Reply With Quote
Bruschi WTF
So he thinks Colts should have won that game for perfection?
He should remember how he felt about losing the superbowl after going undefeated.
The only Patriots loss that season, but the worst one.
http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nfl...edy&id=4775238
"Our goal wasn't a perfect season."
Those were the words of Indianapolis Colts coach Jim Caldwell on Sunday after his team played the New York Jets.
Mission accomplished then.
With quarterback Peyton Manning on the sideline for most of the second half, the Colts lost to the Jets 29-15 at Lucas Oil Stadium. The manner in which Indianapolis' pursuit of a perfect season ended was disappointing.
Having been a member of the 2007 New England Patriots team that completed the regular season 16-0, I expected more from an Indianapolis team that I thought would go for an undefeated season. I was actually rooting for the Colts to make a run for perfection.
Manning will more than likely own every quarterback record known to man by the time he's done, so why shouldn't he be the one to complete a season with a 19-0 record?
There's one problem, though. Manning didn't seem to want it either. Just like his head coach, he seemed to be favoring the decision to rest.
My question is: Rest for what? The playoffs?
The Colts already have a first-round bye. That is the time to rest.
There aren't many times in your life when you have a chance to do something that has never been done before. When you are faced with a challenge like that, my feeling is that you embrace it and see if you've got what it takes to conquer it.
That's the way we felt in New England. And yes, we lost the Super Bowl, but let me be clear: We lost the Super Bowl because the New York Giants played better than we did that day. It was not because we were tired and needed more rest.
Maybe Caldwell, being a rookie head coach, didn't want to shoulder the burden of being the coach of the team that surpassed the 1972 Dolphins. Yes, surpassed, because 19-0 in this day and age would be more celebrated than a 17-0 record 37 years ago.
I didn't see much disagreement from the Colts players on the sideline when they were pulled out of the game either. Manning did look like he wanted to play, but looking like it and telling your coach that you're playing (e.g., Brett Favre) are two different things. Maybe the players didn't want the pressure either.
I understand that they are trying to win the Super Bowl and they have decided that resting gives them the best chance. But I always thought the offseason was the time for rest.
Here's the reality: Some teams don't just play for championships, they play to be the best there has ever been. Others are just satisfied with doing what's required. The Colts decided that resting is more important than making a run at history. They are telling us that what they have done up to this point in the season is good enough. They are satisfied with home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. 19-0? No big deal. History? Didn't want it.
Should the Indianapolis Colts go on to win the Super Bowl, do you celebrate them or wonder: What if they did want it?
Tedy Bruschi played 13 seasons for the New England Patriots and is a member of the franchise's 50th anniversary team.
Bruschi WTF
So he thinks Colts should have won that game for perfection?
He should remember how he felt about losing the superbowl after going undefeated.
The only Patriots loss that season, but the worst one.
The only thing that matters is a championship. Everything else is irrelevant, and Bruschi should know that.
And others with doing what's illegal.
Bruschi really shouldn't have said that.
I don't think everything else is irrelevant. Not at all.
The chance to go 19-0 and be considered the greatest single team ever is more relevant than just winning a Super Bowl. It's got alot more pressure attached to it, yes, but it's a bigger reward.
Winning the SB may be the ultimate goal, but when you have a chance to make history, why not go for it? It's like just because the Patriots tried and failed, it means that going 16-0 is some sort of death sentence to your championship aspirations.
Right now, if the Colts win the Super Bowl, they'll just be 1 of 43 random teams that did the exact same thing. If they had the courage to go for 19-0, they could have stood out as something bigger and better.
And he can deny this all he wants, but if New England rested the starters against the Giants week 17 and didn't give the Giants pick up a ton of confidence by making them realize they can compete with a 16-0 team at full strength (which also gave them a game to learn about all of New England's weaknesses and how to attack them), and entered the playoffs 15-1 instead of 16-0, they would have won every playoff game by multiple possessions. I'm not saying they were wrong to go for 19-0, just saying that doing so probably cost them a superbowl.
That didn't have to do with it. If anything, with a 15-1 record there might have been a hangover due to the loss, meaning they might have lost to San Diego in the AFC Championship.
Resting starters in Week 17 wasn't going to prevent Brady from getting his ankle ed up against the Chargers. It wasn't going to prevent the Patriots O-Line from getting raped by Justin Tuck. It wasn't going to prevent the single most incredible/fluke play in football history from happening.
Another misconception is that it gave the Giants some sort of confidence from almost winning in Week 17. The Giants were already rolling for a good 2-3 weeks before that game.
Difference of opinions. I'm not necessarily saying they would have been a better playoff team at 15-1, moreso that them going full force against the Giants and almost losing week 17 gave the Giants some sort of unbeatable swagger. If I were Belichick I would have done the same thing, no one knew the Giants would become an unstoppable force because they ALMOST stopped New England from 16-0.
I wouldn't call it "rolling", they were 3-2 in the 5 weeks leading up to that game. You can't deny that that game gave them confidence.
Bruschi can go himself. There was a sick part of me these last few weeks that was really praying for the Colts to just lose one game somewhere along the line to take the pressure off them. Now that it's happened I feel a little better.
19-0 would've been cool but the Colts losses to the Chargers the last two years has clearly been due to injury, and obviously they don't want that to happen again. I support throwing in the towel this game if it means skull ing San Diego somewhere down the line.
Brah, who was the one saying "I can't wait to see the Colts go 19-0" on XBL?
I disagree but that is what makes message boards fun.You make history by winning a le. We agree on the ultimate goal though. IMO, you have to do what you can to insure as healthy of a team as possible for the playoffs. That is what Indy was doing and if I were in there shoes...I would probably do the same.
Just my .02.
Bruschi said he wanted to see the Colts do it. It's not like he's saying it to pick on them.
At this point though, they better win the superbowl for their sake to avoid embarrassment. In New England's case I think going for it hurt them, not sure about the Colts. The media started talking about 19-0 like 3 games into the season with New England and put a huge target on their back, the 19-0 talk with Indy didn't pop up till recently.
Like I said, I wouldn't have rested the starters, this being one of the many reasons. It's conceivable that after all the 16-0 and 19-0 talk not going 16-0 would create tons of disappointment with the sense that they had nothing to play for anymore and they'd feel like their season was over. I'm not one to ever use dumb terms like "the stars were aligned", but it seemed like the week 17 game "aligned the stars" for the Giants to upset New England in the superbowl.
lame take
i was watching the game online
you could clearly see that peyton and wayne and the other starters were pissed and wanted to be on the field, but they obviously knew that they accomplished what they needed to accomplish in the regular season (#1 seed) and that the only thing that matters from here is getting that ring.
Now the question is can the Colts break the #1 seed curse???
Last team from either conference to win it all as a #1 seed were the 2004-2005 Patriots.
I don't understand this fear of playing things out. I know it's football, so the risk of injury is way up within every additional snap. But how do you not want to be immortal? How do you not want to be the coach of a team that's immortal? What do you learn about your mental toughness, resolve, for ude from a "calculated" loss?
The Colts are no less likely to lose in the playoffs now than they were when undefeated, just as they are no more likely to win in the le now than they were when they were undefeated.
Gut check time... everybody is playing for a game/chance that may never come. They now no longer have that rallying cry to gather around and work together towards. Every playoff team is working towards the Super Bowl. Now they are no different. Before, they had extra pressure, sure, but that extra pressure could have hardened them...
I don't know... Being undefeated in the Super Bowl didn't cause the Patriots to lose. They lost to a team playing better that specific night. Brady's injury occurred in the playoffs. Saving Brady the final two/three games of the regular season wouldn't have changed that injury's likelihood of occurrence.
You can't get into the "What if?" game... Just play every game to win it. If, at the end of the season you're in a position to do something truly special like go undefeated, embrace the challenge.
Caldwell ed out and played things safe. Maybe it works out, or maybe that loss works to pull the rug out fro under their momentum and motivation and they get bounced early. If you haven't tasted defeat, and know you can't lose, maybe you stay a bit more focus and are a bit more in tune.
I didn't like how they went about it and I sure as didn't like how they set up Painter as the scapegoat.
It didn't make any sense to play them for some meaningless accomplishments and yet yank them for a chance to stay perfect.
And I hope Sanchez throws 10 INTs in the first round because the way they're getting into the playoffs is a complete joke.
The Jets getting in via the mass subs utions (assuming they do get in next Sunday) is just as big a story imo. Imagine if Philly pulled it's starters in their 27-24 last second victory over the Denver Donkeys. Or the Chargers pulling theirs allowing Tenn to get in. Pattycakes allowing JVille could get in. Etc.
Granted, the Colts earned the right to do whatever they wanted to do with their starters. Its not the same as the Chargers, Pattys, or Eagles leaving their starters in because all three of these teams needed to win to keep seeding, Indy did not. With the Colts subbing tho it allowed the Jets a much easier time, just saying.....
I can't remember a situation where a team might get 2nd and 3rd stringers for two straight weeks and gets into the playoffs because of it.
It's bad for the game.
I agree with everything Bruschi said, except for the part about Peyton being "OK" with the decision to pull him. He sure didn't look ok on the sidelines when he was all over Moore.
The Colts weren't getting physically beat up out there. What happened to Caldwell's stance about playing the players unless they were injured?
Stay out there and win the game...go for the whole enchilada.
I'm with Mono...If the Colts win now, they'll just be another team to take the championship. Not that that wouldn't be great...but at least do something to stand apart from the rest.
But going undefeated aside, playing Painter was a joke...and he looked like it. That was embarrassing. That was the worst part about the game.
When did that start to and why does that matter? I ask a question and am really not trying to be snarky or cut anyone down..if that comes across as such..my bad. If Indy wins the le...no one is going to look back in 20 years and say "yeah but they could have gone undefeated" If I was a player and I got that big ass ring, that would be all I need. That is like those who said the Spurs le in 03 was less important because they had 8 losses in the playoffs. IMO, what matters is where you stand at the end, not how you get there. Then again, I am a old schooler with a different set of values and ideas....just my .02but at least do something to stand apart from the rest.
I hear what you're saying, but personally, I disagree.When did that start to and why does that matter? I ask a question and am really not trying to be snarky or cut anyone down..if that comes across as such..my bad. If Indy wins the le...no one is going to look back in 20 years and say "yeah but they could have gone undefeated" If I was a player and I got that big ass ring, that would be all I need. That is like those who said the Spurs le in 03 was less important because they had 8 losses in the playoffs. IMO, what matters is where you stand at the end, not how you get there. Then again, I am a old schooler with a different set of values and ideas....just my .02
Those players looked PISSED to be on the sidelines. There is no way they're feeling good about yesterday's loss today.
I also disagree about not looking back 20 years from now and talking about how they could've gone undefeated. Announcers have a way of dragging things like this back up.
If they go on to win the SB, it'll be like, "YAY! We won...but we could've had the SB and possibly an undefeated season."
It's not as if the Jets won that game straight up playing against the Colts starters. There will always be that "what-if" factor now.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
