Major Harris Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 Super bowl winning teams the last 15 to 20 years have either an elite qb or historic defense. You can go back thru the results and see which of the two is more likely to win a super bowl. Teams with both will win almost every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 I always hate people claiming that colts team was a bad team. They flopped. You don't suddenly go from a perennial playoff team to the worst team in the league in one offseason from losing one player. Patriots showed that when they lost brady. Colts are a soft team that flopped. It's not like they've had the decade of awful that the rams have had, lacking talent at nearly every position. The 2011 colts had many guys who went on to become starters for other teams, the 2011 rams? Not so much. Sorry Bandit, I just don't buy your conspiracy theory. So an entire team conspired before the season to get drummed in the opener and go until December before winning a game just to secure the top spot? It makes no sense. Just what incentive would a random linebacker have to flop and put out bad tape of himself? So the team he may not even be on the following year could benefit from draft position? And you are claiming an entire team had this plan from week one? Sorry that's just crazy logic. Players don't play poorly on purpose, it costs them jobs and millions of dollars. The team behind Brady was excellent, many were 3 time champs. They had a top 10 defense and a competent backup, the Colts had neither. The team behind Manning was not excellent, not even close. When they had a top QB they were good, the one year they did not they stunk. Again showing the value of a great QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 I don't know who said that be he seem's like my kind of drinking buddy! Hail. Yogi Berra said it The quote was later echoed by everyone's favorite color commentator, John Madden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 Yogi Berra said it The quote was later echoed by everyone's favorite color commentator, John Madden. Yogi Bear!? From Yellow Stone National Park!? Well Hell, if it's him and Boo-Boo I'mma drinking with this is gonna' be one HELL of a party! Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 Yogi Bear!? From Yellow Stone National Park!? Well Hell, if it's him and Boo-Boo I'mma drinking with this is gonna' be one HELL of a party! Hail. lol, Yogi Berra the catcher for the New York Yankees. The 50 greatest Yogi Berra quotes http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/09/the-50-greatest-yogi-berra-quotes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 lol, Yogi Berra the catcher for the New York Yankees. The 50 greatest Yogi Berra quotes http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/09/the-50-greatest-yogi-berra-quotes Huh? Never heard of him. Sounds like a Yogi Bear wannabe! Might be Ranger Smith in disguise! I shall read up and educate myself. Starting with the quotes. TY. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 When you get to the fork in the road take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit Rover Blitzer Spy Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 Sorry Bandit, I just don't buy your conspiracy theory. So an entire team conspired before the season to get drummed in the opener and go until December before winning a game just to secure the top spot? It makes no sense. Just what incentive would a random linebacker have to flop and put out bad tape of himself? So the team he may not even be on the following year could benefit from draft position? And you are claiming an entire team had this plan from week one? Sorry that's just crazy logic. Players don't play poorly on purpose, it costs them jobs and millions of dollars. The team behind Brady was excellent, many were 3 time champs. They had a top 10 defense and a competent backup, the Colts had neither. The team behind Manning was not excellent, not even close. When they had a top QB they were good, the one year they did not they stunk. Again showing the value of a great QB So you're of the opinion that the worst team in the league often has 9 guys who leave and are opening day starters for other teams and another 3 guys still playing for the team who are probably hall of famers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 So you're of the opinion that the worst team in the league often has 9 guys who leave and are opening day starters for other teams and another 3 guys still playing for the team who are probably hall of famers? You are what your record says you are and they were terrible collectively regardless of how well some of them improved later. Starting for another team does not necesarily mean you are good, unless you are prepared to argue that Ryan Clark and Tyler Polumbus were good players here. I think I gave a pretty fair rebuttal about your theory that the team laid down. It just doesn't make sense for the reasons I posted. So we are left with the only logical conclussion IMO. The Colts were 2-14 because they sucked. A year later they are 11-5. Luck wasn't the only reason but he clearly was the biggest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit Rover Blitzer Spy Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 You are what your record says you are and they were terrible collectively regardless of how well some of them improved later. Starting for another team does not necesarily mean you are good, unless you are prepared to argue that Ryan Clark and Tyler Polumbus were good players here. I think I gave a pretty fair rebuttal about your theory that the team laid down. It just doesn't make sense for the reasons I posted. So we are left with the only logical conclussion IMO. The Colts were 2-14 because they sucked. A year later they are 11-5. Luck wasn't the only reason but he clearly was the biggest They played terribly, and I think where we differ is if it was due to lack of talent or due to lack of effort. I think we may have differing ideas of what a bad team really is. Bad teams don't have 9 guys that other teams would pencil in as starters down the line. We had 4 in 2011, rams probably had even fewer. Colts may have had the worse record, but from a team building standpoint they weren't nearly in the same quagmire as the rams. Certainly luck helped them, but he's not a +9 win difference, probably not even a +3 win difference over replacement level as we witnessed when Hasselbeck took over this season. Which goes back to monk's point, qb's are important, but they get way too much credit or blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 They played terribly, and I think where we differ is if it was due to lack of talent or due to lack of effort. I think we may have differing ideas of what a bad team really is. Bad teams don't have 9 guys that other teams would pencil in as starters down the line. We had 4 in 2011, rams probably had even fewer. Colts may have had the worse record, but from a team building standpoint they weren't nearly in the same quagmire as the rams. Certainly luck helped them, but he's not a +9 win difference, probably not even a +3 win difference over replacement level as we witnessed when Hasselbeck took over this season. Which goes back to monk's point, qb's are important, but they get way too much credit or blame. Thanks by the way for remaining civil. I have tried too. No actually I had to go back and edit an earlier post once the caffeine wore off and soften it up a bit. We'll just disagree then. I think a good argument could me made that the Colts backup QB situation made them appear worse than they really were. When they trotted out something called Curtis Painter to start the season, then out of desperation signed a very old Kerry Collins off the street, well that really killed any chance. But again it just shows how much the QB can mean to the success/failure of a team IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 There’s been 21 QBs since 2012 that have started 45 or more games. So if their team gives up 25 or more points, there’s only one of those QBs who has actually got a winning record, and it’s just over .500. I’ll let you guys do the research to figure that out. If your team gives up 17 or less than 17 points, all 21 of those guys have winning records. Obviously none of the QBs on the Redskins accumulated that many starts lol...here is how the team did anyway under those two conditions: Skins gave up 25 or more points: Cousins 2 -10 Griffin 5-15 McCoy 0-1 Skins gave up 17 points or less: Cousins 5-1 Griffin 3-2 McCoy 2-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Again the offense plays a big role a lot of the time in the defense giving up points by failing to move the ball, turnovers that set the other team up etc. Is there any question Riggins and the Hogs made it much easier for Petibone's defense by controlling the ball/clock and not turning it over deep in their own territory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 You cannot isolate QB play away from Points Against. This GM doesn't seem to know how actual science works and therefore how meaningless that correlation is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.