Eleven Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 The Colts lost Peyton Manning for the season. There wasn't much they could do. http://www.stampedeblue.com/2011/12/12/2630093/another-columnist-thinks-the-colts-are-intentionally-tanking-the-2011 Quote
wjag Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 http://www.stampedeb...anking-the-2011 I don't think there was any doubt that the Colts embraced 'suck for Luck'. Quote
Eleven Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 I don't think there was any doubt that the Colts embraced 'suck for Luck'. I agree, but apparently there's always one! Quote
deluca67 Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 http://www.stampedeb...anking-the-2011 Dickie Dunn wrote this. It's gotta be true. Fantastic :doh: Quote
Eleven Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 (edited) Dickie Dunn wrote this. It's gotta be true. Fantastic :doh: The writer linked to numerous other writers who said the same thing. Now you're just being disingenuous, frankly. Edited March 29, 2014 by Eleven Quote
deluca67 Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 The writer linked to numerous other writers who said the same thing. Now you're just being disingenuous, frankly. The Colts went from 10-6 with Manning to to 2-14 without. The Broncos went from 8-8 prior to Manning to 13-3 with Manning. It should be a surprise to no one that the Colts fell to the bottom of the league when Manning was out just like it should be no surprise that the Broncos rocketed to the top of the AFC with Manning. He is that much of an impact player. Quote
Eleven Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 The Colts went from 10-6 with Manning to to 2-14 without. The Broncos went from 8-8 prior to Manning to 13-3 with Manning. It should be a surprise to no one that the Colts fell to the bottom of the league when Manning was out just like it should be no surprise that the Broncos rocketed to the top of the AFC with Manning. He is that much of an impact player. That, he is. But as wjag said, it's pretty much common knowledge that once Manning was hurt, the Colts planned to finish last. That 2012 draft was like the 2015 NHL draft (look at what Washington paid to move up to #2). Quote
SwampD Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 The Colts went from 10-6 with Manning to to 2-14 without. The Broncos went from 8-8 prior to Manning to 13-3 with Manning. It should be a surprise to no one that the Colts fell to the bottom of the league when Manning was out just like it should be no surprise that the Broncos rocketed to the top of the AFC with Manning. He is that much of an impact player. What's the argument here? Are you really saying that the Colts didn't tank on purpose, when their starting QB was Curtis Painter? Really? C'mon. Quote
deluca67 Posted March 29, 2014 Report Posted March 29, 2014 What's the argument here? Are you really saying that the Colts didn't tank on purpose, when their starting QB was Curtis Painter? Really? C'mon. I'm saying there was nothing they could do to prevent it. You're not replacing Manning with a free agent or a trade for some backup. Manning was the QB, OC and HC. When the decision was made that Manning would be out the entire season finishing last was inevitable no matter what moves the team made or could have made. Quote
Eleven Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 I'm saying there was nothing they could do to prevent it. You're not replacing Manning with a free agent or a trade for some backup. Manning was the QB, OC and HC. When the decision was made that Manning would be out the entire season finishing last was inevitable no matter what moves the team made or could have made. Of course it wasn't inevitable. You're just being contrary. Quote
deluca67 Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 Of course it wasn't inevitable. You're just being contrary. If it was inevitable why the need to include the Colts situation in the growing list of grand conspiracies that seem to be taking over your posts? Quote
Eleven Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 If it was inevitable why the need to include the Colts situation in the growing list of grand conspiracies that seem to be taking over your posts? Right. Of course. Quote
SwampD Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 If it was inevitable why the need to include the Colts situation in the growing list of grand conspiracies that seem to be taking over your posts? The deluca doth protest too much, methinks. This is not the first (or second) time you've thrown this out there. Quote
deluca67 Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 The deluca doth protest too much, methinks. This is not the first (or second) time you've thrown this out there. There appears to be a growing trend on the board to blame things on secret meets and hidden agenda's. It's as much disturbing as it is sad. Quote
qwksndmonster Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 There appears to be a growing trend on the board to blame things on secret meets and hidden agenda's. It's as much disturbing as it is sad. What about the Colts tanking is secret or hidden? It's right there in broad daylight. Swamp said it best. Curtis freakin' Painter. Quote
deluca67 Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 What about the Colts tanking is secret or hidden? It's right there in broad daylight. Swamp said it best. Curtis freakin' Painter. Who could have the Colts brought in to make any significant difference? Put the tin foil away boys. Quote
WildCard Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) The Colts went from 10-6, to 2-14, and then magically bounced back to consecutive 11-5 seasons :rolleyes: Edited March 30, 2014 by WildCard Quote
MattPie Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 Who could have the Colts brought in to make any significant difference? Put the tin foil away boys. Any of the Bills' revolving door of QBs (I can't be bothered to see which would have been recently cut in the summer of 2012) could have led them to 6-10. Unless you're saying the 10-6 2011 Colts were worse than the Bills in most postions other than QB. Quote
Sabres Fan in NS Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 Around the NHL - 2013-2014 :w00t: And yet to have any effect. All about the Baltimore Colts ......... :P Quote
deluca67 Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) Any of the Bills' revolving door of QBs (I can't be bothered to see which would have been recently cut in the summer of 2012) could have led them to 6-10. Unless you're saying the 10-6 2011 Colts were worse than the Bills in most postions other than QB. No short term answer at QB could have stepped into that position and made any significant difference. The entire offense flowed through Manning. Manning on any of those 6-10 Bills teams and they would be a playoff team. Edited March 30, 2014 by deluca67 Quote
MattPie Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 No short term answer at QB could have stepped into that position and made any significant difference. The entire offense flowed through Manning. Manning on any of those 6-10 Bills teams and they would be a playoff team. Bold: why would any prospective QB be short term in that situation, unless they were planning on drafting a new QB high in the draft? :) Second statement: on that, I completely agree. The same could probably be said for Luck if the Bills had the gumption to do what the Colts (or any of the other recent teams that drafted an early QB) did. Quote
deluca67 Posted March 30, 2014 Report Posted March 30, 2014 Bold: why would any prospective QB be short term in that situation, unless they were planning on drafting a new QB high in the draft? :) Second statement: on that, I completely agree. The same could probably be said for Luck if the Bills had the gumption to do what the Colts (or any of the other recent teams that drafted an early QB) did. They didn't know if Manning would be back. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.