I mean the franchise is built around Peyton but that’s not too say Sorgi or Painter couldn’t step it up and win more than 6 games. It also depends on if any other veteran QB’s came in and helped out. Too many variables to consider. MSM constantly underrates our talent because Manning is the brightest light.

I honestly think that the Colts would be in that 6-10, 5-11 realm w/o Manning. He’s just that important. Look I know that the Defense has good players on it yet they are already stay on the field a lot with Manning at Quarterback. With Sorgi as QB, or Painter (Prays we never see Painter with starting offense), the defense would be on the field even LONGER. With running attacks like the ones in Jacksonville and Tennessee and the explosive offense of the Texans in our division, I’d say we’d be lucky to win ONE of those games. Look I know Sorgi has been effective when he’s played, yet the majority of the time that he plays he is playing against back-ups. The lone exceptions was against a terrible Cardinals team in 2005. Look if Manning wasn’t playing, no one would fear our offense at all. They’d simply roll coverage to Wayne and Clark and make Collie and Garcon beat them. W/o Manning throwing them the ball, I don’t know if I like those odds. Plus our running game is already bad with Manning at QB and defenses playing the pass. Imagine how bad it would be w/o Manning. Look our defense could win the game for us if they draw a favorable matchup. (i.e. a run first offense with an inexperienced and/or terrible QB) Yet the only way we would be able to win 8 or 9 games is if the defense can play at the level of like the 2008 Steelers Defense. Basically w/o Manning, you can pretty much put us down as picking somewhere in the Top 10 come Draft Day. But let us hope we never have to see that.

Most people were saying the Colts would be 3-13 (kind of an overstatement) without Manning during his MVP performing season, including some people here in this blog. I personally think they would be a little below the .500 mark. Just think about all the close games or 4th qtr comebacks the Colts had with Manning this season. No disrepect to the Defense who played really good this year, but they are a bend but don’t break defense who relies on the Offense at times.

You rocked my world yesterday with that article about Manning and saying eff the haters, and then today you have proven you are blind. Sure, our team would be great on defense still, but offensively we’d be near nothing (of course this is assuming we had Sorgi or Painter playing QB). I’d say 4-12.

with an average QB I think they’d be a mediocre team. With a all time great QB they are on one the league’s greatest runs.

I agree with Eli.

Manning goes down (awful thought, makes me cringe). A good veteran QB like Warner or Favre comes in to help. What then?

There are some terrible teams in the NFL right now. Last year, without Manning, playing the NFC West and AFC East? I could see going anywhere from 7-9 to 9-7, depending on some breaks here or there.

Until manning retires, after having broken all of Favre’s records.

If the Jets can make the AFC title game with Mark Sanchez and Braylon Edwards, there’s no reason to believe Sorgi couldn’t do the same or even better with Wayne & Clark.

p.s. Some of you guys dump on Sorgi way too much. Look at his career stats. He’s not the worst option out there. At the very least, you have to admit that he’s got to be miles better than starting Alex Smith or JaMarcus Russel.

1-15 without Peyton.

Sorgi only needs to lead your team to averaging 20 points per game. Besides the last two weeks when you rested starters, your defense only gave up around 17 points per game. With all of the Pro Bowlers on your squad and a focus on the running game, I’m sure you could pull that off. But then again, your team would have to recognize that Sorgi is not Manning and that they actually do have to run the ball to eat up clock. If your team doesn’t recognize that, then the simpletons are right and the Colts probably would be worse than a 6-10 team. You wouldn’t be as bad as, say, 1-15, but you would definitely lose more games to average teams.

Probably 6-10.

Because you assume that, without Manning, that the other QB would be bad. Sure, nobody is as good as Manning, but if the Colts didn’t have Manning they’d have a different QB who might be good too. Who knows? Brought up with a better team, maybe QBs who failed with other teams or who are mediocre QBs elsewhere would prosper in Indy. Or, perhaps Jim Sorgi as a starter would actually be a good fit, just not as good as Manning.

I’d say, sans Manning, Colts are 10-6 consistently, a perennial wild card team and often contender for the division.

Next man up doesn’t say much at the QB position. Sorgi could get 6 wins with the starting line up, maybe a couple more…but Painter, Yikes!!!!!

With Garrard they’re probably a 7 win team. With Sorgi probably a 5 win team, and with Painter… well… let’s just hope we never have to see Painter play in a starting role.

You’ll find out in 5-6 years from now. :)