Huh? The 2007 Colts are one of the best teams... ever?

by Brad Wells on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM EST in Colts Analysis

Listen, I'm as big a homer as there is for the Colts. I'm the idiot that says Marvin Harrison is better than Randy Moss, Tony Dungy is a better coach than Bill Belichick, and Peyton Manning craps bigger than Tom Brady. But, I don't think I'd ever say the 2007 Colts are one of the best teams in the modern salary cap era.

But, for some weird reason, ESPN writer Mike Sando thinks the 2007 Colts are one of the best teams of the last 8 years; better even than (gasp!) the Patriots?

Defense has won its share of championships, no doubt, but the Patriots haven't had to bother with such details while scoring nearly 37 points per game.

No team since 2000, save for the 2001 Rams, has approached their level of dominance. Those Rams lost in the playoffs only when faced with a New England defense that allowed only 17 points per game during the regular season. The Patriots won that Super Bowl, 20-17.

Very few current teams fit into the same class defensively. The Colts, Steelers and Bucs come closest. Each allowed fewer than 17 points per game during the season. Green Bay (18.2) was better than Dallas (20.3) among teams that also fared well in the 10 categories correlated to winning, but the conversation keeps coming back to Indianapolis.

The Colts finished this season ranked third among all teams since 2000 in the 10 categories most strongly correlated to winning. Dallas ranked 12th, Green Bay 20th -- highest among current NFC teams.

But these Colts also led the league in scoring defense. That gives them an edge.

I'm not sure what to take out of this article. ESPN has basically mocked the Colts all season, trumpeting Patriots Nation since the draft day trade for Randy Moss. Now this. It's like being starved in a cage, and when your capture offers you an apple, you're not quite sure whether to accept it or not.

In any case, the stats show the Colts as a very formidable team, but we all know that team stats are very misleading.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

umm...

I don't see why you think this is a stretch. It is my opinion that if they win the SB and do so without any "issues" (ie not having to come from a large deficit where one can question the other team faltering) then they should be considered one of the best teams in recent NFL history. I mean think about it...they were 3 or so plays away from being 16-0 and that is with allllllll those injuries. It's pretty amazing when you could have been 16-0 pretty easily yet every week from like game 7 or so on had 4-7 starters out.

I've been watching football since the late 80s (I'm a fairly youngin' who incidentally shares the exact same bday as Reggie Wayne- 11/17/1978) and I do not know of one single team that has had as many key injuries (on both sides of the ball at that) as they have and done as well as they have.

Obviously they may falter in the playoffs and show they do not belong in the discussion but as it stands right now they sure seem like one of the best teams in a long, long while. Here's hoping the playoffs prove this.

It is amazing to me you do not agree with this opinion based on everything you have said about the team and such. I'd have figured this is something you'd for sure agree on based on the injuries, the record, the AFC South superiority and the two peanut losses (titans finale excluded for obvious reasons) they had.

Oh and as for ESPN and thier sudden flip...it could be that:

A) they are either recognizing and have gotten over their 17 week orgasm over the pats

B) they are trying to hype up Indy so if/when they face NE and the Colts do actually lose they can jizz on the Pats even more and then say the Colts choked and blame Manning. I for one doubt the SB win has given Indy/Manning a pass in the eyes of the media like it has for everyone else in nfl history who's won a ring which IMO is pathetic....but I'll see how the media covers the Colts/Manning this playoffs.

I'd like to think it is option A but knowing the media and ESPN in general it is probably option B.

by Rob L on Jan 3, 2008 3:18 PM EST reply actions

I need to see them in the playoffs

Actually, I do agree with Solan. I'm just shocked that ESPN let him write it. Then again, after reading your explanation, it makes sense.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by Brad Wells on Jan 3, 2008 3:29 PM EST up reply actions

Sando

Not Solan, sorry.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by Brad Wells on Jan 3, 2008 3:30 PM EST up reply actions

CYA Theory

It's called covering your behind. If (when) the Colts do beat the Pats, they will say that they believed the Colts were the one team that could beat them.

by Blueisgood on Jan 3, 2008 4:14 PM EST up reply actions

07 Colts by DVOA

12th best overall since 96. 8th best before the week 17 scrub-fest.

8th best offense since 96. 8th best before week 17. Sorgi dropped the offensive DVOA, but not enough to change the Colts ranking vs the other top Offenses.

Something I noticed while looking these up: The 04 Colts had a higher DVOA through 16 weeks than the 07 Pats. Week 17 Manning played one series.

my blog http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com/

by shake n bake on Jan 3, 2008 4:07 PM EST reply actions

how about since 2000?

Since that is the time-frame that Sando(somewhat arbitrarily) chose to highlight?

by Bullard47 on Jan 3, 2008 4:31 PM EST reply actions

ok 2000 to 2007

Total
07 Pats
01 Rams
00 Titans
04 Pats
04 Steelers
02 Bucs
04 Colts
05 Colts
07 Colts 8th

Through 16 weeks the 07 Colts were 6th since 2000

Offense
07 Pats
04 Colts
06 Colts
02 Cheifs
00 Rams
00 Colts
04 Cheifs
07 Colts 8th
01 Rams
03 Cheifs
05 Colts

07 Colts 8th through 16 weeks

my blog http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com/

by shake n bake on Jan 3, 2008 4:49 PM EST up reply actions

BTW

DVOA should be adjusted for last game sit-outs. Counting a game that means nothing to a team like it was a normal game with all 22 starters on the field is ridiculous. And did anyone notice that Manning has put three teams into the Top 10 of total DVOA, and four into the Top 10 in offensive DVOA, while Brady has only lead this team to one spot on each, excepting the one 2004 campaign which was on the back of his defense(wow, that's surprising). Oh well, it's just stasts you know ;-)

by Bullard47 on Jan 3, 2008 4:42 PM EST reply actions