LOL @ Colts

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nomadfan. Show nomadfan's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    No luck for Luck tonight.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    Didn't you hear? Andrew Luck is the greatest to ever play the game, and it's only a matter of time before we all see it! Still waiting......................................

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from CHAMPSXLVIII. Show CHAMPSXLVIII's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    The colts should stop trading high round draft picks for mediocre players - what fools

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    Out of all QB's under 28... I take Luck to be honest.  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rodimus77. Show Rodimus77's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    Last week he was all over the forum acting as if the ponies had won the Superbowl...where you at now UD? Oh I know, you are somewhere still crying about '03 and '04

     

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    I actually think the Colts have a ton of upside. Choosing Luck over Manning was the right move. This team will be a contender for years to come. The Pats had an ugly road loss last week against an inferior team so it's not like the Pats fan base has much reason to brag. The Pats and Colts both beat an undefeated NFC super bowl contender this year so both teams are legit in my book.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jaytftwofive. Show jaytftwofive's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    Why do the Colts have so much trouble with the Chargers 07,08.....??? And yet the Chargers always had trouble with the Jets..04,09

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from CHAMPSXLVIII. Show CHAMPSXLVIII's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Underpants was on here all cocky today.  Their offense couldn't even score a TD vs SD.

    Colts allowed a bunch of yards on the ground, too. 

    [/QUOTE]

     

    LOL - cocky??  my god you've got a warped sense of reality.  Thanks for proving it every day.  BTW my comments regarding the colts were about the defense not the offense.  Remember when Belichick would allow yards but not points.  That was back in the day when they were winning SB's.  I am sure you didn't mind it then, did you? 

    Colts are only 1+ year removed from a 2-14 season.  They are 4-2 with a couple of quality wins.  They definitely need to work on their offense, but their defense is keeping them in games.  I am encouraged.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The other funny part of this is Underpants saying his team allowed fewer points than the Pats earlier today BEFORE his team played in Week 6 like a troll sneak.

    After Week 6:

    Pats - 97

    Colts - 98

    lmao

     [/QUOTE] 

    Now you can claim 2nd best Russ - by 1/6th of a point per game.  LOL.  hi five.  hi five.

    Of course, Indy has played better offenses than NE.  indy 8,13,14,16,28,32 (avg rk 18.5); ne 7,12,17,23,29,31 (avg  rk19.8).  NE opponents avging 20.7 pts per game.  Indy opponents avging 21.1 pts per game. 

     

    maybe indy still does have the 2nd best defense.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Rodimus77's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Last week he was all over the forum acting as if the ponies had won the Superbowl...where you at now UD? Oh I know, you are somewhere still crying about '03 and '04

     

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

    [/QUOTE]

    I was.  And I will again.  You conveniently forgot that I said I thought the colts were not that great.  Thus, wins against a team like Seattle (undefeated at the time were big).  Did you forget how much this board celebrated sunday- like you'd won the superbowl.  selective memory no doubt. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually think the Colts have a ton of upside. Choosing Luck over Manning was the right move. This team will be a contender for years to come. The Pats had an ugly road loss last week against an inferior team so it's not like the Pats fan base has much reason to brag. The Pats and Colts both beat an undefeated NFC super bowl contender this year so both teams are legit in my book.

    [/QUOTE]

    +1 - but I'll give the pats this.  They are much better on the offensive line.  In general, their defensive unit is better, too, I think - although I have been impressed with the colts and I was impressed with the way they managed to keep SD out of the end zone 3 times in the red zone.  That said, they've got to do better than just keep a team out of the end zone.  SD dominated the TOP by almost 2:1.  Some of that is on the offense definitely.  Colts could have used Austin Collie last night.  Everyone dropped passes.  Awful.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jaytftwofive. Show jaytftwofive's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    Can we be objective here? Give the Colts credit for being a contender 2 years removed from 2-14. We have to give credit where credit is due.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Underpants was on here all cocky today.  Their offense couldn't even score a TD vs SD.

    Colts allowed a bunch of yards on the ground, too. 

    [/QUOTE]

     

    LOL - cocky??  my god you've got a warped sense of reality.  Thanks for proving it every day.  BTW my comments regarding the colts were about the defense not the offense.  Remember when Belichick would allow yards but not points.  That was back in the day when they were winning SB's.  I am sure you didn't mind it then, did you? 

    Colts are only 1+ year removed from a 2-14 season.  They are 4-2 with a couple of quality wins.  They definitely need to work on their offense, but their defense is keeping them in games.  I am encouraged.

    [/QUOTE]

    Your finesse RBs and SDs for that matter are a problem. Just saying. 

    Neither your team nor theirs has a downhill style runner which is why each had red zone issues.

    I would be encouraged too with a franchise QB like Luck after  HOFer like Gomer.  Heyward-Bey blows, though.  FLeener was a good find.  Do not like Richardson. Runs too high, can't handle being an every down lead back.

    I actually think your secondary is your strength. Once Wayne retires, that will really hurt and it might be after this season or next.

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with your finesse comment at all.  The colts averaged 4.4 yds per carry with no big runs.  Further and to expose your lack of understanding, the colts were only in the red zone once. 

    the problem the colts had was receivers dropping balls, and Fleenor was the worst offender last night.  He has not come close to living up to his draft position.  Man, you really don't know your football. 

    Finally, the secondary isn't bad, but Greg Toler was abused all night last night which is how SD sustained their drives. 

    next time you need a football education please let me know.  You'll get there, but I recommend laying in the weeds and not commenting until you get it.  You know the saying.  You may be stupid, but why open your mouth and remove all doubt. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Rodimus77's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Last week he was all over the forum acting as if the ponies had won the Superbowl...where you at now UD? Oh I know, you are somewhere still crying about '03 and '04

     

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

    Colts lose!

    [/QUOTE]

    I was.  And I will again.  You conveniently forgot that I said I thought the colts were not that great.  Thus, wins against a team like Seattle (undefeated at the time were big).  Did you forget how much this board celebrated sunday- like you'd won the superbowl.  selective memory no doubt. 

    [/QUOTE]

    What? You were on here saying how impressed you were Indy beat SF and Seattle, tooting your own here all giddy that your team won those games, where there is actually nothing wrong with that.

    Also, your WRs, like Reggie Wayne, had drops last night.  Did you not come on here after our game and say how our WRs had some drops?

    What comes around goes around.  I would suggest you keep your trap shut a bit more, wouldn't you?

    [/QUOTE]

    I was impressed.  If I wasn't, then I wouldn't have been tooting my horn.  Get it?  No? your problem.  I would not get giddy if all the colts did was meet expectations.  They were not expected to win either game. 

    And yes, I did say your team had drops.  Other than Collie.  The colts unfortunate thing is that all of our players had drops including Wayne (which is unusual).  We got very very little production from our receivers. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from danemcmenamin. Show danemcmenamin's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    I thought you were a Broncos fan these days UD6?? You sure do an awful lot of talking about a QB who hasn't been with your team for 1 and a half seasons now

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to jaytftwofive's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we be objective here? Give the Colts credit for being a contender 2 years removed from 2-14. We have to give credit where credit is due.

    [/QUOTE]

    Russ is single minded.  He is not even a patriots fan.  He's a belichick fan.  He'll never give credit anywhere but to Belichick.  He makes excuses for negative circumstances and give all praise to belichick for positive ones.  He sees no other value. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to danemcmenamin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I thought you were a Broncos fan these days UD6?? You sure do an awful lot of talking about a QB who hasn't been with your team for 1 and a half seasons now

    [/QUOTE]

    Manning was the reason for Indy's success, and I am grateful for that.  Given the way Denver's D is playing he is also the reason for their success.  I'm not someone who can't appreciate players from other teams like some here.  I am still a colts fan.  Next week, I will be rooting for the colts. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Underpants was on here all cocky today.  Their offense couldn't even score a TD vs SD.

    Colts allowed a bunch of yards on the ground, too. 

    [/QUOTE]

     

    LOL - cocky??  my god you've got a warped sense of reality.  Thanks for proving it every day.  BTW my comments regarding the colts were about the defense not the offense.  Remember when Belichick would allow yards but not points.  That was back in the day when they were winning SB's.  I am sure you didn't mind it then, did you? 

    Colts are only 1+ year removed from a 2-14 season.  They are 4-2 with a couple of quality wins.  They definitely need to work on their offense, but their defense is keeping them in games.  I am encouraged.

    [/QUOTE]

    Your finesse RBs and SDs for that matter are a problem. Just saying. 

    Neither your team nor theirs has a downhill style runner which is why each had red zone issues.

    I would be encouraged too with a franchise QB like Luck after  HOFer like Gomer.  Heyward-Bey blows, though.  FLeener was a good find.  Do not like Richardson. Runs too high, can't handle being an every down lead back.

    I actually think your secondary is your strength. Once Wayne retires, that will really hurt and it might be after this season or next.

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with your finesse comment at all.  The colts averaged 4.4 yds per carry with no big runs.  Further and to expose your lack of understanding, the colts were only in the red zone once. 

    the problem the colts had was receivers dropping balls, and Fleenor was the worst offender last night.  He has not come close to living up to his draft position.  Man, you really don't know your football. 

    Finally, the secondary isn't bad, but Greg Toler was abused all night last night which is how SD sustained their drives. 

    next time you need a football education please let me know.  You'll get there, but I recommend laying in the weeds and not commenting until you get it.  You know the saying.  You may be stupid, but why open your mouth and remove all doubt. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The YPC thing is misleading. I go by what I see.  Trent Richardson himself was averaging well under 4 YPC so far this year and last year.

    Any YPC over 4.0 is derived from your passing offense setting that up. That's like saying Woodhead does that. But, he wouldn't as a lead back.

    Richardson is your defacto lead back, but he's not an effective in between the Tackles runner. Was spoiled at Bama like Reggie Bush was at USC. Same thing.

    Your last paragraph is litterd with anger and embarrassment. I don't blame you. You came on here yesterday talking about your D allowing fewer points and our WRs having too many drops.

    Your team has allowed MORE points, had more drops than we did AND you lost.

    Pretty bad little day for you yesterday, huh? And, Greg Toler abused doesn't mean your secondary is great. I didn't say it was great. I said as a whole, your secondary is the best part of your team next to your QB and Reggie Wayne.  That should tell you how overrated your team is in the early part of this season.

    Film is out.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ah - there's the problem.  You can't see anything.  Nothing.  Nada. Zilch.  You are blinded by your Belichick Bliss. 

    You have no idea what Indy's offense is about these days.  None.  Go read my friend.  Study up.  Then we can talk. 

    No response to the belichick bend don't break methods, huh?  No response to your incorrect red zone comment, either, huh?  Or being wrong about Toler, huh?  I guess when you are wrong, you are wrong.  Best to just walk away from that as you did.  change the subject, right? 

    You are not very good at this. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from magicalhobo. Show magicalhobo's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    The ponies must have missed the beef.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jaytftwofive's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we be objective here? Give the Colts credit for being a contender 2 years removed from 2-14. We have to give credit where credit is due.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pagano factor last year.  Nice job to rally around that but I also think Luck was a pro ready QB as a senior at Standford.  They're still in transition as they overachieve. Question is, can they improve as the season goes or will the more quality teams, even the 4 games left with Ten and Houston in their division bring them back down to reality a bit..

    Keep in mind, they were not really a 2-14 team. They tanked it for Luck.

    [/QUOTE]
    But if the Pagano factor is gone this year and they are still leading their division, have 2 wins over superbowl contenders and are 4-2 what does one attribute their success to? 

    Clearly your lack of football understanding and bias lead you to suggest that the colts weren't a 2-14 team in 2011.  Not only did their record show it, but after that season their roster was turned over by more than 70% and less than 20% are left today.  The colts have only 4 starters (18%) left from 2 years ago.  They only had one probowler that year and he is no longer on the team.  But yeah, they weren't a 2-14 team, and Belichick didn't think his taping methods were against the rules. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jaytftwofive's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we be objective here? Give the Colts credit for being a contender 2 years removed from 2-14. We have to give credit where credit is due.

    [/QUOTE]

    Russ is single minded.  He is not even a patriots fan.  He's a belichick fan.  He'll never give credit anywhere but to Belichick.  He makes excuses for negative circumstances and give all praise to belichick for positive ones.  He sees no other value. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Your team sucked for luck.  We all know it.  It was not a real 2-14 team.

    [/QUOTE]

    See the post above. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And, what's your point?  Their roster turnover from older, aging players in the last 2 years, means they didn't tank the 2011 season for Luck as they walked from Gomer?

    The premise is, your 2011 Colts team really wasn't a 2-14 kind of team. They wanted to make sure they got the #1 pick.

    FACT

     

    [/QUOTE]

    how'd they intentionally tank the season russ?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: LOL @ Colts

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    PS You could only dream of the football knowledge I have, Underpants. You seem to not realize that fact.

    [/QUOTE]

    This response doesn't surprise me.  You are nothing if not blindly self-assured.  The bad thing is that has nothing to do with being right, and when you are wrong (which is common with you) it just makes you look all the more idiotic. 

    Don't take it from me, though, there are dozens on this board that feel the same way about you. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share