North American
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Dec 09
00:17
Joined:
Date Joined:
22 Jun 02
Personally I just don't understand this decision. Of course the objective is to win the Superbowl, but going 16-0 is arguably a better achievement as it happens far less often.
They get a bye week to rest anyway so it is debatable whether an extra 20 minutes' rest, 3 weeks ahead of their first playoff game, would make any difference to their playoff odds. If I was a Colts fan who paid hundreds of dollars to take my family to the game yesterday I would feel really let down.
What do others think?
They get a bye week to rest anyway so it is debatable whether an extra 20 minutes' rest, 3 weeks ahead of their first playoff game, would make any difference to their playoff odds. If I was a Colts fan who paid hundreds of dollars to take my family to the game yesterday I would feel really let down.
What do others think?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 28
|
By:
What if Manning or another top starter got hurt in that game?
|
|
By:
Agree, the Superbowl is the big aim, but they had such a big unbeaten run and the idea of going 16-0 must have been in their minds.
Obviously if Manning took a big hit and was out for the rest of the season everyone would be on his back, so you can understand why he took him out, but I would have kept them in for longer and gone for it |
|
By:
the thing that always makes me laugh is that the important people (the O line) never seem to get rested and they do most of the hard work
not that hard throwing a ball about every sunday stupid decision to pull your QB imho |
|
By:
But what is the chance of Manning getting hurt in the 3rd or 4th quarter of one game? Surely you can take that risk?
|
|
By:
did anybody even lay a finger on manning the whole game? i cant remember the defense getting anywhere near him. 10,000/1 on him getting injured.
|
|
By:
I don't understand one thing. Id he couldn't be risked in the 3rd or the 4th quarter when the game was on the line, then why start him. Play a proper match for more than half the match and then pull him. Silly.
I agree with the above poster. The offensive/defensive lines are the most important thing about any team. You give Manning, Jason Campbell's offensive line and he is not 14-1 I can tell you! |
|
By:
why take a risk when you don't have to ? rest everytime for me as the 16-0 can always have holes picked in it anyway for people that bothered.
|
|
By:
The most ridiculous coaching move i can remember.
|
|
By:
I won't touch a futures bet on Indy for FEAR of Manning going down. New England won em all and lost the big one.
Buyer beware fellas. |
|
By:
have the bengals anything to play for this week ?
|
|
By:
Why fear manning goes down? He is one of the least sacked QB's in the league and has a pretty clean bill of health over his career.
Any playoff team is f_cked if their starting QB goes down...what a crazy reason not to place a bet. |
|
By:
His thumb was hurt bad a couple of years ago, not such a crazy reason at those odds imho.
|
|
By:
if the bengals have F.A to play will prob be another game handed to the jets
hopefully ;-) |
|
By:
If New England lose, game will be meaningfull for Bengals.
|
|
By:
ok rink didnt realise that
|
|
By:
I wouldn't rest starters but I think the debate is pretty much neverending. Both sides of the argument have merit and I guess at the end of the day it comes down to owner philosophy.
|
|
By:
One thing about it is, if your the coach (decision maker) you'll have a helluva gambling edge.
|
|
By:
i think a few people were aware it may happen as the opening line got taken down from 7 to -5.
To be fair you could lay a fair amount at 1.3 when manning was pulled from the match,i voiced my opinions on the match thread and the person i felt sorry for the most was the young qb. His first nfl start was greeted by a cacophony of boos and to make matters worse caldwell also removed his main receivers and told the lad to play against the nfls best defence. I've no respect for the coach and you can be sure that this will have an aeffect on his players as well.They won't win the superbowl. |
|
By:
@knight rider.....them wheels are starting to fall off the aston villa ;)
|
|
By:
villa soon be 7th KR....the mug EBOUE will be silent now ;)
|
|
By:
Agree with KR here..Injury can happen at any point in a game or training you cant wrap players in cotton wool. Manning could have been hit in the first half so why start him at all???
Fans have been scr.ewed but really depends what players thought. If they were with the decision then its ok if they were not its going to irritate a few. Whatever Polian says about records etc I would imagine a few of them would have been keen. All the other "records" they now apparently own don't even include playoff games so hardly the stuff of legends. |
|
By:
Gets more terrible the more I think about it.
Even if they win the superbowl (which i now cant see)...they will just be another name on the list in 30 years time...they had a chance to go down as the only 19-0 team ever and bottled it....dumb dumb dumb. |
|
By:
I don't like starters rested unless they're carrying a niggle. 'Rust' has probably done for more teams than injury over the years.
|
|
By:
A couple of points i'd like to make here.
1) It was totally unfair on the paying public, the rest of the teams fighting for play off spots and puts the NFL integrity to shame. 2) Every time Indy have rested there players they have been stuffed in the play offs, the one time they didn't they won it. 3) If Manning starts even one minute of the Buffalo game it makes a total mockery of resting him against injury against the Jets then doesn't it? If you are going to get injured playing against the Jets who hadn't touched him once then the Bills could do the same so why risk even one snap? 4) All the talk of the 16.0 not been as important as winning the SB is total rubbish, I went on the Colts forum on CBS Sports to see what they were saying and all the 'Pro' Manning out posters replying to the Patriots going 16.0 and not winning, all and i mean all failed to mention the actual winner of that years SB. In 5 years time if you talk about 16.0 you know about the Pats, No one will remember the Giants victory as it was just another SB win just like the Steelers last years is but a distant memory. Why do people still talk about the Dolphins '72, its the same with the Pats '07. 5) And lastly considering how much of a rivaly there is between the Colts and the Pats for 'Team of the decade' and just in general between the fans, i would have thought the Colts would have busted a gut to get the Pats record at the very minimum, and the chance to beat it would have been too good to throw up. 6) The timing of the decision was baffling, let the Colts open up a 2 score lead and bench in 4th qt fine, but halfway through the 3rd qt when 5pts in front? I'm pretty sure all the fans who paid a fortune to go see the game appreciated it. As a Pats fan though can i just say a great big THANK YOU. |
|
By:
Pretty sure the fans will have expected it, they said they were going to do it.
|
|
By:
That may as well be Lori but im pretty sure the fans expected the Colts to be winning by a comfortable margin first.
They knew on the run to 14-0 that they had the mighty Pats record in sight and i bet 99.9% of them were rooting for them to equal it at the very least. |
|
By:
Priest well stated, have to agree with point 1 most. This from a league that used to censor "Jimmy the Greek" from giving point spreads on the air, for INTEGRITY reasons.
|
|
By:
no beacuse i needed miami to finish above jets in division. can still happen i guess. miami win jets lose
|