It’s rare that Jim (a Colts fan) and I (a Patriots fan) agree on anything either team does. But we agree on this: The Colts really stunk up the joint by pulling their starters with the ball, up 5 in the third quarter against the Jets. Some people seize the opportunity for greatness; others turn their back to it, afraid of failure. It was shocking to both of us that the Colts would shun the (very good) chance to be the first 19-0 team in history.
What did you think? Comment and vote, after the jump.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 5:01 PM
and here I thought Tony Dungy was soft, he’s got nothing on Jim Caldwell. no way these dudes get past a tough team like the Chargers.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 5:08 PM
The way it was handled sucked balls. If they were oh so very worried about their delicate little flowers, erm, players, getting hurt before the playoffs why the fuck did they stay out there until almost the end of the 3rd period? Why pull them when they were on the verge of salting the game instead of doing the usual play one or two series and then pulling ‘em?
Dan Patrick schooled the lame-o Tony Dungy on NBC afterwards. He asked a very good question: If you were so worried about injuries during your time as head coach, how come you kept all your starters in late in the season during blowouts? Dungy’s defensive, cowering “Well, I pulled Peyton sometimes” answer was pathetic. I remember well so many games when the Colts actually had a potent offense (when Edge was there) that they’d be up 40-10 and the starters would play to the end of the game. Pathetic excuse making by Caldwell and Dungy.
The Colts are one and done, they’re soft and any adversity in the playoffs and they cave like Bayern Munich in the last 4 minutes of the 1999 European Cup against Manchester United. The offense is still not completely in sync, the running game is iffy and the special teams are horrible. I can easily see them getting behind 10-0 in their first playoff game and just choking.
I’d still have sex with Matt Stover, Peyton Manning, Jacob Tamme and Dallas Clark, though.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 6:05 PM
If you’re concerned about injuries going into the playoffs you either sit the key players out the entire game or take them out at a predetermined time (at the half or, like in the final exhibition game, after one series). If you’re concerned about winning the game, you don’t take your starters out until the game is won. The way the Colts handled it is just odd, bordering on incompetent.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 6:34 PM
hmm Dallas Clark for sure and Peyton is packing in the back so yeah him too (though Eli is the cute one, Peyton looks like he’s gotten a few too many footballs to the face) don’t know the other 2 wait what were we talking about oh yeah the Colts and the way they handled it yeah that was horrible, if they don’t win the Super Bowl (and they won’t) then that whole coaching staff needs to go. When was the last time an undefeated team was booed at home? I’m glad the fans let them know right away how they felt.
Dan Patrick should have asked Tony Dung-y what happened the last time the Colts had the conference wrapped up and rested their starters the last 2 games. It was 2005 and they went one and out to the Steelers. They won it all the next year as the 3 seed w/ their backs against the wall and no bye week.
The more you think about it, the less sense it makes……
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 8:54 PM
Jim A. and Joe G., you hit the nail on the head. Sit them the entire game if you’re concerned about key players getting injured in a meaningless game. Or if you feel you need to play them some just to keep them sharp, then pull them at halftime. To sit them at that point of the game he did is just plain stupid.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Apparently, the Colts starters were told they were playing 1 possession in the third. At the time, they led 9-3 and figured one TD puts them up 13. OK, I can buy that. But the Jets returned the second-half KO for a score, so that should have changed their strategy and let the starters play until they had a 9+-point lead. Very mismanaged.
on Dec 28th, 2009 at 10:06 PM
I’m fine with it. Sure 19-0 would’ve been great but the coach made the decision. Its easy for everyone to Monday morning quarterback the situation but at the end of the day its the coach’s call and obviously he’s been doing something right to get them to the point where they are now. I’m glad they did lose so now we don’t have to keep hearing about it. Play on and go for the big prize.
on Dec 29th, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Everyone seems to assume that “all will be forgotten” if they win the Super Bowl. But if they win the Super Bowl, it means they were that close to 19-0…and it didn’t happen because a coach decided to not let it.
on Dec 29th, 2009 at 3:01 PM
I see your point, but this assumes no key starters would have gotten hurt playing all out in the last 20 mins. against the Jets and against Buffalo. As we see in the NFL each week (Bears-Vikes; Bucs-Saints; Raiders-Steelers/Eagles/Bengals/Broncos), one should never assume.