Frustrated Colts Fan
Okay. I've had a day to digest the game, and here are my thoughts: as unbiased as I can muster (and in as random an order as I can muster).
-The Colts got beat. The Steelers played better, and that's why they won. I don't think it's fair to take anything away from how well the Steelers performed.
-The Colts should have stuck to their gameplan they used all season--especially early in the season--and run the freakin' football! Edge had a total of 14 rushes in the entire game. This is a back who was near the top of the league in yards and yards-per-carry all season long. And for some reason, they decided very early not to run the ball. Why? Was it because the Steelers got ahead on the scoreboard? I hope not. Was it because the Steelers taunted them during the week about not lining up and running it? I hope not.
One of the staples of this Colts team the last few years has been to never panic based on the score. I mean, they abandoned the run EARLY in the first quarter!! Why did Tom Moore feel the need to have a passing pissing contest? What happened when the Colts did finally decide to rely on the run late in the first half? Oh yeah, they drove down the field on Edge's back and scored (granted...a field goal).
-The Steelers rush deserves almost all the credit. They schemed well and got after Peyton the whole game. The scuttlebutt on the Colts is that if you can pressure Peyton consistently...the offense gets out of whack. That's what happened.
-I am now officially in the camp of those who believe that resting starters after playoff berths are clinched is a horrible idea. The TV announcers, the radio announcers, the analysts, and every fan in the RCA dome was talking about how rusty the offense looked. It cannot be a coincidence that they were rusty and also hadn't seen any real game action in four or five weeks. Practice is great and all, but the same fear of injury that causes a coach to rest players during the final games causes practices to be far from a game simulation. Are you going to tell me that Freeny and the boys were hammering Peyton to the ground at practice the way that the Steelers did?
Plus...remember the beginning of the season? The Colts squeaked out wins against their first few opponents despite the offense looking...wait for it...rusty. It took several weeks for the "real" Colts high-powered offense to show up. It is honestly no surprise to me that they had such trouble getting into a rythym after having sat the starters for several weeks.
-That questionable call on the replay? Yeah...that was an interception. And if the call isn't overruled...the game's over there. Shouldn't have even been as close as it was...if I'm honest. I want to be a homer and defend the replay official's call...but I can't. I was seriously stunned that the play was ruled an incomplete pass.
-Bettis' fumble. Man, Big Ben really saved his team. If he doesn't get his arm around the leg...Nick "Stab Victim" Harper goes all the way and the Colts win.
-Mike Vanderjact. What can I say? The most accurate kicker in NFL HISTORY shanks one worse than is imaginable. I could have kicked the ball straighter than that...seriously...no exaggeration there at all. I guess the (lower case) gods were watching the game after all...evening things out after the interception-that-wasn't. As floored as I was that the interception was called an incomplete pass...I was even more floored that Vandy's kick was so far off target. Amazing.
-First three quarters of the game? Boring, especially for a Colts fan. Last quarter? A roller-coaster ride of excitement. I lost all hope and gave up on the game...three different times! And each time except the last loss of hope I saw some jaw-dropping play or call put my Colts back in position to tie or win. Honestly...I'd almost rather have seen them just skip the late comeback and lose by 20 or something....that up and down...back and forth nearly gave me an ulcer.
-I think I'm sick and freaking tired of hearing that "Peyton can't win the big game." It's one of those false statements analysts make that have no basis. Granted...he has played on many teams that lost big games. But if anyone actually looks me in the eye and tells me that a team's loss or victory is all the responsibility of one man...I think I'll puke in their mouth.
Sure, the QB is the most important player on a team. And if Peyton's out...they don't win 13 straight. Sure. Fine. But I think the O-line played as poorly as Peyton against the Steelers (if not more so). I think Tom Moore called a crap game. I think Mike Vanderjact needs to start looking for a new team. I think there were a few dropped passes that could/should have been caught.
Hell, I think saying Peyton can't win the big game is a slight of how great the Steelers Defense played. How can an analyst praise the Pittsburgh D for its schemes and blitzes and in the same breath bash Manning for choking?
I'd even be fine hearing "The Colts can't win the big game" because, you know what? they haven't yet (Unless you count the playoff games they've won in the last few years, or the Pittsburgh and New England games this year).
Am I a Peyton apologist? I don't think so. He played poorly (until the fourth quarter). But I don't think anyone on the Colts team can stand up and say they played awesome in that game.
Is it all Donovan's fault that the Eagles lost the Super Bowl? Is Tom Brady the only reason the Pats won three out of four (if you say yes I'll scream...because that Defense has had as much to do with their success as anyone)?
What if the O-line doesn't give up those back-to-back sacks at the end, but instead buys Peyton several seconds to throw? Is it inconceivable that he might have found an open receiver? Peyton is universally praised for being the best in the league at avoiding sacks...feeling the rush. And the O-line is considered one of the best in the game. Their job is to protect Manning and they did not.
To say Peyton lost the game is to also say that the Steelers played so-so defense...that another QB would have performed better against that relentless rush.
Okay, rant done.
-I hate that, as a Colts fan, I have to spend another year listening to the (deserved) talk about how they underperformed. I hate that they lost. What good does it do you to win 13 in a row and lose your first playoff game? No good whatsoever.
Titans fans have had a whole season to realize their team was crap. My team convinced me they were great and then turned to crap in the only important game thus far.
posted by Kennelworthy @ 1/16/2006 05:51:00 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Forewarning--this is a long comment. It's like a post.
I pretty much agree with everything said here--of course, except the issue of rust. I just don't believe in it, and I'll respectfully disagree with you and Mike on those kinds of issues (and my comment will touch on other things, I'll just get the "negative" out of the way first).
The reason why I don't, along with all the other issues in sports that I have argued against, comes from years of watching games in every sport and hearing the intangible reasons laid down and them being absolute total non-issues come game time.
As for rust, I've seen players perform in a subpar manner during the middle of the season and it would be called rust if they had had a lot of time off. I've also seen teams play like a well-oiled machine first game of the season. And many more such examples. It's all a matter of perspective. That said, Manning DID throw some unbelievably off-target passes. You could call it rust, or you can simply call it good Steeler D, or you can say it's both. But I take the side of good Steeler D because I refuse to believe Manning and his offense didn't practice like a mother getting in sync. When we talk about rust, it SOUNDS like Manning, his receivers, the O-line, and Edge were all eating chips and watching SPACEBALLS waiting for game day.
Personally, I think if the Colts had come in 16-0 and had rolled over San Diego, Seattle, and Arizona to end the year, they would have still likely lost this game. The general "Belechick Scheme" has been a Manning and O-line killer for years when a team has the D to run it.
As for the "Manning can't win the big one" talk, I also eschew this kind of discussion, which you have also dismissed here and I totally agree. If history mattered that much, the Patriots would have beaten the Broncos, Tom Brady would have been 11-0 in the playoffs and would never lose. Even my "top seeds" post, while containing interesting history, can't be factored into one individual game. The criticism (or praise) that comes from history is absolutely not fair in a team game. If you want to relate it to tennis or golf, you can--but even in those sports good players in their era are often overshadowed by those who just have that extra skill--at the moment, it's Andy Roddick living in the shadow of Roger Federer, and in golf it's Phil Mickelson and Tiger Woods.
With Peyton Manning, it's Belechick and those who follow his schemes. With UT, it was not exactly his fault as it was the defense for allowing so many points that Manning and company had to score 40 to win (and UT scored a lot of points in those games, so it wasn't like Spurrier had an answer). In this past game, who the hell on the defense had Heath Miller? Did that guy find a hole every play or what?
Yeah, and your thoughts on the run, too. Wow. That was disgusting. The 14-0 score dictated that, no doubt. I think they felt that if they ran the ball a lot, and the Steelers did the same, they'd have no time to get control of the game. But it's the run that has set up so many things for Manning and his receivers to go to work.
My thoughts on the Indy coaching and Tony Dungy--this parallels my thoughts about Atlanta and Bobby Cox. There most definitely is a different level of play in the playoffs. I have a whole book of thoughts on it, and it likely differs from what other people mean when they talk about things like this. The playoffs is your turn to show a team something they weren't expecting...Let me talk about the Braves for a minute.
Greg Maddux is one of the best pitchers in baseball history. He also couldn't win, not consistently, in the playoffs. Nor could Glavine. Finesse pitchers, they relied on hitting the corners and getting borderline calls, and they also relied on the mentality of your average everyday batter to get outs. In the playoffs, teams knew they had to change their approach, and they often went with pitches and drove those into the outfield, whereas in the regular season they were hitting them hard into the ground to the infielders, trying to pull those same pitches. Those are the kind of things I would be referring to as "playoffs are at a different level than the regular season." The problem with Cox and the Braves has always been not approaching the game differently. There are, of course, other matters, but I felt they could have won more just by taking a different approach now and then.
And here, the Colts and Dungy decide that the well-oiled machine will just do its work with no disruption. You've got to throw a team a curve ball, and then you can start mixing in those tried-and-true plays. Stop allowing the defense to "cheat!"
And so on.
Interesting points, and if I really felt like it (still hung over from that gut wrenching game on Sunday), I'd go line by line on it. Let's just say that I was right in my post, and that it sucks when your team loses. It's always tough. Pull for the Steelers this time, and I'll pull for your team when the results are reversed.
It's a deal, George. I hate Denver anyway, and it's tough to do anything but respect the Steelers and their coach.
Post a Comment
<< Home