Luke Links: The "Clark Judge Hearts Jim Irsay" Edition

by Brad Wells on Dec 15, 2009 5:31 AM EST in Colts Analysis

Lukelinkslogo_medium

With homefield locked up, the discussion can now truly shift to what the Colts should do the next three games. Prior to last Sunday, it was premature. Now, it makes sense. It also makes sense that Jim Caldwell addressed the subject of this Thursday's game against the Jaguars, and ONLY this Thursday's game against the Jaguars. It keeps with the theme of "one game at a time," which is what Caldwell (and former head coach Tony Dungy) sells to this football team.

Here are the links:

Clark Judge at CBS Sports writes a well-deserved "fluff" piece on Colts owner Irsay, calling him the "block that Colts' winning engine is built on.
Why did Denver Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels seem to stubbornly defend his rather silly decision to defer the ball to the Colts after winning the opening coin toss?
ESPN's Paul Kuharsky seems to very much want Peyton Manning to clinch MVP Thursday against the Jaguars.

John Oehser continues to do the yeoman's work, scripting the highlights from last night's Bill Polian show.
I very often enjoy 18to88's Horse Sense.
With the Colts coming to town, the Jaguars game will not be blacked out locally in the city of Jacksonville.
NFL Network's Mike Martz and Warren Sapp "debate" the Colts and Saints and how they might rest starters down the stretch.
When the 2009 season ends, Jim Irsay will probably make Peyton Manning the highest paid player in the NFL.
Yahoo! Sports' Shutdown Corner weighs in on the Colts playing starters this Thursday against the Jaguars.
And finally, NFL.com's Vic Carucci breaks down the current AFC playoff picture.

Tweet Comment 44 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Something about our defense this year

Excuse me, but their SWAG is crazy right now. 4th and 1, 3rd and 1, long, short, whatever they’re knocking guys back. Tackles are blowing into the backfield with penetration I haven’t seen from our interior linemen in forever it seems

I know we’ve been down this 13-0 road before, but something feels very different this year

by LBizZLE on Dec 15, 2009 5:41 AM EST reply actions

Our defense is fierce

There aren’t THAT many new guys. More stout in the interior, more agressive line backers. I get the feeling guys like gary Bracket have waitied their entire careers to be turned loose on the quarterback.

by naptown_ninja on Dec 15, 2009 9:29 AM EST up reply actions

Definitely different

When did we ever stop people on fourth and short before? This year, we know Peyton doesn’t have to win the game by scoring hugely every game, we can rely on our defense to keep the score low..

An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing...

by bluegirl on Dec 15, 2009 6:05 AM EST reply actions

If Peyton wins MVP this season I’ll be shocked.

"Yea, verily, we shall overcome thy pathetic attempts at defense, thou jelly-livered knave! Talk not of thy smack to me, for I shall wedge mine booted foot nine furlongs up thy ass, bitch! Canst thou dig it??"

by KingRichard on Dec 15, 2009 6:53 AM EST reply actions

I'll second that feeling

"If me and King Kong went into an alley, only one of us would come out. And it wouldn't be the monkey."
"I don't really trust a sane person."
"I never met a man I didn't want to fight." The one and only Lyle Alzado

by TRDean on Dec 15, 2009 7:38 AM EST up reply actions

I'll third it

"The critics can criticize but we're the crème dele crème,
Me and P-Dela we blend what they're calling the standard,
Still standing while they're screaming when will it end?"
- Standing Still, Hilltop Hoods

by AussieColtsFan on Dec 15, 2009 7:50 AM EST up reply actions

+1

Brees is statistically better in almost every category and has an undefeated team. Unless they choke and the Colts keep rolling with Manning dominating, I don’t see it.

by yellowsnow on Dec 15, 2009 7:53 AM EST up reply actions

Don't forget

Saints and Brees have played a cupcake schedule, especially in their division (which is awful). That might sway voters.

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 Brad Wells on Dec 15, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions

What does their schedule have to do with anything?

by KingRichard on Dec 15, 2009 9:42 AM EST up reply actions

KR...I can't believe this...

but I totally agree with you…

This isn’t college and the BCS…this is the NFL!! Schedule has nothing to do with it, and it shouldn’t.

by TRDean on Dec 15, 2009 9:51 AM EST up reply actions

you don't think award voters should consider the level of competition a player's faced????

seriously?

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

It's shocking how much can slip your perception

Even your eyes lie

by shake n bake on Dec 15, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions

No...not in the NFL...

I mean come on…all I hear you guys say (BBS, et. al.) is that this is the NFL. You don’t blow teams out every week…you take wins as you can get them. Its not like Brees has padded his stats agains small conference teams like in college ball. When looking at schedule you can’t take that into consideration. If you do basically you are saying that sorry you can’t be the MVP since your team has not played tough enough teams. Too much gray area there.

by TRDean on Dec 15, 2009 10:42 AM EST up reply actions

I'm not saying a bad schedule should disqualify a player

but if one player faces a tougher slate of opponents than another they should be expected to perform at a higher level.

If two players had identical stats, records, etc, but there was a clear difference in the quality of opponent they faced on average, would you be torn about who to vote for?

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

It's shocking how much can slip your perception

Even your eyes lie

by shake n bake on Dec 15, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions

Shake, not only that, but they PROBABLY also look at other mitigating factors like

his surrounding cast, overcoming hardships, new coach/coordinator, etc.

Brees has a top running game, Manning, not so much.
Manning has a proven pro bowl WR and a PB-quality TE. Brees has… Colston, I guess (has he made the PB?)
Manning has had a musical chairs situation on the OL at RG and both tackles. Not sure about Brees.
Last year Manning was among the most-hit, but least-sacked QBs—that says a ton about his ability to tough it out, and throw the ball before taking the sack (or fumbling like Kurt Warner last night!).

I think they take all these into consideration in the absence of a clear statistical advantage. And the stat gap is pretty small right now, but likely to grow the next few weeks. :-(

I think we can all agree that those “mitigating factors” (run game, bad OL, early injury rust) contributed to Manning winning last year over guys with better stats, like Rivers. So why wouldn’t SoS factor in as well? If they do their homework, the voters should not only look at SoS, but at the quality of the passing D’s each man has faced. Like the 2000 Colts and 2003 Chiefs, a 10-win team looks impressive, but if it’s D is porous, the win and stats against them count just a little less… I don’t know if either QB has faced a team like that and run roughshod (Pats/Titans, cough cough) this year, but I hope it’s part of the equation.

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Dec 15, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions

Schedule

Padding stats against bad teams does not make one an MVP if another guy (Manning) has similar stats (Manning) and has played tougher competition (Manning) and his team is currently undefeated against the competition.

by Brad Wells on Dec 15, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions

First of all...

are you saying that Brees is padding stats? Jeez…he is not Brady and the Pats. If Brees wins the MVP, I wouldn’t have a problem with it at all. Like Manning, I would rather win the Lombardy Trophy.

by TRDean on Dec 15, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions

Agree completely

by coltsfanawalt on Dec 15, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions

Answer

No, he isn’t stat padding just to do it. However, if his “better numbers” are against inferior teams, how does that make him a better player than Manning?

Again, the criteria for the MVP is that he must be the best player in the NFL, and his team must be entering the playoffs.

by Brad Wells on Dec 15, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions

I think being the best player in the league will help Peyton's chances.

I’m not sure if there are many people who think Brees is actually better than Peyton, but there are probably people that think he’s having a better season.
It would be close I’m sure, but if it ended today I wouldn’t be betting on Peyton.
I hope that changes, a 4th MVP sounds really nice.

by yellowsnow on Dec 15, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions

Also don't forget

Brees has a lot more turnovers than Manning does.

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

by coltsfan723 on Dec 15, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

Nothing silly about deferring

I would love it if the Colts deferred every time. I have huge faith in their ability to adjust at halftime and I love seeing the results. If we’re down at halftime, I want the first possession to start the comeback. If we’re ahead at halftime, I want the first possession to help put the game away.

Yeah it sucks if you defer and the other team finds the endzone right away. But if being down by seven points is really such a problem, your chances of winning probably weren’t that good anyway.

"The best defensive player is the sideline." - Trevor Pryce, on how to stop Peyton Manning

by szquirrel on Dec 15, 2009 8:21 AM EST reply actions

If your defense is leaky....

like Belichick’s, maybe you’d want to consider trying to get the early lead…

by naptown_ninja on Dec 15, 2009 9:21 AM EST up reply actions

i think i would not like the Colts to defer.

Our defense is better in the 3rd quarter only allowing 17 points all season than our offence, we are really good on offense on 1st ,2 and 4.

Add that we had a lot of first drive TDs and we play best with the lead.

by thebossuzzi on Dec 15, 2009 9:26 AM EST up reply actions

yeah

put in peyton’s hands early and often

by naptown_ninja on Dec 15, 2009 9:49 AM EST up reply actions

Agree with deferring

I’m usually happier when the Colts get the ball to start the second half. As szquirrel points out, the Colts have engineered any number of comebacks with the last possession of the 1st combined with the first possession of the 2nd; and have put games away in that fashion as well. They don’t seem quite as adept at taking advantage of that 1st possession when they get the ball to start. (Or maybe I just don’t notice it as much.)

by Masson on Dec 15, 2009 9:49 AM EST up reply actions

I always defer in Madden

like having the second half kickoff. Then, if your down 3 or 7 at the half, immediately, it is in your control to get right back in that game.

EVH+DLR=BFFr........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on Dec 15, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions

I agree.

Defer and start the second half with the ball.

by coltsfanawalt on Dec 15, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions

playing with the lead

is what allows the colts d to play fast, take more chances, get more pressure, and cause more turnovers. getting that lead on the first possession is smart and efficient.

by naptown_ninja on Dec 15, 2009 9:55 AM EST reply actions

A one score lead in the first quarter ain't much

I seriously doubt that NFL teams make any significant changes to their gameplan when they go down by seven on the first drive. Sometimes the other team scores first. It happens. If a team can’t hang with that, they have larger problems that won’t be fixed by any psychological advantage they might gain from receiving first.

"The best defensive player is the sideline." - Trevor Pryce, on how to stop Peyton Manning

by szquirrel on Dec 15, 2009 10:26 AM EST up reply actions

Yep

by coltsfanawalt on Dec 15, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions

Deferring

Personally I prefer getting the ball to start the 2nd half. The Colts are one of the best teams at scoring at the end of halves so I have confidence in them being able to score at the end of the 1st half and the beginning of the 2nd half. I think our defense is good enough to stop an opponent on their first possession if they get the ball first. It’s the start of the game and everyone’s ampped up. Besides, most teams do not score on their opening possession. During out Super Bowl run we kicked off first. This year we’ve received first most of the time and I can’t argue with the results so far.

by TouchdownMonkey on Dec 15, 2009 10:45 AM EST reply actions

Why don't the Colts defer when win they win the toss then?

Polian was asked on his radio show a week or two ago, and I liked his answer. Sometimes you lose the toss and you start on defense, but GIVEN THE CHOICE, he would take the opportunity to put points on the board. No, a one score lead in the 1st is not much, but if the opposing team never digs out (like tenn, last week, and denver this week), and those one or two scores are the difference in the game… the argument kind of makes itself.

by naptown_ninja on Dec 15, 2009 1:04 PM EST reply actions

It makes sense for the Colts to always try and start on offense. We're a better team when playing with a lead.

I didn’t think Denver’s decision was so poor. Their defense is old, they play better in the first half than second half. They’re the better unit for Denver. Get them out there playing. They don’t want to go on offense first when the crowd is still all pumped. Colts offense and how it quiets the crowd kind of takes the crowd a little out of the game.

It’s not a big thing either way, but I didn’t think it was some boneheaded move.

by diagenesis on Dec 15, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions

The Clark Judge Article

Can anybody help here:

He said: “Polian tells a story of the 2003 draft and how the Colts were torn on two players in the first round. One was an unspecified defensive player whom Dungy wanted and the other was Clark.”

Come on, that is just killing me! Who who who was a mid-late 1st round draft pick on D that year that would fit our system?

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Dec 15, 2009 1:06 PM EST reply actions

Here's who it could be

William Joseph – DT – Miami, FL
Andre Woolfolk – CB – Oklahoma
Nick Barnett – MLB – Oregon St. (He’s definitely possible)
Sammy Davis – CB – Texas A&M
Asomugha
Tyler Brayton – DE – Colorado
Some others…

Who I think it was: EJ Henderson, who was taken 40th overall. It certainly could have been Asomugha, but I’m doubting it. He’s a cover corner, not a Tampa 2 corner.

Creator and developer of the Winning Stats.

by mgrex03 on Dec 15, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions

Asomugha played safety his first year or two with oakland so that may be what he was projected as, and coveted as by the colts. No clue if that’s the case but definitely possible.

by SilentRat on Dec 15, 2009 2:28 PM EST up reply actions

not to mention

he is a well-spoken, upstanding citizen (his current team notwithstanding)

oh – and look at this – he went to Cal ;-)

How can you not love a team that does this?

by LovinBlue on Dec 15, 2009 4:48 PM EST up reply actions

(rolls eyes)

"I am in favor of censorship ‐ not against what is supposed to be sexy or dirty, but against what is idiotic." -Jean Renoir

Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Finals suck.

by Cassieper on Dec 17, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions

The deferring is a non issue to me

It depends on the character of your team. A team like the Colts wants to get the ball first and go down and score immediately to take a lead and put pressure on them from the start, as Naptown_ninja (and Polian) said. But a team with a strong D and mediocre O – the Broncos – have a better chance to make an early statement and control the game from the start if the D gets a quick stop and gives the O the ball with good field position. Plus then they can still start the 2nd half with the ball, likely getting that back to back possession advantage.

And the Broncos could very well have changed the game during that middle portion when their D finally did step up. It just happened that the Colt D played pretty well too. Except for the Marshall parade, anyway.

No problem at all with the decision/thinking. It just didn’t work out for them at all.

by willyduer on Dec 15, 2009 1:08 PM EST reply actions

The Colts should always try to defer at home

The crowd is always loud and intense at the start of the game, its a great time to send the defense out there.

Conversely, at the start of the 3rd quarter there are thousands of fans that aren’t in their seats yet. Lots of people are still coming back from the bathroom, the concession stands or a smoke break. If the visiting team has the ball first in the 2nd half they’ll get a possession without the full brunt of the crowd noise.

by TheNoodleMan on Dec 15, 2009 1:12 PM EST reply actions

One reason the Colts are 13-0 is third-quarter defense. After shutting the Broncos out in the third quarter Sunday, the Colts have allowed 17 points in the period this season.

That’s 17 points the entire season. That’s about 1.3 points per game. Basically, we make really good halftime adjustments.

by diagenesis on Dec 15, 2009 2:00 PM EST reply actions