Reasons to feel very good about the 2009 Colts

…only because guys like Caldwell, Christensen and Metzelaars aren’t proven commodities in their (possible) new positions. Regardless, it’s the long -term future rather than the short term that could validate guys like Don Banks and Matt Bowen. Dungy, Moore, Mudd are all great teachers. The guys who have learned from them are still on the roster. It’s the guys who haven’t been drafted yet that, if anything actually represents a great danger, we have cause to worry about, because they may not have Moore and Mudd, and won’t have Dungy, to coach them up.

That said, I’ve been impressed with Caldwell, Christensen has obviously garnered some respect outside West 56th, and I believe if Metzelaars was being groomed for the job by Mudd and Polian, he must be the right guy. I can’t help but keep remembering that in the season after Dungy left his last job, all his former players did was win a Super Bowl. Which is why this year, at least, we don’t need to be anxious about the bottom falling out, though I doubt the new coaches would be the cause of it in any case.

The fact of Don Banks picking the Colts to miss the playoffs doesn’t necessarily bother me. As LukeNukem said, Banks was probably given an assignment and followed through on that. Unfortunately sportswriting has become more about the reaction than actual analysis, so I have no idea whether Banks even really believes what he writes. That might explain his lack of any logic.

Still, that lack of logic is what truly bothers me. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was told to pick three AFC teams to miss the playoffs. Given that situation, smart people can legitimately disagree about whether the Colts would be one of those three. But although he selected the Colts, Banks doesn’t give any legitimate reasons for doing so.

His first bit of evidence is the law of averages. The less said about this the better. Yes, regression to the mean is an observed phenomenon, but so is inertia. So is causality. Winning and losing in the NFL is not a matter of chance – to believe otherwise you’d have to believe that the Indianapolis and Detroit franchises are on par, and have an equal shot at winning the Super Bowl next year. (Yes, there are forces such as the draft, salary cap, etc. that serve to enforce parity, but Polian’s deft mastery of these forces is a large part of the Colts success over the past decade.) Saying that the Colts’ coin will come up tails this time just because it’s come up heads the past six times isn’t satisfactory; since this isn’t a matter of chance you must tell us why the coin will come up tails. (Even if winning were strictly a matter of chance, any mathematician would tell you that previous results have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether your next flip will be heads or tails.)

His next evidence is that the Colts looked old last year. I’ve wracked my brain and I can only think of two players who are legitimately in the second half of their careers, and that’s Manning and Saturday. Both are still playing at an All-Pro level. Marvin is no longer effective, but that’s been true for the past two years and we still made the playoffs each time. The comments prior to mine show that most of you are aware already that the Colts are actually one of the youngest teams in the league. For Banks to not know this is just lazy.

In fact, Banks’ also brings up the laziest argument of all, the departure of Tony Dungy. Caldwell replacing Dungy isn’t exactly like McDaniels replacing Shanahan. Caldwell has been coaching with this team for as long as Dungy. I honestly see this as a non-issue, and I know many Colts fans who are excited to see if Caldwell will bring a little fire and intensity that was missing with Dungy. Of far more pressing concern are the departures of Moore and Mudd, yet Banks’ doesn’t even mention these gentlemen once. Lazy.

Finally, we have the idea that the all-world offense had to cover up the rest of the team’s weaknesses. This is a lazy idea left over from at least several years ago, when we had to win every game 45-35. Anyone watching our team last year would have seen plenty of games where the defense had to bail out the offense, most notably against Houston and Cleveland. And certainly anyone who followed our team last year would hesitate to call our offense all-world. Start with the injuries to the line, add the injuries to Addai, come up with the 31st-ranked rushing attack, and “all-world” is a joke. Consider that the O-line should be largely healthy for this season, and that we just spent a first round pick on a RB, and our offense should only improve next year. But of course, if all you know about the Colts’ 2008 offense is that Peyton won the MVP award, then small wonder you still throw around terms like “all-world”. Again, lazy.

Again, I have no problem if someone genuinely picks the Colts to miss the playoffs, as long as they can adequately defend their position. Banks cannot. If a healthy QB, a new RB, and added depth on defense are enough for him to think that the Patriots will be back in the playoffs, then surely it should be enough for the Colts to remain in the playoffs (stronger division and all).

There are no obvious reasons to say that we won’t make the playoffs. Even if we lose Mudd and Moore, which as you stated Banks didn’t even mention, we will fill those spots from within. It’s much smoother to move someone up from the ranks than to seek outside the organization. It works this way with any business. That is why I am not all that concerned about Caldwell. I’m sure he will make certian changes, bigger D at first thought, but like you said, he may bring some much needed fire to the organization. With Polian at the helm, we get players with the highest of work ethics. That has been true since his arrival, so our players know what is expected of them from the start. While it is true that at some point in time we will have to regress, I can’t see this being the year. 13-3 and a trip to the big show! Go Colts!