So, how the F did we lose to the friggin' Chargers?
Let's be good sports (unlike our funny little friends in Chowdaville) and state that San Diego deserved to win (because they did) and we wish them well as they continue in the playoffs. You will notice that when Dungy and Norv Turner met at mid-field after the game there was no cold handshake, no rudeness to reporters, and no general douchebaginess. There also weren't any video cameras recording other people's signs, but we all knew that already. The point is how you win or lose is as important as winning itself. Some people disagree with that, but who gives a crap what classless morons think.
But, that aside, when I think back on this game I have a hard time wrapping my mind around why the Colts lost. They literally had everything they wanted to happen happen. Tomlinson was shut down. Rivers did not play in the fourth quarter. Manning was carving up San Diego's defense. Hell, after Gonzo's 56 yard TD, I thought the game was over.
But one thing happened this year that has hardly ever happened in Dungy's tenure: The Colts surrendered a fourth quarter lead. This happened once before, back in November against the Patriots. It has hardly ever happened during Dungy's tenure, and for it to happen twice (in two big games) in one season is bizarre. Against the Chargers, how it happened is the most mind boggling.
After taking a 24-21 lead on Gonzo's TD from Manning, the game seemed well in Indy's hands. Phillip Rivers and LaDanian Tomlinson were both out of the game. Tomlinson was ineffective, but Rivers was playing pretty well. Still, the Colts defense (ranked #3 overall in the league) should have mauled a Chargers offense with Billy Volek at QB and Michael Turner at RB. It should have been a 3-and-out, or maybe even a turnover. Instead, Volek engineered a 70-plus yard drive resulting in a TD (by Volek) on a QB sneak from the goal-line. When that happened, you got the sense the game was over, and the defense (which had carried this injury-riddled team all season) CHOKED BIG TIME.
There are a ton of reasons why this defensive meltdown occurred. First and foremost, the game plan stunk. Less than a month after singing Ron Meeks' praises, I now have to crucify him. The Colts defensive line got zero pressure all game long. No blitzes were called. None. If some where, they were either few and far between, or so poorly executed they went unnoticed by San Diego's o-line. Bob Sanders was hardly used as a weapon to engineer a pass rush, much like he did against the Titans in Week Two. With Dwight Freeney IRed and Robert Mathis still not 100% (he was used as a situational pass rusher and not a starter), the Colts relied on Darrell Reid, Josh Thomas, Ed Johnson, and Raheem Brock for their pass rush.
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
Penalties were also a killer, and none worse than Marlin Jackson's stupid face mask penalty on 3rd down. Marlin will forever be known as the guy who ended New England's season in 2006. However, his penalty on Sunday basically handed San Diego the game. If Jackson doesn't commit that penalty, the Chargers go three-and-out, punt, Colts get the ball back, and likely run out the clock. Instead, he gave SD a fresh set of downs plus 15 yards, and a few plays later the Chargers had the lead. These kinds of penalties hardly ever happen to Indy, and they NEVER happen during post-season games. In this game, they did.
The final reason was plain, simple inexperience. Yes, this team has players like Manning, Wayne, Clark, Saturday, Sanders, Vinatieri, and Brackett. If you look at those players in this game, they generally played well; Manning played brilliantly. However, all season long this club has relied on contributions from rookies; players like Ed Johnson, Tony Ugoh, Gonzo, and Keyunta Dawson. Indy has also leaned heavy on second year players and first time starters, like Freddie Keiaho, Tyjuan Hagler, Devon Aromashadu, and TJ Rushing. Many of these young guys simply seemed wide-eyed and out-of-sync playing in their first playoff game. Some, like Gonzo, played lights out. But especially on defense, the young guys simply did not make the plays necessary to win playoff games.
In a way, youth and inexperience really did in this team; the same young and vigor that carried them all season. The reality of 2007 is that this team was hurt and never got fully healthy. We thought, and rightly assumed they were healthy, but after watching Sunday's game it was clear players like Marvin Harrison had no business on the field. Brock and Mathis were not ready either, and Bethea seemed wonky as well. Unlike 2006, where despite injuries there were numerous veteran players ready to step up and fill-in (Booger McFarland, Mike Doss, Rob Morris, etc.), this season the back-ups were talented, tough, but inexperienced rookies going up against a veteran Chargers team. Even the Chargers back-ups, like Volek and Turner, are veteran guys who know how to win.
The silver-lining here is the youth and talent on this team got a taste of what real NFL football is about. Like the teams in 2003, 2004, and 2005, they got a taste of playoff defeat. Often, that taste will fuel a desire get better, perform better. Unlike 2006's squad, which had been through the wars together for several years, the make-up of this 2007 team was young and bright-eyed. This experience will aid them in 2008, as will the eventual return of players like Freeney, Morris, and hopefully Anthony McFarland. For us fans, it's a bitter disappointment. Yet another first round bye produces another quick playoff exit.
0 recs |
53 comments
Comments
how bout the offense?
If I remember correctly thats how you beat the Pats last season in the AFCCG, with your offense getting the job done late in the game.
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 2:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The offense generated over 400 yards
by BigBlueShoe on Jan 15, 2008 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
it should have been enough to win
That's why it is a collective team loss.
by torontocoltsfan on Jan 15, 2008 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not blaming the offense
Sometimes the offense has to go out and win the game when the defense isn't playing well, like last year's AFCCG, so why is this game so different?
I definitely watched the game (was a great one) and am not a Manning hater, I just think Brady is better. ;)
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And
Kelvin Hayden had just forced a turnover and Peyton was engineering a brilliant drive back down the field, and then here comes good old 18 to 88, and then Marvin tries a one move - and gets slammed. This is a guys who steps out, falls down, or outruns his defenders. He doesn't jimmy, shake, or stiff arm. That's not his game. He makes incredible catches and plays smart and doesn't boast about his touchdowns like he just invented the cure for cancer. But here, after being away from the game for so many weeks, he takes a shot at it. I don't blame him, make a play on your first catch and give something for the fans to cheer about. But he hadn't got hit at full speed for some time now, and he wasn't ready. You can spread the blame around all you want, but you have to admit that that was not a Marvin Harrison play.
Shortly thereafter, the defense apparently decided to clock out. Tyjuan Hagler was easily the star at this point and from there out on the defensive side of the ball. He got in the backfield and made plays, he filled gaps, he chased Antonio Gates down the the weakside sideline(not his side) and breaks up a pass. Amazing, but amazingly that was all that was amazing. Mathis was sluggish, The other D-lineman couldn't get push in time to make a play, And Bethea looked high. He still hit when he got there, but it was like 3 seconds too late, everytime. His worst game of the year.
Like BBS said, besides the one max blitz called in the first quarter, the defense was a meek version of BSBD, which basically means a 4-4 front Bob playing like a second Middle Linebacker, and Bethea counting butterflies in the deep zone. Marlin and Kelvin were called upon to play man. MARLIN AND KELVIN CAN'T PLAY MAN. They can play the flats and the short field, and they can lay a lick, but they don't have the speed to chase a wide receiver, and they don't have the vertical to stop a big threat like Vincent Jackson. This might have worked with some SS Blitz or some zone blitz on obvious passing plays. Bob Sanders is as capable of playing man as either corner, so it would have been a good time to call an unheard of CB Blitz from Marlin, with Bob coming from his 8th man spot to press the receiver and follow him on his route. But no pass rush, not even a threat of one, combined with late moves by the linebackers on everyplay, plus cover 1/cover 3 alternations with Bethea on lean equals the third ranked defense giving up 400+ yards to a punk named Rivers. Sad.
But back to the main point, you can't say the offense didn't come out to play, but the fumble, then Reggie's tipped pass interception, then KK's dope-headed bounce-off-hands interception, I mean come on. That was a minimum of 9 points, and very possibly could have been 17-21. Didn't we lose by four? So take a three-and-out on Volek's drive, which should have happened, and the above offensive plays, and what are you left with? A brilliant Manning performance on the 450 yd/5 touchdown/74% level and a 41-21 victory. Still weaknesses shown, but the job is done and the young guys got a feel for the playoffs. Instead, we're left with shmucks blaming Manning and saying this is why he's not better than Brady, and the Colts are choke artists, blah blah blah. Come on '08 and Go COLTS!
by Bullard47 on Jan 15, 2008 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
gojaogja
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 4:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Colts offense played a little better
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
correction:
by tenyardfight on Jan 15, 2008 3:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
none of the above
I'm not blaming either Manning or Romo because the players on offense around them failed as well.
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
faokfojagf
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 4:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
considering we all know...
by proud mary on Jan 15, 2008 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
aojaojga
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 5:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
King
by standingpat on Jan 18, 2008 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On a side note.
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 4:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well
Turner gave this to his players. He looked like a mad man during the whole game. Dungy was just lost. He wasn't able to get his team back on the tracks after that really stupid fumble. We lost the game there. We should have opened 14-0 (and we were on the way to do it), and SD would have never get on the game. We didn't. I don't blame Tony Dungy, heck, who the fuck am I to do something like that, right? But we gotta wonder why there wasn't enough passion from the whole team. And we also gotta wonder who was the one behind the gameplan on D. The play calling on defense was idiotic during the whole game.
As a team, the Colts are so much better than the Chargers that it's not even funny. But if we played like they did against us, or like the Jags did against the Pats, NO TEAM IN THE NFL COULD HAVE STOPPED US.
I saw Brazil getting back home during the last World Cup, and I saw the same thing on the Colts sunday. It's not about losing, 31 teams in every season lost somewhere where they shouldn't have. But it's about losing without the passion. Losing to someone just because he played with more heart than you. Losing to someone who just wanted more than you.
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 15, 2008 4:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
fasjjag
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Next season will be a big one, especially for Manning. If he can comeback, and lead his team to another SB, maybe he'll get all the respect he deserves.
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 15, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My Humble Analysis
Here's my humble analysis on why the Colts lost:
- Defensive Play Calling: No blitz? Why? You guys have pretty good corners and Chambers and Jackson are okay receivers. So, why not blitz and go man to man? Pressure on the QB is the great equalizer in the NFL. Brady and Manning are great but neither is as effective when pressure is applied. Rivers is an okay quarterback but pressure makes him come unglued. Check out the Pats demolition of the Bolts from earlier in the season. Baltimore, Philly and the Giants gave us problems. The common theme: blitz packages coming from everywhere and they had the corners to play effectively. Why your defensive coordinator didn't blitz more is strange, especially when Volek entered the game. The reason we won the Giants game is because in the Fourth quarter we began to blitz the hell out of Eli. He was shredding our defense and all of a sudden its three and outs.
- Offensive Play Calling: If I remember correctly, Peyton had second and goal late in the game and threw three straight passes. No need for that. Addai is really good (I would say he's better than Maroney right now). Run the ball. Spread them out and run a stretch run. The Colts are known for that play.
- Jennings made key mistakes. He gave up a lot of deep balls. That's not supposed to happen in Cover Two. I don't know if he's good or not because I haven't seen enough of him but he had a really bad game.
- Taking a Month Off: I don't think there should be any debate about whether to play the final games of a season anymore. I know some have argued that the Colts came out strong so there was no "hangover" effect from having a month off but the defense clearly faltered in the Fourth Quarter. I don't really love it when Belichek plays the starters deep into the Fourth but it forces the players to play 60 minutes of every game. The defense seemed tired and not mentally tough during the last quarter. What was up with the dumb penalties? You rarely see a Dungy coached team do that. But, what is common to Dungy coached teams is an early exit from the playoffs. I think its time he switched his style.
- Peyton Manning: Chalk it up to homerism if you like, but I think some of the blame lies with Peyton. He had two opportunities to win this game and didn't come through. For whatever reason, he tends to get impatient when the game is on the line and I think Peyton's lost a lot more "big" games than he's won. Brady will take checkdown after checkdown to win the game (see the game winning drives in the first two Superbowls -- I think he threw to Troy Brown once during the first Superbowl and threw to Deion once during the second; other than that its all JR Redmond, Jermaine Wiggins and Kevin Faulk -- not exactly superstars). Not to say Brady hasn't blown a few in his time (AFC Championship last year; Denver the year before where he threw a costly pick in the endzone; Miami, when he had no business throwing a pass when he was sitting on his butt), but he's generally very patient and wins the big game a lot more than loses. On that final drive, Peyton seemed to toss too many deep balls when his checkdown receivers were there.
by Medfa on Jan 15, 2008 4:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
jgjadg
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 4:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Listen
The reason the Manning analysis stinks is people were complaining Manning went to his check downs too much. Many of his throws in the red zone were to Addai, Keith, and Clark.
Manning is as patient or patient than Brady. both are great players. Claiming Brady is better is blind homerism on your part, but I'll let it go.
by BigBlueShoe on Jan 15, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The other reason
Manning played brilliantly. I don't expect you to agree.
by BigBlueShoe on Jan 15, 2008 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if that was really true BBS
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
2nd that...
The reason I believe this is true is the less-than-brilliant play of the QB when the game was on the line. Brilliant quarterbacks don't leave six points behind when they face first & goal from the nine, with 2:51 to go in the season. Spin those facts as you choose but, they never change.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 15, 2008 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Terry
It is literally THAT simple.
by BigBlueShoe on Jan 16, 2008 9:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Listening to his comments
I guess we'll have to wait another year to see.
by coltsfanawalt on Jan 16, 2008 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and
by coltsfanawalt on Jan 16, 2008 11:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah and Mannning has been playing since 98
by Terry on Jan 16, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I never said he didn't play well BBS
What Manning did is completely irrelevant up to that point. So what if he passed for 400 yards and 3 TDs, its what you do when the game is on the line thats important.
Its just like in hoops if Kobe Bryant scores 40 points but fails to do anything when the game is on the line, to me, thats not a brilliant game.
Again, I thought Manning played well, but he could have played better.
by Terry on Jan 16, 2008 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What's completely irrevelent
by coltsfanawalt on Jan 16, 2008 6:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
irrevelevant...
The folks here insist on calling Peyton Manning incredible & brilliant... does his playoff record attest to this? I say no.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 16, 2008 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True
Think for a moment, if the Patriot TEAM hadn't had such an amazing dominance of the entire NFL this decade, Manning and the Colts would never have their brilliance doubted. 6 straight playoff appearances and a superbowl title last year, that's as good as anyone, taking the Patriots out of the picture. Not to mention Manning's personal accomplishments, it's incredible.
So since your team is so truly remarkable, do you feel better to say that no team that lives up to that incredible standard is any good? Because if Peyton and the Colts aren't, then no one but your beloved Pats are anything more than a joke. Congratulations.
by coltsfanawalt on Jan 16, 2008 6:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know...
Six straight playoff appearances - one successful campaign. Brilliance at work ??
For Brady & the Patriots it will soon be seven playoff appearances and four Super Bowls this decade. Maybe our standards are higher in New England, that would help explain it.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 16, 2008 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
See my point?
by coltsfanawalt on Jan 16, 2008 7:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I do, I think...
The Colts are a terrific organization - unfortunately, their great play, their skilled quarterback has had to play in the shadow of Tom Brady & the New England Patriots. But, for the true fans of pro football these two teams have become the rivalry to watch. I wish that both teams were playing this weekend.
I am super-proud of my team these last seven years, you see, I remember watching Jim Nance hitting the line for two yards (he being the Pats offensive threat in those days) while N.E. went on to lose 42-10. (repeat same the next Sunday). So, Pats fans have been liberated this decade and the freedom is heady stuff indeed.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 17, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Homerism is one thing
Manning had a great game, but compelte threw away a very important late game drive becuase he didn't look at his checkdowns, but went for deep bombs.
Some think Manning is better, Some think that Brady is better but that is all irrelevent to what was being said, and that is that Manning has a true tennency to lock in on one person in pressure situations and he hasn't gotten over it, and until he does it will lead to more "choke" labels even with numbers on his side.
by ZTurgeon on Jan 15, 2008 9:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
fyi
You mean until he wins a super bowl he'll be labelled a choker?
Fail, nice try, but major fail.
by KingRichard on Jan 15, 2008 9:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry about my Typo
I would like to state, that I do not believe he is a "choker". I however do think that in times of great pressure, he does target in on people and ignore check downs.
So the media will label him as a "choke artist" without unfairly, but not entirely without reason. Oh, and a Super Bowl Ring puts him in the same class as Trent Dilfer too, so just because you have it doesn't make you a good QB.
by ZTurgeon on Jan 16, 2008 7:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Response
Re: Manning, I don't think you can absolve him of blame. Look, he's supposed to be one of the best but he had first and goal or whatever it was with the game on the line. He didn't get it done. I expect better from Manning and I hope you do, too. Yes, its a team game but are you saying that Manning had zero options to score a touchdown on four plays inside the 10? I have a hard time believing that. Reputations and your worth as a QB are made in the postseason. Unfortunately, Manning's record in the playoffs does not bode well for him. Marino was a great QB but there's no question that every smart football fan would take Montana or Elway to execute a game-winning Superbowl drive over Marino. Four hundred yards of passing with a +60% accuracy are fantastic stats but all everyone is going to remember that is Peyton had two drives to win the game and failed to do so. Did he play well? Yes. Did he play up to his potential? In my humble opinion, no.
by Medfa on Jan 16, 2008 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Contrarian view...
Fourth Quarter - Colts first and goal on the San Diego 9, 2:51 left on the clock. Peyton's at the helm with the game (check that, the season) on the line...
What happened ???
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 15, 2008 4:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
i have to agree...
But the fact is, Manning had a chance to win the game and he didn't. Again, I don't blame Manning at all for the loss because again, it never should have gotten to that point. But to not hold him accountable at all is dumb because regardless of the poor play of the defense, we had a chance to win the game and Manning didn't come through.
Of course the reason we even had a chance to win was because of Manning's great play. Again, the loss hardly falls on Peyton's shoulders, and this is certainly not any indication or reason to believe Peyton can't win the big game or any of the other ridiculous crap being said.
by jochexum on Jan 15, 2008 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
followup...
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 15, 2008 5:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
very well said jochexum
by Terry on Jan 15, 2008 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dungy had a brain fart
Quick note: If the quarterback is anyone besides Brady The ratio becomes 20/40/40. The reason is that Manning is so good Dungy expects him to make those plays (as did everyone watching the game) so it has more of an influence on play calling and whose hands the team wants the ball in.
by ihavethemelody on Jan 16, 2008 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what happened was
by biosBSOD on Jan 16, 2008 8:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
wrong play set
Sure, the Keith pick hurt but, that was a great play by the defender wresting the ball out of Keith's arms. But that drive was not the end all, be all of the Colts season.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 16, 2008 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is quickly becoming
by Cru on Jan 15, 2008 5:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jennings
Before we jump to conclusions, lets remember that Roy Hall and Dante Hughes were both IRd earlier in the season. Hughes was widely expected to go in the first round, and was doing very well his first season. Hall is just... Um, well, I don't know how to describe him. He's a tight end with WR speed and hands. He has a lot of potential, and the physical tools. He just needs to get in the game.
by MonkeyBusiness on Jan 15, 2008 6:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Brady... its obvious
Manning: 7-7 in the playoffs, 1 ring
Brady in the last 7yrs: 1 pro-bowl RB. 1 pro-bowl WR (this season). 0-pro-bowl TE
Manning: 1-1st ballott HoF WR and another all-pro WR, multiple pro-bowl RB's and pro-bowl TE.
Next discussion...
by BradysBetter on Jan 16, 2008 8:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
obvious....
When you take into consideration the talent that has surrounded Manning - one must conclude that Manning is not close to being the equal of Brady.. not even close. The folks that endlessly sing the praises of Manning (the Manning apologists too) always choose to ignore the telling history of these two QB's.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 16, 2008 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is getting old
We, Colts fan, couldn't care less if Brady is better than Manning, or if Manning is better than Brady. We think Manning is better, and we can talk all day about why we think so. So can you, regarding Brady. But you guys talk about that all the time. I mean, Brady HAVE to be better than Manning, right? It would be awful if your QB is not the best one.
Nobody around here cares about Brady. I like to see him playing, he's a great QB. But that's that. We don't think too much about him. But you guys have something against Manning. I think that somewhere in your brains, you all think he's better than Brady.
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 16, 2008 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
MGBB
The posts around here all exalt in the greatness, no, the brilliance of Peyton Manning. Colts fans blindly placed him on a pedestal and then dismiss any evidence that shows he's lost his claim to a higher standing. I don't think that Manning is bad, I consider him the second best QB in the league right now, that's hardly bad.
Patriots fans find it amusing that Colts fans won't acknowledge the measurable differences (prior accomplishments on the football field) between these two QB's. That Manning plays second fiddle to Brady is not a point of contention, just look at the history of these two. You can continue to overlook Manning's record in big games but what purpose does that serve? The guy we champion at least has the pedigree to warrant our adulation, your guy doesn't.
Colts fans obviously care about Brady, they knock him all the time, snide remarks and petty things that I'm sure amuse the masses here.
by horseofadifferentcolor on Jan 16, 2008 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sniffle sniffle
by tenyardfight on Jan 16, 2008 9:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 




















