden. If the announcers are discussing whether it's a good time to try it, and if B suggests they might try it, and if everyone who's watching at least thought it, it probably isn't a 'surprise' onside kick.

391
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:06am

Re 384: Good thing my contract is guaranteed.

392
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:07am

379: Trogdor, I was curious enough to go check the BAL/CIN gamebook to see who you were ripping. Whaddya know: It's Jeff Triplette!

And stan, you can take that gushing post over to the irrational Brady/Manning board.

393
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:09am

Starks is out?! But... the fan club!!

(sorry, this game is painful.)

394
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:09am

I think Reggie Wayne runs really nice deep routes, but his hands leave a lot to be desired. That drop might have just cost the Colts four points, and he made his TD catch a lot harder than it should have been.

395
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:11am

Yeah... that lighthouse is DUMB.

396
by stan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:11am

382,

good point. Sure, add those free yards as well. And since other QBs are good at that, it would be worth the effort to measure.

Let's face it, these yards are valuable. In measuring a QBs value, why not include them?

397
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:11am

Oh, that's Triplette. That would be why every time I see him, I know the game has been poorly officiated, and seems on the edge of losing control entirely. How does he still have a job?

The worst guy I've ever seen for drawing people offsides was Elway. It was so aggravating, he was good for at least one or two a game. Granted, it was largely because they let him get away with a massive headbob, which is supposed to be illegal, but whatever. Did I mention I can't stand Elway?

398
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:12am

It looks more like a juicer than a lighthouse

399
by bobman (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:12am

Let's hear it for the Colts sad sack special teams.
CRAPPY KOs from their kickoff specialist but sweet coverage. They might even climb a slot or two this week, knock wood.

400
by stan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:13am

I think it is too early for the Colts to be going loose pass defense like this.

401
by jeffd (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:13am

389: since I've got nothing better to do, I just checked the play by play. At this point NE has stopped Indy 3 times on third down - on 3-13, 3-11 (after which indy converted on 4-1) and most recently on 3-7.

Of the other third down plays, you've got: 3-1, 3-2, 3-1, 3-9, 3-6, 3-1, 3-10, 3-2, 3-6, and 3-4.

So what's that tell us? NE can't stop New England on third down, obviously... but at least half of those were 3 and short, which I guess means NE can't stop Indy at all.

402
by RowdyRoddyPiper (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:14am

4 down territory. Yay!!!!

403
by Androo (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:14am

Re: 398 et al.

I always thought that was supposed to be a razor.

404
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:15am

What was that about Wayne's hands?

Best thing about turnover on downs - no COMMERCIALS!!!

405
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:16am

We need another 3 touchdowns.

406
by B (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:16am

Is 3 out of 5 (60%) really not very effective at long passes? I'd think that's a good completion percentage at that distance.

407
by Chris (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:17am

I haven't critically been watching the game, but everytime I look up, the Colts are running a come back route for 7-10 yards.

408
by mactbone (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:18am

That's not a lighthouse. It looks like a wrench or a stylized razor. But it's not a lighthouse.

Why are they New England anyway? It's not the New England Bruins or Red Sox. Maybe the team just fell in love with the Patriot guy hiking the football and decided to enhance that aspect by calling themselves New England. It doesn't jive with the rest of professional sports.

409
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:18am

Ooops... wayne... oops...

410
by Matt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:18am

Another drop.

411
by jeffd (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:19am

aaaaaaaaaaaaand there's another third down conversion. Shouldn't this be a candidate for TMQ stat of the week?

412
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:19am

Are the Colts not aware that Nick Kaczur is a rookie? Why are they stunting Freeney to the other side so much?

Because they double team him, and every time he stunted (aside from a block.. no one there.. reciever) they wasted a blocker.

It's a time for free man give and take. It didn't work, not a bad plan though.

And I can't beileve it took so long for the Pats to depend on their TEs.

It's not like Bob Sanders can actually bring one of them down.

413
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:19am

So have I mentioned that Reggie Wayne's got some bad hands? Letting him get open and hoping he'll drop it has been the Patriots' most effective strategy tonight.

414
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:20am

A razor.. how cute.

And Harrison is playing with a friggin cast?

415
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:21am

Ooo, so is this the point where it's bush-league to try to score? I'm eagerly awaiting Manning's glare at Bellichick.

416
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:21am

And Harrison is playing with a friggin cast?

And he's still an all-pro reciever.

417
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:23am

Ooo, so is this the point where it’s bush-league to try to score? I’m eagerly awaiting Manning’s glare at Bellichick.

It's a 3 score game, I don't think we can talk bush league yet, but thanks for the flamebait.

Gay held Wayne there.

418
by Pat (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:24am

Just a reminder for the Fire Mike Vanderjagt petition.

Can't kick kickoffs, and he makes short field goals look exciting.

419
by Michael David Smith :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:25am

Why kick the field goal there? You're still only up three scores. If you go for it and don't score, you're giving the Patriots the ball at their own 1-yard line, whereas after the field goal your pathetic kickoff team is going to give them good field position. (Of course, if they had gone for it, we'd have to listen to Patriots fans complaining about how Manning just wanted to run up the score.)

420
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:26am

Earlier in the broadcast, Michaels quoted Manning as saying the receiver he feels most comfortable with is Wayne. There must really be something weird between PM and Marvin.

421
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:27am

#416: It's not flamebait. Obviously the Pats can't stop the Colts. They're way down and should be mailing it in, right?

This isn't about anything against the colts, it's about the idiotic argument that a team should just pack it in.

422
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:28am

418 - because every dramatic Pats comeback drive ends in a FG. There's a big difference between 17 and 20, make them score that TD

423
by Pat (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:28am

MDS: Even a touchdown doesn't put you up more than 3 scores, unless you go for two.

That being said, the field position thing is entirely correct, and I agree.

424
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:28am

Earlier in the broadcast, Michaels quoted Manning as saying the receiver he feels most comfortable with is Wayne. There must really be something weird between PM and Marvin.

There might be something weird ... what a throw by Brady..

There might be something weird with PM and Marvin, but if I had two excellent recievers, and 1 faced the second best CB most of the time, I'd probably favor them as well.

425
by Jerry P. (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:29am

Because it forces the Patriots to score 3 TD's to win instead of 2 TD's plus a FG to tie?

426
by stan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:29am

another fg makes a difference

427
by BillyB (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:30am

I hope no one thinks Manning is the reason Indy is winning. Any qb can win when he's got a workhorse back who carries 25 times in the first three quarters and a D that holds the other team to 14 points.

428
by Sid (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:31am

This game was over about 20 minutes ago.

I'll have my thoughts on the game posted in a few minutes.

429
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:32am

This game was over about 20 minutes ago.

I’ll have my thoughts on the game posted in a few minutes.

STOP JINXING MY COLTS

430
by jeffd (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:33am

So does bellichick call for the onside kick again....

431
by Bill (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:35am

Re: 426 - Brian Billick is on the line looking for one of those 'any QBs'.

432
by admin :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:37am

I just want to inform everyone that in five minutes, I will be making a comment.

433
by charles (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:37am

patriots could use some crowd noise and a turnover right now

434
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:37am

Hey, what do you think are the odds that no replays of that TD were shown in the stadium until after the extra point was kicked? I know if I was in charge of scoreboard replays and my team benefited from a close call, I wouldn't replay it until after the next play.

435
by seven year lion (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:38am

I hope no one thinks [Indy's defense] is the reason Indy is winning. Any [defense] can win when [it's] got a workhorse back who carries 25 times in the first three quarters and [an offense that's put up 34 points].

436
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:42am

Hey everybody, the collectiblestoday.com ad at the top of this thread has a locket with a stylized razor. Oh wait, that's a lighthouse.

437
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:45am

Yep, that was all Edgerrin James right there.

438
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:46am

Yeah, I was up by 33 in my league today, my opponent had Manning. I'm going to lose. This is ridiculous.

439
by Sid (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:46am

Game thoughts:

1)Why didn't the referees blow the whistle when David was down on the ground after recovering the fumble? The play should have been dead. David thought so too, as he got up and threw the ball.

2)Harrison was out of bounds with 2:02 left in the first half, yet they ran the clock to the 2 minute warning. Why?

3)There was a lack of commuinication between Manning and Jeff Saturday on several plays.

4)Whenever I see Manning play (with the notable exceptions of playoff games in Foxboro), I get the impression I'm watching one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. He is so much smoother and more effective than any QB going. Brady is the only one who can compare to him, and Brady does not have the bugaboo of losing to one team several times, but still.

5)Whoever kicks off for the Colts always sucks. It doesn't seem to matter. Last season, it was Vanderjagt, Hunter Smith, and two other guys got shots. This season, it's Rayner. Everyone is terrible. Why can't they find a guy who knows how to kick off? Is it that hard? Rayner is a waste of a roster spot.

Non-football thoughts:

1)"I like it, I love it, I want some more of it." That's my feeling every time I watch a Tim McGraw spot.

2)I enjoyed the long period of time without a commercial break in the 3rd quarter.

440
by lk6 (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:46am

Is it me, or Bill Bellichick is making a a "Manning face"?

441
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:47am

Belichick just used that challenge to not use a timeout, smart dick move

442
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:47am

You can fake a challenge for an extra timeout? Neat.

443
by johnt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:48am

What the hell? Why can Belichick get a free timeout just by throwing the red flag and then take it back?

444
by charles (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:48am

can't wait to see the dungy belichick handshake after this game.

445
by ABW (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:49am

Did Belichick just Martz? Noooo......not a good sign.

446
by Pat (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:50am

Man, Belichick is losing "genius coach" points this game. Lose with class, man.

447
by charles (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:50am

belichick is making the "holy s*** manning is running up the score like we're the houston texans face" right now.

448
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:50am

Two words, Bush League. :)

449
by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:50am

On out-of-bounds plays, the clock runs again once the ball is set, except inside the last 2 minutes of the 2nd quarter, and the last 5 minutes of the 4th (and all of OT?). So if he went out with 2:02 left, they'd stop the clock, spot the ball, then start the clock again.

450
by charles (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:51am

Did we lose Aaron, aaron please say something!

451
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:52am

Indy came back a couple years ago from 3 TD on Mon night vs TB, with about 4 minuted left, so there is a precedent for comebacks here. Perfectly fair to go for 2 here

452
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:52am

No, of course Manning's 300 yards through the air have nothing to do with the score.

453
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:53am

I think Aaron's writing a detailed apology to us PIT fans for his team subjecting us to the pre-week 12 media. I'm getting nauseous already...

(just kidding, Aaron. I know how hard games like these are.)

454
by Stevis (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:54am

Why go for 2? Now, with a 19 point lead, you potentially let NE get away with one fewer endzone trip--if NE can convert 2 2's. I'd just as soon kick, be up 20 and make them go the distance thrice. Of course, that should all be academic, if your D plays semi-competently.

455
by Chris (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:57am

The Patriots can walk away from this game, take a breath, and say to themselves "Thank God our division sucks"

456
by Ivarsson, Sweden (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:00am

Coach Yoast: "Run it up, Herman, leave no doubt!!"

Seriously, make it an extra 7 - I'll buy the "we hade to get that monkey off our back. Bigtime." argument...

457
by charles (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:02am

that patriots-jets mnf finale looks worse and worse by the day.

458
by admin :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:03am

The five minutes thing was a joke (read four comments earlier).

Which will turn out to be more annoying and irrational?

a) Patriots fans over the last couple years insisting that they are always disrespected, that the Patriots are invincible, and that Tom Brady would beat Peyton Manning even if Brady had Houston's defense and Manning had the 1985 Chicago Bears defense.

b) Other fans who will now pile on the Patriots, suggesting that Bill Belichick is no longer a "genius coach," that Tom Brady is a bad quarterback, that the Patriots were always overrated, that they will never be good again, and so forth.

c) Colts fans who will crow about how this guarantees the Colts are going to match the undefeated Dolphins, apparently not aware that they still have to play PIT, CIN, SD, @SEA, and @JAC.

459
by lk6 (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:05am

WOW, DOUG FLUTIE!!!!!!

460
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:06am

c) Colts fans who will crow about how this guarantees the Colts are going to match the undefeated Dolphins, apparently not aware that they still have to play PIT, CIN, SD, @SEA, and @JAC.

What flamebait. Colts fans are generally very humble, especially compared to the Pats fans.

What a great priceless commercial. I

461
by doktarr (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:06am

427 - you win the prize for the most ironic comment ever. Did you watch the AFC divisional game, by any chance?

Yes, balance is important. That doesn't take away from the fact that Manning has had a very good game. Verily, he didn't need to be this good, since they're winning by a lot. But he was.

462
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:07am

That was, I (Heart) Doug Flutie.

463
by Ivarsson, Sweden (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:08am

d) me whining about my Packers being disrespected by stuff as "winning/losing" and not paying homage to a proper Saints drubbing, and how pythagorean wins should determine playoff spots...

464
by TomC (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:08am

If Gerard Phelan were in this game, the Pats would still have a chance.

465
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:08am

I want Flutie to throw a TD Bomb. DO IT.

466
by Fnor (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:09am

Nathan, you do realize that "controversial" doesn't mean "flamebait." Especially when you're referring to people who don't troll.

Personally, I think both teams' fans are annoying. That's the great part about football, the not-game part is completely and utterly irrational.

467
by ian (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:10am

a quick glance at the schedule says Indy has 3 or 4 real games left - Pitt, Jax, Sea, and maybe SD or Cin, depending how you feel about them. Can they win out?

468
by Tom Brady (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:11am

IS THIS ALL THERE IS?????

469
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:12am

Nathan, you do realize that “controversial� doesn’t mean “flamebait.� Especially when you’re referring to people who don’t troll.

People that don't troll give flamebait all the time. Hell, most of political announcing is flamebait.

It's fine, I'm just dismissing it.

I personally find Pats fans entertaining. I wouldn't even care about our losing, and now winning against them if they didn't make such a big deal about it.

They fuel my enjoyment. Personally, I'm just glad we're not 1-7.

470
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:13am

a quick glance at the schedule says Indy has 3 or 4 real games left - Pitt, Jax, Sea, and maybe SD or Cin, depending how you feel about them. Can they win out?

I'm a huge Colts fan.

No way. Not in the NFL. Any team can win any week, if it's week 16 and they are undefeated, then we can talk.

Maybe week 15.

471
by admin :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:14am

Nathan apparently does not have access to my e-mail account. By the way, I'm just trying to figure out how 6-2 Cincinnati doesn't count as a "real game."

472
by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:14am

I think the best thing for Pats fans tonight with Deion Branch busting out the Kid 'n Play dance. For that alone, the man should be an All-Star.

473
by Nathan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:16am

Nathan apparently does not have access to my e-mail account.

Nope, but I have seen Colts fans on this site. Maybe I'm too egotistical to see the problems, but they are mostly rather reasonable, if not a little Manning crazy.

Maybe I'm just not a good judge. Football is entertainment to me. It's not that important, and real arguements over it make me laugh.

Politics is my bag. When are you going to do a Political website Aaron?

BeltwayOutsiders.com

474
by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:21am

b) Other fans who will now pile on the Patriots, suggesting that Bill Belichick is no longer a “genius coach,� that Tom Brady is a bad quarterback, that the Patriots were always overrated, that they will never be good again, and so forth.

I think this will happen. It's like everyone and their grandma wanted NE to lose tonight. Everyone will diss brady even though he had a spectacular game tonight. Everyone will talk crap about BB even though he had people off the street playing DB tonight.

You know who are in for a long ass night when you bench Duane Starks out of necessity even thought you have homeless people playing in your secondary.

475
by Sid (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:26am

RE: 313

The Falcons aren't even the 2nd best team in the NFC. They'll likely make the playoffs, but they're very overrated.

476
by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:26am

RE #335:

Dude, the ENTIRE Pats team has been too "timid" this season. They aren't trying to strip the ball, they aren't going for the big play, they are just setting back with this whole "well, sometime or another they will not catch the ball" type of mentallity.

477
by pooty (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:30am

"homeless people playing in your secondary."

I just love the imagery this brings to mind!

478
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:32am

Just read on Bill Simmons' site that the Pats had a tough time picking up the Colts formations tonight because they still had tears in their eyes from getting their Super Bowl rings.

479
by Tim L (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:32am

It's easy to overlook, but Brady had a magnificent game. The lack of running game hurt, although I doubt it's fatal. The main problem for the Pats was the lack of pass rush and (obviously) poor coverage.

Belichick is still a great coach, his childish antics at the end notwithstanding. He's unfortunately been snagged by that great equalizer in all pro sports, the Law of Competitive Balance. Fortunately for the Patriots, they should win their division this year.

480
by ian (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:32am

"homeless people in your secondary"

is that like the Burger King at flanker?

481
by Todd S. (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:43am

Manning had a very good game tonight. The 2nd TD pass to Harrison was sweet, as he was moving back as he threw it. Much better than the pass he threw to Vrabel, in which he was also moving backwards.

Edge was very good as well. If he tires again this year, it could really slow down the Colts offense later in the year.

As MDS alluded to, Wayne did not have a great game; however, he had a better catch percentage than Harrison last year, correct? I don't think it's been a long-term problem. Harrison looked 3 years younger tonight (probably something to do with the 3rd stringers NE has to start because of injuries).

Hopefully this was the last game that Jason David starts over Marlin Jackson.

Rayner's kickoffs were short tonight, but high. Vanderjagt kicks both low and short. Is he worth a roster spot? If your only alternative is Vanderjagt, then yes. Believe me, the Colts special teams looked great tonight compared to earlier in the year. (To be fair to Vandy, that 2nd field goal came off of a botched hold. It was actually a nice kick.)

The Colts defense tonight wasn't great, but they made enough plays to make a few stops. Too many missed tackles. (Plus, Brady and the Pats offense are still really good. Dillon's fumble was a huge play.)

No way this team goes 16-0. Too many holes on defense still. But 14-15 wins and HFA is a possibility.

Go Colts. Aaron, sorry about your email, man.

482
by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:44am

Man, when they asked BB about Duane Starks not being out there in the second half, he had this look on his face that just screamed "Because he f*&*ing sucks" thats why when they asked that question.

483
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:44am

Just have to say that ABC's little Mastercard parody at the end of tonight's game was unbelievably bush league. Cover the game. Leave the pathetic comedy to ABC's primetime lineup where it belongs.

I was delighted to see the Pats get rolled tonight and I enjoy a little kick-em-when-they're-down humor as much as anybody (see 478), but for the broadcasting network to run a pre-taped (!!!) comedy bit sticking it to one of the teams is GARBAGE.

ABC deserves to get ripped for this stunt and I wouldn't blame the Pats at all for being less than fully accessible in their next appearance on MNF. Show the teams some respect.

484
by Bizarro Ron Mexico (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:01am

The Bengals are 7-2, just for the record, and the Colts are playing @CIN.

485
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:09am

One other quick thought before bed:

I realize that I'm going to be very much in the minority in saying this....I didn't think the on-side kick was such a bad call. Down fourteen, defense stopping nothing, Brady playing brilliantly. If it works it changes the game radically.

Belichick's great strength is that he never shies from challenging players, his own and the opponent's, to make plays. In this case, the Colts did make the play. I don't have handy the success rate of on-side kicks, but how many here really believe that the chance of recovering an on-side kick were really that much worse than the chance of forcing the Colts to punt if they kicked deep? Indy scored on 7 of 9 possessions, so just based on tonight's sample if the chance of recovering the on-side kick was 22% or better it doesn't look like such a crazy call.

To crib from a favorite TMQ topic, Belichick's move acknowledged that it doesn't matter if you get beat by three points or thirty. He takes risks that put his team in a position to win. In this case it didn't work and the WEEI crowd is going to have a field day with the move, but calls like that have earned him an awful lot of jewelry.

486
by bobman (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:21am

RE#481
Todd,
I am a pretty big Jason David fan, and not only because at 5-6 I tower over him. I think he had a bad game, but usually plays very well. Hard to believe he's outplaying their top two draft choices in practice, but the coaches must see something...
You were spot-on about the 2nd Vandy FG--snap/hold were atrocious and still he knuckle-balled it through.
The first tackles tonight were bad, I'd say at least 10 were missed. Some resulted in 8-20 yard plays, others were covered up with the speed and youth swarming to the ball. I am concerned, yet somehow they kept a good team in that team's house, pretty well under control.
16-0...? maybe. I am not sure if they'd bench the starters for the last game if they were 15-0. The league might have them all arrested if they did that, and anyway, who'd need two solid weeks of rest before the playoffs? I have a gut feeling that they'll lose one or two to Jax/Cin/Pitt, and then comes Seattle on X-mas eve. Yes, it's on field turf, but that game gives me the willies.

BTW, nice, effective scrambling and a super sweet TD pass on the run for Peyton "Ron Mexico" Manning.

RE: 473, Nathan, Beltwayoutsiders.com is a GREAT idea, though a statistical breakdown of lies, broken promises, doublespeak, etc. would result in everybody getting a grade between 99% and 100%--makes rankings too tough.

Also, as a Colt fan who lived through a 1-15 season, 0-9 season, a slew of 2-14 and 3-13's, find it very hard to crow about 8-0. I know how bitter the other side of that record is. Man, am I happy, but like you said, let's talk in week 16.

487
by Sid (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:27am

RE: 320 Jeff F

You had bad info. Gay, Dillon, and others played.

488
by Sid (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:33am

RE: 485

I liked the call for the onside kick. The only reason BB got bashed is because it didn't work. If it had worked, it would've been "genius Belichick does it again."
I had no problem with him going for the onside kick there. Surprise onside kicks are ones that actually have a chance of working.

489
by Chris (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:42am

I liked the call for the Onside kick too. At the way things were going, you probably were going to need one. It's better to do it early and have a surprise element then when everyone all gathers together expecting it. The kicking team rarely recovers those.

490
by Michael (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:46am

PEY TON MAN NING clapclap clapclapclap

491
by Vash (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:47am

The onside kick call was excellent, and they should have recovered.
If you watch the play again, two Patriots block the first Colt who goes for the ball, but nobody gets the second one. If the Pat on the right makes the correct play and blocks the second guy, it's New England ball.

492
by Brian (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:58am

Re: #481
Jason David had a bad game tonight. Previously he had been making very few mistakes compared to Jackson, keeping him the starting spot (despite his athletic shortcomings). Hopefully they don't give his spot away because of this bad game. I hope he swaps with Jackson to nickel corner because Jackson improves and takes it from him in practice. If he can play fairly mistake-free football the Colts secondary starts looking awfully good.

493
by Brian (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 4:05am

Oh, forgot to say, even as a Colts fan I don't think there's any chance they'll win out. There's just too many good teams. They'll probably lose two games, Cincinnati or Pittsburgh and Seattle or San Diego. Unless they do better tackling TEs, San Diego will force them to score a LOT of points to win.

What happened to Tarik Glenn this year? From Pro Bowler last year to penalty machine, what gives?

494
by Vash (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 4:57am

Oh, forgot to say, even as a Colts fan I don’t think there’s any chance they’ll win out. There’s just too many good teams. They’ll probably lose two games, Cincinnati or Pittsburgh and Seattle or San Diego. Unless they do better tackling TEs, San Diego will force them to score a LOT of points to win.

*coughcoughHEATHMILLERcoughcough*

495
by Browns Dude (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 6:48am

"I wouldn’t blame the Pats at all for being less than fully accessible in their next appearance on MNF. Show the teams some respect."

From what I hear, the Patriots don't feel the need to be constantly respected.

496
by tunesmith (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 8:03am

Well I have the week 9 beatpaths power rankings up. Indy is still #1, but New England actually rises a few spots because Carolina's win over Tampa Bay gave New England credit for their win over Atlanta again, and that was a big win. Up until now New England didn't get credit for defeating Atlanta because Miami was screwing it up for everyone (who had beaten CAR, who had beaten NE). But since Carolina beat Tampa Bay, who had beaten Miami, it cleaned up a bunch of longer "beatloops", which included CAR->NE->ATL, so now those are counted as valid wins again.

So New England rises, and Carolina rises even more.

Did you get that?

Click my name to see the graph and the rankings.

497
by Todd S. (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 9:12am

#486 and #492 Well, the last really bad game David had was a few weeks earlier against St. Louis. Is it possible he just plays very poorly on Monday nights?

498
by stan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 9:43am

493

Tarik Glenn didn't deserve the Pro Bowl last year. Everyone just thought the O-line must be good because Peyton was lighting it up. Three guys got hurt. They aren't going to send undrafted rookies to the pro bowl, so Glenn was all that was left to reward.

Last night wasn't that different for him.

499
by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 10:33am

IK6 (#440 )--
Is it me, or Bill Bellichick is making a a “Manning face�?
I might have missed one, but I'd say that's Belichick's usual game face. He usually looks like he's got Essence of Sour Persimmon bottled, and takes a swig at every commercial break.

500
by Andrew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 10:50am

Goat of the Game Awards (a tie!) to Duane Starks and Corey Dillon.

Did anyone catch Belichick's slapdown of Starks in the news conference? "Why wasn't Starks on the field in the second half." "We wanted to have the best players on the field."

501
by Andrew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 11:11am

Sid #439:

Manning is unquestionably the best QB playing right now, and probably the smartest about the position since Jim Kelly. My entirely subjective criteria for this is the fact that they always called their own plays and ran a successful no-huddle offense all game long. He is very smooth, stays upright, and rarely makes mistakes.

502
by Andrew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 11:24am

Samurai #476:

I watched Pats players tryign to strip the ball last night. Unfortunately, they should have been trying to tackle.

503
by Todd S. (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 11:28am

One other thing: kudos to Dungy for going for it on 4th down near mid-field. Perhaps he is learning...

504
by GBS (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 11:55am

“Why wasn’t Starks on the field in the second half.� “We wanted to have the best players on the field.�

If I'm in the media horde, my followup question is "Then why was Starks on the field in the first half?"

505
by Drew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:04pm

Aaron, I hope you're not getting too many nasty emails from Colts fans. Sadly, I'd imagine you are. I'm hoping that Colts fans won't embarrass ourselves too much in the next few days over this, especially since those of us who frequent this here site know that you're as fair as anyone on the web. Bill Simmons, on the other hand... he's been asking for it.

506
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:20pm

504 -

If you have the stones to ask that question of Belichick face-to-face in the interview room, you should indeed be part of the media horde!

507
by Drew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:25pm

I have a question about Starks, since the general consensus seems to be that he sucks. It seemed to me that the Colts were going after Asante Samuel at least as much as Starks in the first half. Did anyone else notice that, or am I imagining it?

508
by PatsFan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:27pm

Next time Carl shows up and tells us what a nice, classy guy Bill Polian is, I'm going to tell Carl to please remove his head from Polian's ***.

First we had Polian's crass, quasi-gloating remark over Bruschi's stroke some months ago, and last night we had this:

With four seconds remaining and the Patriots hurrying to the line to squeeze off one final play in a 40-21 blowout by Indy, Colts president Bill Polian said with annoyance, "They're trying to run another play. He's going to throw another pass."

And as backup quarterback Doug Flutie rolled out with pressure on his heels, Polian muttered, "Break his leg."

(from the Pats beat writer for the ProJo -- click my name for the link)

509
by PatsFan (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:30pm

That said, the Colts do deserve to enjoy that win -- they beat the Pats like a drum, no ifs, ands, or buts.

510
by C (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:52pm

Re: 507

Drew, that's what I thought too. Certainly on the first drive, and I thought later on as well, it seemed like Samuel was getting burned pretty regularly. That 48 yarder on the second play from scrimmage, for example, was Harrison just running away from Samuel, then the TD on the fade was exploiting the same matchup.

Maybe the Pats were giving Starks extra help and leaving Asante one on one with Harrison?

511
by admin :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 12:58pm

The e-mail from Colts fans isn't particularly bad, and it isn't this week. I'm just talking about the general feeling I get reading my e-mail as well as message boards around the Web over the last couple years. The Colts fans commenting on these boards may not gloat, but on other boards it is going to be a little different.

I'm not sure what the hell Polian's problem is. If you think the Pats were trying to score for the sake of their stats at the end, you don't know anything about the history of football in New England. It was blatantly obvious that with the game over, Belichick basically sent Flutie out and told him to go have some fun for the fans. Flutie is a hero in New England -- there's a street named after him a mile from here -- and with the Pats now in a dogfight for the playoffs, this may be the last time Belichick can just toss Our Dougie out there for one last hurrah.

512
by doug flutie (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:10pm

hurrah.

513
by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:13pm

Now that the Colts won, nfl.com/NFL Network's Lincoln Kennedy says the Colts will run the table (linked).

514
by Drew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:19pm

Well, I'm not going to put too much faith into what a Pats beat writer claims he heard Bill Polian mutter. I once had a clerk at a grocery store insist that I muttered the word "b****" even though I did not. Sometimes people hear things. If I hear it from another independent source, I might believe it.

I will agree 100% that Polian has a somewhat personal beef with the tactics that the Patriots occasionally employ, as I've heard him discuss on his radio show. But I don't believe he would wish an injury on somebody. I also agree with him that Belichick throwing the challenge flag was a fairly obvious attempt to game the system.

515
by GBS (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:25pm

I'm a Colts' fan living in the Indianapolis area, and I don't know ANYBODY who thinks Bill Polian is nice or classy. Am I glad he's the Colts' GM? Absolutely, but I wouldn't want him for a next door neighbor.

516
by Tim L (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:31pm

I astonished people are seriously talking about the Colts going 16-0. Are they completely unaware of the history here, or even the lack of incentive to win games after a team clinches home field advantage throughout the conference playoffs?

I've seen much better looking teams than Indianapolis (Denver '98, Washington '91, to name but two), and none of them were able go run the table. The chances of the Colts doing it is essentially zero.

517
by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:39pm

Aaron,

Maybe it's because on Indy's best day, the only way they could beat NE was when they were decimicated by injuries and all the other times that they played NE whipped their asses?

As a NE fan, I'm not worried about this loss. In fact, I'm kind of happy it happened. NE has always thrived off the disrespect and loser angles and this gives them a prime opportunity to pull that card. I'd love for IND to win out the rest of the regular season. I'd love for them to have another record. Then I'd like to see the Pats walk into the RCA dome for the championship game and destroy them.

518
by Josh (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:54pm

Vinatieri says Pats lost because lacked swagger:

''They played well, but we've got to start taking care of our own stuff, too," he said. ''We didn't play well at all. Not on offense, defense, or special teams. We didn't have enough fire out there. We didn't have the swagger we normally have."

The swagger comes with pulling off big plays, like an onside kick. When they work, they are a stroke of genius. When they don't, they leave you wondering.

519
by Andrew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 1:58pm

So who is the worse 4-4 team?

Defending AFC champs New England who have been blown out by San Diego and Indianapolis, or defending NFC champs Philadelphia, who have been blown out by Denver and Dallas?

Philly is clearly in the worse position in the standings.

520
by Todd S. (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:07pm

#515 Ditto what GBS said.

521
by djcolts (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:34pm

1. I don't see 16-0 for the Colts - I think they can win 3 out of their 5 remaining tough games and go 14-2.

2. Every team has jerk fans, including the Colts. However, the Colts fans that remember the futility of the recent past before Manning was drafted just appreciate the way this season is going so far.

3. There is one Colts OL that is overdue for a Pro Bowl appearance - C Jeff Saturday. With Mawae out for the season, maybe this is the year he finally makes an appearance in Hawaii in February.

522
by Drew (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 2:44pm

Re: 521, subpoint 3

Be careful. Observing that another player's injury might cause your team to move up a notch could be considered crass quasi-gloating.

523
by Jeff F (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:07pm

What was Brady's DPAR monday night?

I think I'm going to start calling the Patriots the Tom Brady show, because he's their only consistent playmaker this year.

524
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:16pm

516 writes "The chances of the Colts doing it (running the table) is essentially zero."

Really? Essentially zero? So would you put it at, say, 1%? If so I will gladly put up 10 bucks against your 1000 and we can have a fun little bet on the Colts going undefeated.

In fact, if any of the many people who have pointed out that the Colts have "no chance" to go 16-0 wants to back that up with odds that reflect that belief, please, please, please make your willingness known here!

I have no affinity for the Colts, but it's foolish to say they have no chance to win eight more.

Here's a fun time-killer. Go through the rest of Indy's schedule and assign a % chance of them winning each game. Then multiply them all together and see what you have as the % chance of them running the table. I've got 9%, an 11-1 shot against. Honestly I think that's about right.

I'll poke around and see if anyone has posted odds on Indy finishing 16-0.

525
by Mikey (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 3:28pm

betonsports.com has the Colts a 10-1 shot to finish 16-0.

They offer odds on all possible finishes for the Colts, with the shortest price being 5-2 on a 13-3 season. 14-2 is 2-1, and they list 7-2 on both one loss and four losses.

They also offer an absurd 150-1 on the Colts losing their eight remaining games. Come on! By my guesstimating those odds should be more like 100,000-1.

526
by OMO (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 5:39pm
527
by Brian (not verified) :: Tue, 11/08/2005 - 6:21pm

Re: #498
Agreed, I never thought Glenn was the best lineman they have. But he seems to be getting multiple penalties almost every game this year. I'd be interested to see his penalties vs. the whole line's penalties from last year. And Saturday is definitely the one that should be getting to the Pro Bowl regularly, just look how well the line does without him in there...0-5 in the preseason, the QBs were pressured relentlessly and never got into a rhythm.

528
by Sid (not verified) :: Fri, 11/11/2005 - 3:52am

RE: 419

Exactly.

529
by Sid (not verified) :: Fri, 11/11/2005 - 4:15am

RE: 429

When I say it's over, it's over. ;)

RE: 432

huh?

530
by Tim L (not verified) :: Fri, 11/11/2005 - 3:25pm

524 and 525:
"Really? Essentially zero? So would you put it at, say, 1%? If so I will gladly put up 10 bucks against your 1000 and we can have a fun little bet on the Colts going undefeated."

You're on! I have no doubt I'll win. I'd leap all over it if you were to set it at your 9% chance: Put down $90, and I'll happily wager $1000.

I ran the cumulative probabilities on my spreadsheet and came up with 1.5%, which I think is optimistic since it doesn't take into account injuries or the leveling effect of a team resting their stars after they clinch home field advantage.

I'm surprised you and Michael David Smith believe it is so high.

531
by Sid (not verified) :: Mon, 11/14/2005 - 2:18am

RE: 530

Same here. If I could get 10-1 odds or so, I'd gladly put up $1000 against your $100. To me, it is HIGHLY unlikely that the Colts go undefeated, and I'd be willing to lay money on that.