NFL Preseason 2015: Packers looking for a good diagnosis and Cris Carter is looking for Lee Majors

[DanteGabriel]

That was a good post, Jace, and a nice deconstruction of the way the talent degraded in the Colts. But I don't think that the talent degradation explains it all. The team went 10-6 in 2010 with Manning, and 11-5 with Luck in 2012. In between, they went 2-14. Does having poor QB play really explain that dropoff? Maybe my perspective is warped from seeing the Pats go 11-5 with Matt Cassel, but other teams, like the Packers, have been able to survive QB injuries and not look like such a dumpster fire as the Colts did in 2011. The Cardinals won plenty of games with their #2 quarterback last year. Sure, you can't find a decent QB option three weeks before the season. But a non-disastrous QB option should have already been on the roster, as the backup. Painter should never have been even the second or third option on that team -- that's indicative of the Colts failing to take the backup position seriously.

 

I'm not saying the team went into 2011 with the agenda to lose games -- I'm saying that as an institution, and as a roster, they accepted defeat at some point early in the season, and maybe that's more damning of them than a deliberate tanking agenda.

[Trebla]

 

 

 

I don't know if the letters you quoted have any significance, but thank you? :)

 TL:DR = Too long: Didn't read. Just me being a smartass. I did read it, tho. ;)

[lancerman]

The thing you have to always consider is that Cassel took a much better team than either of the Colts teams, with an easier schedule, and Cassel was a better QB than the Colts replacement.

Painter was a nobody who didn't belong on the field, taking a weaker team.

The Patriots dropped 5 games without Brady. The Colts dropped 8 without Manning. So the net drop for the Colts was really 3 games. And now we are at, Painter is so much worse than Cassell *who took a much worse KC team to 11-5, that it really becomes negligible.

It wasn't the fact that Manning went down, so much as they had nobody suitable to replace them, when you flipped a rookie in that spot, as good as Luck is, it showed how bad Painter was.

[Jace, Extat]

That was a good post, Jace, and a nice deconstruction of the way the talent degraded in the Colts. But I don't think that the talent degradation explains it all. The team went 10-6 in 2010 with Manning, and 11-5 with Luck in 2012. In between, they went 2-14. Does having poor QB play really explain that dropoff? Maybe my perspective is warped from seeing the Pats go 11-5 with Matt Cassel, but other teams, like the Packers, have been able to survive QB injuries and not look like such a dumpster fire as the Colts did in 2011. The Cardinals won plenty of games with their #2 quarterback last year. Sure, you can't find a decent QB option three weeks before the season. But a non-disastrous QB option should have already been on the roster, as the backup. Painter should never have been even the second or third option on that team -- that's indicative of the Colts failing to take the backup position seriously.

 

I'm not saying the team went into 2011 with the agenda to lose games -- I'm saying that as an institution, and as a roster, they accepted defeat at some point early in the season, and maybe that's more damning of them than a deliberate tanking agenda.

 

Well thank you to all of you for the compliments, I was really unsure about it. I got ready to delete it and make a shorter post a number of times because I didn't like how long it went on.

 

I can completely accept and understand that point of view, Dante. You're absolutely right about the fact that there was no real option at QB2, and as I dug into at length Bill Polian deserved to be fired for his utter incompetence. And as you say, they weren't exactly giving their best effort out there but the Colts were legitimately in Jaguars territory of futility as a team and do you feel like the Jags and Tampa are out there giving 100% all the time? Like I mentioned and like Trickster mentioned the Colts went from having the one of the Triumvirate to having the worst starting quarterback situation in the league, add that to a really  mediocre roster, mix in a useless piece of shit as a head coach, throw in a pinch of a freak talent coming out at QB and you get the 2011 Colts who are accused of tanking.

 

Again, I have to reiterate that if it was a deliberate tanking job I seriously doubt everyone in the organization would have lost their jobs. Knowing what we know after the fallout, the only people who could have been in on such an act would have been Peyton or Irsay. Sure, I suppose Peyton may have deliberately sabataged himself and potentially his career to get out of town after just signing a $90 million contract. I'm just saying it seems unlikely. The other person is Irsay, but why would Irsay fire everyone if he told them to tank? And if the staff knew Irsay wanted them to tank, then when they were suddenly fired I have to imagine that voices would have been heard. Irsay doesn't call the plays. Irsay doesn't personally select every player. So the only reasonable explanation would be that Irsay knew Peyton would get hurt precisely when the next best things (plural) were coming out of college, so he must have personally told Polian to take that Nickleback reject out of Purdue in the 6th round as part of a master plan. Y'know, if that's what you find believable.

 

Or, it was shitty planning by the GM brought on by bloated salaries for aging stars (or Bob Sanders) who didn't make an impact, which lead to a shitty cap situation (the Colts were shedding a LOT of bad contracts in 2012 which lead to all the space they enjoy today), which lead to corners being cut and what's the most steady dependable position on the roster where you've never even needed a backup? QB! You have Peyton Fucking Manning, you don't need a backup. This guy's no Geno Smith wimp, he broke his jaw and was back in the game on the next goddamn play. The guy behind Manning's there to hold pictures for him to look at and go sit down behind the center when the games over and your star QB's getting mentally prepared for a steak at Elmo's. Manning had never missed a game. He had missed 2 snaps his entire career. And fuck Bill Polian for pissing away the talent around a guy who should have been the undisputed best player in the history of the sport.

 

For my part, I love Andrew Luck. I think he's charming with his doofyness, I think he seems like a nice young man, and I love watching him play. But if you think that I or any real fucking Colts fan who actually spent time doing things like writing insanely long comments on a forum thread, or watching ten year old highlights just because, wanted to see Peyton Manning leave, you're out of your mind. Would you have willingly said goodbye to Brady in 2008 in favor of Matt Cassel no, not even Matt Cassel, just a really exciting prospect that hadn't even proven anything at the pro level? Forget that everyone called him the next Peyton Manning. We had THE Peyton Manning.

 

And yes, I remember that there were morons with signs saying 'Suck For Luck' and 'bring us #12' and shit at the games. But you know as well as I that there are an ungodly number of jackasses who claim to be the greatest fan of sport X or team Z and they have no idea what the fuck they're talking about, and those people do make their way into the stadium when no one wants to go to another depressing beatdown except for retards who make stupid fucking signs. 

 

God damn, I need to play some videogames now.

[Tempra]

Hard to be excited for anything right now about the 49ers except Jarryd Hayne. Boy can hit, too.

http://i1375.photobucket.com/albums/ag477/Solace49/Hayne%20BOOM_zpsniafnxjx.gif

[Jaime L]

To bring the topics together Colts tanking is like Deflategate. Yeah there's no smoking gun that tampering went on but Occam's Razor points to both things happening at least to some degree. Not that I'm advocating punishment in either case. Just saying we're all adults here and there are no perfect knight Barristan the Bolds in Pro Football. Everyone's seeking whatever edge they can get so long as there's not a specific rule prohibiting it. (Not that that stops Goodell from punishing players and teams as he sees fit but I digress) 

 

It's generally known in the NBA that organizations can and will tank even if players and coaches generally do not. It's why they have a draft lottery and still even with it are forever looking for further ways to deter this behavior. Why would the NFL be any different? The only thing that keeps teams from demonstrably tanking is the NFL draft is such a crapshoot year to year. But not when we're talking about a once in a generation prospect.  

 

Yes, the Colts were going to be a bad team when Peyton Manning couldn't go but keep in mind they started that year 0-13. And then immediately won two games...but only after already locking up the #1 pick.

 

So yeah they were going to be a bad team, and yes they're insanely lucky in that they've bottomed out as a franchise when the three greatest prospects of my lifetime came out (i.e.: Elway, Manning, Luck) but it's hard for me to believe the organization didn't also grease the skids at the fringes to ensure they locked these up. There's a ton the front office can dictate week to to week in terms of players made available to put a team on the bad side of the razor-thin margin between winning and losing. And honestly, they'd have been stupid not to. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 Great post. I agree that the situations are rather analagous. I'd have to say that it seems a little esaier to do this in the NBA, as there are like 5 times as many games, and each individual game is less important overall. With only 16 games, you're under a much harsher microscope, and your lack of effort is more likely to be complained about or reported, as you are effecting other teams much more. I don't think it's likely that you'd have an entire team of prideful professionals willingly lay down just to get a higher draft pick. That being said, you can see how this could be achieved on the front office level. If an owner or GM demands that a coach play a certain lineup, how many coaches are going to actively resist that pressure?

[DanteGabriel]

I also don't fully buy the "it can't have been intentional because everyone was fired" thing. The Colts coaching staff sucked. They could justifiably have been fired anyway. And Polian -- maybe he wanted to retire from GMing, get a TV job where he'd get paid to whine about the Patriots on camera. Like Jace said, he'd already been failing at his job for a couple of years, could have been on the block already. Irsay could very well have told Polian and Caldwell, "Look, you guys are getting replaced one way or the other. But do this for me, and I'll get you some of Timothy Leary's ashes to smoke, it'll change your paradigms most excellently" and maybe that's enough to create... slippage.

 

And hey, good for you, Colts, you got Luck. This is a run of fortune even greater that San Francisco going from Montana to Young, because Walsh actually traded for Young instead of falling into the right draft spot. But own it that your team was willing to lie down to improve your position. I've embraced the Patriots' Cobra Kai-ness, own that bit of clever weasel-work. Weasels are fantastically interesting animals.

 

Lucky for NFL tankers, draft order is pretty easy to guarantee, unless you get into one of those tiebreakers that's settled by a coin flip. The Celtics shat the bed so hard to position themselves to draft Tim Duncan, and got screwed. Some Boston people are still bitter about that.

[Maithanet]

 Great post. I agree that the situations are rather analagous. I'd have to say that it seems a little esaier to do this in the NBA, as there are like 5 times as many games, and each individual game is less important overall. With only 16 games, you're under a much harsher microscope, and your lack of effort is more likely to be complained about or reported, as you are effecting other teams much more. I don't think it's likely that you'd have an entire team of prideful professionals willingly lay down just to get a higher draft pick. That being said, you can see how this could be achieved on the front office level. If an owner or GM demands that a coach play a certain lineup, how many coaches are going to actively resist that pressure?

But I think the margin between victory and defeat is larger in the NBA than in the NFL.  And teamwork is just more important in football than basketball.  You could have 5 pro bowlers on your offense, but if your quarterback and center both suck, you aren't going to have a good offense.  In comparison, if you have 3 scrubs playing alongside two all-stars in the NBA, you will make the playoffs in the East.  In order to truly tank, the Sixers had to turn their entire roster into a mix of young guys who aren't ready for prime time and veterans who are demonstrably not NBA players.  In the NFL, if you just settle for very weak players at a few key positions (quarterback, center, NT, FS), then even if the rest of the guys are doing their job, you'll still lose virtually every game. 

[ugh already]

It's a good thing Brady was only caught cheating and not smoking weed.

[Howdyphillip]

snip

 

Yes, but you guys really did tank a season and pull off the Suck for Luck campaign right?

[Jaime L]

 Great post. I agree that the situations are rather analagous. I'd have to say that it seems a little esaier to do this in the NBA, as there are like 5 times as many games, and each individual game is less important overall. With only 16 games, you're under a much harsher microscope, and your lack of effort is more likely to be complained about or reported, as you are effecting other teams much more. I don't think it's likely that you'd have an entire team of prideful professionals willingly lay down just to get a higher draft pick. That being said, you can see how this could be achieved on the front office level. If an owner or GM demands that a coach play a certain lineup, how many coaches are going to actively resist that pressure?

 

Yeah, agreed. In the endless NBA regular season, established players (especially on losing teams) demonstrably won't give it their all on a night to night basis. 

 

In the NFL with non-guaranteed contracts, I think you can generally count on even established guys to play their asses off as they're playing for their livelihoods. Everyone's at risk of getting cut if what's showing up on tape doesn't match their salary. So it makes tanking harder to engineer and I assume is the other reason there's less of it. Though I still think front offices can make an impact. 

[BormonReborn]

It's a good thing Brady was only caught cheating and not smoking weed.

 

Just to clarify, Tom was generally aware that someone more likely than not may have cheated.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

But I think the margin between victory and defeat is larger in the NBA than in the NFL.  And teamwork is just more important in football than basketball.  You could have 5 pro bowlers on your offense, but if your quarterback and center both suck, you aren't going to have a good offense.  In comparison, if you have 3 scrubs playing alongside two all-stars in the NBA, you will make the playoffs in the East.  In order to truly tank, the Sixers had to turn their entire roster into a mix of young guys who aren't ready for prime time and veterans who are demonstrably not NBA players.  In the NFL, if you just settle for very weak players at a few key positions (quarterback, center, NT, FS), then even if the rest of the guys are doing their job, you'll still lose virtually every game. 

 

 All good points, and I think that's what makes it easier to say that the 76ers have obviously tanked while the Colts position is somewhat more nebulous.  

 

 

 "Hey, we had a terrible QB and no viable backup. What are you going to do?"

[BormonReborn]

OK, I have a question for the more legal members of this board.  

 

The NFL appealed the judge's decision.  I was under the impression that to appeal a court's decision it had to be on some legal grounds.  Grounds, such as new evidence, a procedural misstep, or something like that.  

 

Does the NFL's appeal based on anything like that?  Or am just being stupid and anyone can appeal any decision?   

[Cas Stark]

OK, I have a question for the more legal members of this board.  

 

The NFL appealed the judge's decision.  I was under the impression that to appeal a court's decision it had to be on some legal grounds.  Grounds, such as new evidence, a procedural misstep, or something like that.  

 

Does the NFL's appeal based on anything like that?  Or am just being stupid and anyone can appeal any decision?   

 

They haven't filed their appeal yet, I would suspect they will say the judge misapplied the law related to the CBA.  Appeals usually aren't about new evidence, it's almost always procedural.  Basically, yes anybody can appeal anything but it has to be based on some kind of legal grounds, however much of a stretch it may be.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 

Just to clarify, Tom was generally aware that someone more likely than not may have cheated.  

 

 C'mon. At his behest. What possible incentive would these equipment guys have to deflate balls without his express permission? Not even permission, pressure. The semantics games you Pats fans play are laughable. The fact that he didn't have to do it personally makes him look worse, not better. 

[Cas Stark]

 

 C'mon. At his behest. What possible incentive would these equipment guys have to deflate balls without his express permission? Not even permission, pressure. The semantics games you Pats fans play are laughable. The fact that he didn't have to do it personally makes him look worse, not better. 

 

There isn't any real evidence that the balls were deflated, it's only 'more probable than not' according to the NFL.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 

There isn't any real evidence that the balls were deflated, it's only 'more probable than not' according to the NFL.  

 

 Right. And Tommy destroys his phones as a matter of course, and the deflator got that nickname cause he lost a lot of weight in the offseason.

 

 

  http://s1336.photobucket.com/user/Lumpy67/media/Brady%20iphony_zpsfoqcigf3.jpg.html

 

 

/Did the NFL totally screw up every aspect of this "investigation"? Yes, there's no argument there. The ruling was correct. All that being said, they were deflating balls.

[Trebla]

SBNation created an app that can show you what would happen to your favorite team if they had the turnover the Niners had this offseason. It's depressing!  http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/9/4/9261761/what-if-your-team-had-suffered-the-same-offseason-fate-as-the-niners

 

Dallas would have lost Jason Garrett, Dez Bryant, Cole Beasley, Dwayne Harris, DeMarco Murray, Ronald Leary, Doug Free, Jermey Parnell, Tyrone Crawford, Anthony Hitchens, Dekoda Watson, Sean Lee, Rolando McClain, Brandon Carr, Orlando Scandrick, Tyler Patmon, and Chris Jones.

 

:stillsick:  :ack: