Colts are OVERATED

by andrew29910 on Nov 12, 2009 2:55 PM EST Comment 48 comments

Its obvious. look how many points the colts are letting there opponents score on them. Now look at ours. Yeah they are 8-0 but look who they are playing. they are playin easy ass teams. so of course we will beat them on sunday.

brady and manning have the same stats in td-int. look for a double coverage on randy moss to free up welker. not that it matters because moss will probably catch it anyway.

The views expressed in these FanPosts are not necessarily those of the writers or SBNation.

0 recs | Comment 48 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i'd disagree

The Colts defense is allowing only 13.5 PPG, if I recall correctly. That’s an impressive feat regardless of the division or conference you play in. That they are doing it with injuries to some of the big name starters they’ve had in the past makes it even moreso. When Troy Brown was forced into our action as one of our DBs, people thought the team would be shredded aerially because of all the injuries — instead the team demonstrated that commitment to smart defensive play calling and a sound system trumps personnel. I see a lot of similarities with the current Colts defense.

by jctsai12 on Nov 12, 2009 3:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Strength of schedule

The Colts have made their schedule look weaker than it is because everyone they’ve played has lost to them.

If the Patriots were also undefeated, the combined record of their opponents would be 26-38, virtually identical to the combined record of the teams the Colts have played.
The Jets would be a sub 500 team, and the Broncos would have a much less impressive record of 5-3.

In other words, the Pats have made their schedule look tougher than the Colts’ by having lost two games.

by ColtsSBLXIV on Nov 12, 2009 7:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

Okay, I have a few issues with this post. Yes, the Colts get all the hoopla for being 8-0. No, they haven’t played any really good teams. But when have the Colts NOT been a good team, in recent memory? Yeah. They’re always good. They may have more hype than is warranted but to say that they’re overrated is kind of unjustified, given their past.

by The Hill on Nov 12, 2009 3:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Good teams?

Arizona (5-3) and the Texans (5-4) aren’t “good?” The best teams the Patriots have played and beaten are the Baltimore Ravens (4-4) and the Atlanta Falcons (5-3)). So, I guess that means the Patriots haven’t played anyone good either.

And where is this undeserved “hype” the Colts are getting? I’m not seeing it. Everyone is talking about the Saints, ranking them #1 in all these stupid power polls. The other hot team is the Broncos (the team with the best record on NE’s schedule, which NE lost to).

Thanks for dismissing this FanPost because it is indeed pretty ignorant, but this idea that the Colts have not played anyone “good” is silly.

SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account so you can post a FanPost, make a FanShot, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Nov 13, 2009 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Colts currently have the #1 scoring defense in football.

This post is both misinformed and ignorant.

Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.

Man, I need a life...

Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: This is my dad's favorite scene from one of my all-time favorite shows. Full of win, IMO.

by Cassieper on Nov 12, 2009 3:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

this guy had a bad day

either that or hes sum 13 year old kid i mean good teams r suppose to beat the easy teams and win when it comes to the wire…im not pointing anything out but maybe he should be posting the Saints are overrated since they have a easier schedule than the colts do

They look at me and say Why? I stare back and say Why Not?

by Livemaxxx on Nov 12, 2009 4:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Read his last post. It explains a lot of things.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Nov 12, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol ok now i really know thank you

They look at me and say Why? I stare back and say Why Not?

by Livemaxxx on Nov 12, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

THAT WAS A JOKE

by andrew29910 on Nov 13, 2009 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

O the hilarity.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.

by Comedic.Sans on Nov 13, 2009 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They're 8-0, there's only one other undefeated team, and they're typically rated as the best or second-best team in the league right now

They don’t sound overrated to me.

by RSNexile on Nov 12, 2009 4:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

ummm lets see

andrew29910

a fan of:

New York Yankees Major League Baseball Team

Cleveland Cavaliers National Basketball Association Team

New England Patriots National Football League Team

WOW , where do you live? hawaii?
sorry friend but i cant take you seriously not after knowing that you root for the pats but hates the redsoxs.

by thebossuzzi on Nov 12, 2009 4:33 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

a front runner?

im guessing maybe he follows great teams?

They look at me and say Why? I stare back and say Why Not?

by Livemaxxx on Nov 12, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I know lots of Connecticut residents

that are Yankees loyalists but Pats guys/gals. Not that uncommon. Not that this has any bearing on whether the post is just flat out off-base or not.

by jctsai12 on Nov 12, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sure he's also a fan of

Gator football and Tar Heel basketball.

by mgrex03 on Nov 12, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha!

"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007

by peytonsthebest on Nov 12, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

actually im not

The patriots Are the best I dont care what you say what you think, Nothing!!!!!!!!!

by andrew29910 on Nov 16, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

Recced

by BigBlueShoe on Nov 13, 2009 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ITS MY OPINION. I WAS BORN IN BOSTON ANYWAY

by andrew29910 on Nov 13, 2009 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

.............

Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.

Man, I need a life...

Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: This is my dad's favorite scene from one of my all-time favorite shows. Full of win, IMO.

by Cassieper on Nov 13, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

one question

do the Colts sit down and write out a list of shitty teams they would like to dominate and the submit it to the people who put out the schedules? NO! they play whos on the schedule. If you knew anything about football you would now that the good teams dominate the bad ones….and what have the Colts done?

I rest my case,

Bob Sanders does not play Hide-and-Seek, He plays HIDE and PRAY-HE-DOES-NOT FIND-YOU!

by coltsfan723 on Nov 12, 2009 4:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

It happens

No team has any control over the schedule, and sometimes you luck into a schedule full of mid-majors and happen to get the teams with the best shot against you at home. You can’t help that it’s your year to play the worst division in football as your NFC opponents or that the rest of the teams in your division suck (ok, maybe not Houston, but they’re still not that great).

by RSNexile on Nov 12, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The AFC South

is a teeter toter, besides the Colts….Tennessee and Jacksonville are good and bad, for some reason they cant stay consistent, Tennessee has better luck at this than Jack Del Rioville. But if they can get good and stay good, the AFC South can be a tough division with Houston finally showing up and playing football.

Bob Sanders does not play Hide-and-Seek, He plays HIDE and PRAY-HE-DOES-NOT FIND-YOU!

by coltsfan723 on Nov 12, 2009 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

2007 AFC South took both Wildcard slots with the Titans and Jaguars

Let’s see the AFC West do that

My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 12, 2009 6:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, but they both suck this year

You guys got lucky with that. Next year you probably won’t be quite so lucky.

But again, you can’t control that. And in a league where even Eric Mangini can win a game, you have to be damn good to win eight in a row.

by RSNexile on Nov 12, 2009 6:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

regarding strength of schedule

It’s always been kind of a “myth” to me anyway, to say that teams are only good because of their schedules. With divisional schedule weight, if a good team like the Colts runs its division the previous year, of course its schedule will look easier the following year. It just hung two losses on 3 of its opponents and pulled their win percentage down! That doesn’t mean they’re playing college teams.

Also, because the NFL ensures that playoff teams from the previous year play each other the following year with their open dates on the schedule, it’s not like a team in a “weak” division doesn’t get tested throughout the year in those games. Last I checked, the Pats weren’t in Indy or Pittsburgh’s division, or the Chargers, yet we seem to get together with those guys pretty regularly.

Simply put, there’s just no such thing as “cakewalking” to an 8-0, 10-0, 6-0, 12-0, whatever and 0 record. To be undefeated this deep in the season is an impressive accomplishment.

by jctsai12 on Nov 12, 2009 5:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Thank you

for shedding some light on this guy who has absolutely no clue whats goin on the real world!

Bob Sanders does not play Hide-and-Seek, He plays HIDE and PRAY-HE-DOES-NOT FIND-YOU!

by coltsfan723 on Nov 12, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow...

That’s all I’ve got. Wow…

"Flying blind on a rocket cycle?" -Vultan, from the movie "Flash Gordon", for no particular reason...

by peytonsurdaddy on Nov 12, 2009 6:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

You know a high mind is responsible when...

the Colts let “there” opponents… ~~illiterate~~ profound.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.

by Comedic.Sans on Nov 12, 2009 6:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Guess what this post earned you kid....

Bob Sanders does not play Hide-and-Seek, He plays HIDE and PRAY-HE-DOES-NOT FIND-YOU!

by coltsfan723 on Nov 12, 2009 7:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

um.....

the colts have been playoff calibur for about a decade. how are they overrated with one of the best QB’s and one of the best WRs in the game, and their defense is performing above average, and you call them overrated?

by patriotguy on Nov 13, 2009 7:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Above average defense?

They’re #1 in the league.

by BigBlueShoe on Nov 13, 2009 8:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

for defense

pts: 1st
yrds: 8th
pass yrds: 9th
rush yrds: 14th

by patriotguy on Nov 13, 2009 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they are definitely in the top 4 in terms of defense at the moment.

pts are definitely, imo, are my way of looking at how great a defense a team is.

by patriotguy on Nov 13, 2009 10:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

#1 ranking

PPG are the only thing that matters. Yards are completely over-rated as a stat measurement. That’s a sentiment Bill Belichick himself shares. Thus, #1 scoring defense = #1 defense in the league.

by BigBlueShoe on Nov 14, 2009 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Points are the most important thing in terms of stats,

but i don’t think the colts are the #1 defense. the stats in the points per game column say that(although that stat doesn’t tell the COMPLETE story to how good a defense is, and i also don’t judge talent on a player or team based on stats. but thats just me), but i rank the best defenses as:
1: Pittsburgh
2: Ravens
3:Colts(maybe colts as #2)
4: Giants

At the moment, the Ravens are getting unlucky, but i’m not counting them out. Rip me if you want, but it’s just how i see it(at the moment).

by patriotguy on Nov 14, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ravens?

I don’t think there’s a stat out there that would put them in the top 3 in the league so far. Other than reputation.

They have not been playing that well this year.

Luck is probability taken personally, clutch is probability attributed to individuals.

by shake n bake on Nov 14, 2009 11:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

but i think their defense still looks threatening to me.

by patriotguy on Nov 15, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They haven't been great thus far...

but on the flipside, it would be a little premature to write off a defence that has Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata, Ed Reed and Ray Lewis. Those are all game-changing play-makers, and there’s at least one of them in all aspects of the defence – D-line, linebacking corps, and the secondary. They’ve definitely lost some of the sting from last year, which I would guess is a result of the change in D co-ordinators, but I would imagine that once the new playcalling jitters are lost, he’ll put those guys in a position to make the plays they’re known for. There’s just too many great players on that defence to discount them outright.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.

by Comedic.Sans on Nov 15, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think they are bad, but I don't think it's right to call them a top 3 D

when they haven’t been much more than mediocre, talent aside.

Luck is probability taken personally, clutch is probability attributed to individuals.

It's shocking how much can slip your perception

by shake n bake on Nov 15, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They are a couple playmakers from elite

Suggs gets doubled, and there’s no one on the other side. They could also use 1 bigger corner to go against the taller wideouts. Without those, they’re just good. With them, they’d be elite again.

My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 16, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

in terms of correlation, definitely

PPG allowed is where you look, and there’s obviously a strong correlation between lowest PPG and highest win percentage. I think the overall sentiment I’m trying to convey is that “Defense” isn’t just the 11 guys on the field defending (and “Offense” isn’t just collecting WRs with blazing speed), but rather a true team effort on all sides of the ball.

Certainly, a lot of the Colts’ defenders success is owed to Manning’s ability to move the ball, keep them off the field for recovery, and not put them in bad situations; likewise, the defense keeps him from getting backed up too often and gives him the room to make great plays and see the field brilliantly. Same with the Patriots, and every other team; defense and offense are symbiotic, and a low PPG is a statement about the strength of the entire 53 man squad as a whole.

by jctsai12 on Nov 14, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

#1

In scoring defense, which isn’t necessarily the best way to rank a defense. Though we’re #2 and I prefer to think of us as the #2 defense in the league so carry on I guess!

by sc4rs on Nov 13, 2009 9:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Defense Rankings

I wonder why so many fans think that yards per game allowed is the gold standard for ranking a defense?

The Colts let many teams march up and down the field all day, but stop them once they get to the red zone. Bottom line is games are decided by the number of points on the scoreboard, not by the number of yards in the stat sheet.

The Colts have won three games this year when they scored 20 or less points, thanks to their defense.

by ColtsSBLXIV on Nov 13, 2009 12:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

it's really difficult to rank a defense

Both scoring and YPG are important metrics, but looking at either in isolation is fairly misleading. Much of a defense’s success is heavily reliant on the ability of the offense and special teams to generate positive field position.

Defensively, a team could be constantly allowing the opponents to start near midfield. In those cases, even if that defense is only giving up 15-20 yards per drive, they are still put in the unfortunate situation of having allowed their opponent to get into scoring range.

Conversely, there are plenty of teams capable of moving the ball deep all the time and pinning their opponents back. But the defenses may allow the opponents to drive right back and pin them deep, losing the field position battle and leaving their own offense vulnerable to turnover, even if they don’t give up a score.

As I said, using either scoring or yards per game is just scratching the surface of a defense’s effectiveness. It’s like using the BMI to gauge an individual’s health — imprecise and very broad in many cases. To really evaluate a defense, you have to analyze how it performs in different situations; average opponent field position, current score differential, time of possession, etc. Teams play differently when they’re up big or early, often allowing yardage in prevent as a tradeoff for disallowing the big, momentum-shifting plays. These kind of nuances are very hard to capture statistically.

by jctsai12 on Nov 13, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I prefer yards per play

As a metric, it’s the most effective simple means of determining a defense’s performance.

The Colts are currently second in the league in yards against per passing attempt (New England is fourth) and 17th against the run (New England is 24th). That suggests to me that the best way to beat either team is by establishing the running game. But since both teams are usually in the lead and tend to dominate time of possession, they don’t face as many rushing attempts — about 25 per game for each — as you might expect otherwise.

by RSNexile on Nov 13, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs