I was really dreading this morning after the Indianapolis Colts lost to the Tennessee Flaming Thumbtacks last night on Monday Night Football. I was not in the mood to deal with Bob Kravitz and the local sports talk media on the demise of the Colts. It was a frustrating game to watch and gives Tennessee a near insurmountable 4-game lead with 9 games to play.
The most frustrating part to me is the way the ball has bounced for Indy this year. Last night was a microcosm of how things just are not going the Colts' way. In the second quarter alone:
Peyton Manning threw an unwise pass to Reggie Wayne that was tipped. The ball deflects directly to Chris Hope for the interception. A few feet in either direction and it probably drops harmlessly.
Chris Johnson fumbled the ball and the Colts recovered it. The officials evidently felt that the ground caused the fumble and Tennessee kept the ball. Replays showed that the ball came out before he was tackled. Jeff Fisher wisely ran a quick play before Tony Dungy could call for a replay.
Immediately after that, Clint Session had a easy interception and could have run it back a ways, but he dropped the pass because he started upfield before he fully had the ball.
Pierre Garcon stupidly chose not to field a punt around the Colts' 25 and ball bounces all the way back to the Colts' 6-yard line.
Then later in the game:
Marlin Jackson caused a fumble and the ball rolled harmlessly out of bounds.
Anthony Gonzalez catches a third-down pass about a yard short of the first down and is immediately tackled. Receivers need to know where that first down marker is and make sure they are past it!
The Colts screw up two fourth-down plays. On fourth-and-1, the Colts hand off to Dominic Rhodes who if stuffed for a one yard loss. The Colts do not have the O-line that can "power" their way for one yard when they absolutely need it. Then later on a fourth-and-3, Peyton locks on Marvin and former Colt Nick "If you had fucking cut back outside we would have gone to another Super Bowl" Harper breaks up the pass. Gonzo was wide open for the first down this time.
Back in 2006 when the Colts were on the their way to the Super Bowl, it seemed that they caught more of the breaks that year. Offensive linemen recovering fumbles in the end zone, defensive backs catching interceptions, bad passes falling harmlessly to the ground. Granted, the Colts have caught some breaks due to bad play calling and bad decisions by Minnesota and Houston. Otherwise, the Colts could be much worse off than they are. Yet, even at 3-4, we still have a very good shot at a wild card birth.
As I have quoted before, "Better lucky than good," but the Colts have not been good very often let alone lucky. I will not say that the Colts' season is on the brink. Even if they lose versus New England next week, the Colts have shown they CAN play like their former selves and would still have chance to garner a playoff spot in the AFC. The big question is WILL they turn it on play like Super Bowl champions or flat like roadkill?
I've been a fan of Bob Lamey, the play-by-play broadcaster for the Indianapolis Colts radio network, for quite a while. I have preferred to turn the volume down on the CBS broadcasts and turn on Bob because I knew I would hear better game calling than the 'tards on CBS. However, Bob has gotten to be a bit too much of a homer.
Granted, I want the local play-by-play broadcaster for a team to be a bit of homer. It is not like a national broadcast where you really need to be a neutral party. I want my local person to have an interest and root for my team. Yet, over the past few years, Bob's homer-ism is reaching an extreme. I mean Ron Santo homer-ism extreme. It is hard not to enjoy Bob's enthusiasm on a Colts touchdown or an excellent play. And I get a chuckle everytime Slut does his Bob Lamey "It's Good!" imitation.
Listening to the Colts-Packers game last weekend, as the game went worse and worse for the Colts, you could just hear Bob get more and more disenfranchised. Every penalty against the Colts is made out to either be a crap call or a "Jesus F-ing Christ" not another penalty call. When the Colts finally scored late in the game we got a half-assed, "Touchdown, Dominic Rhodes." I do not expect a broadcast to be a Mr. Positive in a blow-out game, but give me an honest broadcast.
Howard Kellman has been broadcasting for Indianapolis Indians for 33 years and does play-by-play broadcasting the right way, in my opinion. I can turn into the game at any time and never know if the game is tied, or a blow-out one way or the other. He just seems to be able to deliver a broadcast that will keep the listener involved in the game, regardless of the score. Although Howard just seems to have that voice and personality that I would probably enjoy hearing read Betty Crocker recipes.
Is it time for Bob Lamey to be replaced. Ehh, not quite yet. It is hard to imagine someone other than Bob broadcasting a Colts game. Yet, I would like to have the Colts or someone reign Bob in a bit.
Side note - I admit it has been fun to write for LomHenn.com. I never imagined myself writing for a blog or that it would be as fun as it has. It is funny though that you can spend five minutes writing a post and then spend ten times that amount trying to come up with an interesting or witty title for the post. A post just does not seem complete until you can come up with a good title.
I hope everyone enjoys our posts as much as we enjoy writing them.
I'm watching Game 2 of the World Series last night and Fox Network is using something they call "Fox Trax" which is a graphic showing where the pitch was located versus the strike zone. Unfortunately, every time they show it, it was fucking wrong! I want to know where the pitch was located when it crossed home plate - NOT WHERE THE CATCHER CAUGHT IT, you fucktards!
ESPN'sGamecast and MLB.com'sGameDay online modules show you where the pitch was located as it crossed home plate, i.e. in relation to the batter. Fox is showing me where is the pitch was located when the catcher catches it. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! The world is watching the game and seeing batters getting called strike three's, but according to Fox, the pitches are no where near the strike zone.
Come on, Fox! Are you rusty since TBS carried the majority of the earlier playoff games this year? Are you just that freaking lazy? Get off your asses and do the job you're fucking supposed to do!
Mike Lopresti has been hitting the "Rays Aid" and has hopped on the Rays bandwagon. He also seems to think that there is parity in baseball. (In a bad Jim Mora imitation) Parity?! Parity?! Don't talk about parity! Are you kidding me? Parity?!?
Who's the kid being interviewed by a television station?Apparently, he's someone important with the Tampa Bay Rays. Seeing how young he is, I'm guessing he's in charge of the cotton candy.
Oh, nice start here. Just because he is young, he can only handle cotton candy, huh?
"We're here with Andrew Friedman," the TV man says.
THE Andy Friedman?
Good grief. That's Andrew Friedman? The front office guy who built most of this juggernaut? Thirty-one years old, it says here in the Tampa Bay media guide. We'll have to take their word for it.
Oh, sorry, I was thinking of Abe Froman, the Sausage King of Chicago.
Former Tulane outfielder. Former Wall Street analyst. Former fantasy league player. Former child in Houston who used to make his mother take him to the Astrodome at 4 o'clock for a night game, so he'd be there in time to watch batting practice. A baseball nut while he was still in Happy Meals.
Enough with the fucking food references! Obviously Andrew is quite talented to be in the front office of a MLB team at a young age and obviously he has had the right touch to put together the current Rays team in the World Series.
Now he's constructed an American League champion with the second lowest payroll in baseball — and stands there as the latest proof that just about anybody can get to the World Series these days if he is shrewd enough and lucky enough.
Yes, anybody CAN win in professional sports, but the Rays have paid for it in the fact they had never finished above fourth place in the division in there entire existence before this year. When you have a Top 10 first round pick every year, you should eventually be good, I would hope.
Which is why Bud Selig sounds so happy.
"I just can't tell you how important this is," the commissioner of baseball said over the phone. "I'm really lucky I was able to see this."
Yes, we figured someone would have either taken you out or your ass would have exploded since you are the owners puppet, although this might explain why Bud is so happy.
Selig doesn't just mean the Rays in a World Series. He means the current unbridled parity in baseball.
Once again - Parity?! Parity?! Don't talk about parity! Are you kidding me? Parity?!?
Just because the team with the second-lowest payroll made it to the playoffs and the World Series, does not mean there is parity in baseball.
Only the NFL is supposed to distribute power like this. But count the franchises lately in a World Series. Eight pennant winners since 2004, eight different teams. Fifteen teams — fully half of the major leagues — in the past 10 years. Baseball is guaranteed of having its ninth different champion in nine years.
OK, eight different teams have won pennants in the past five years, but Boston, New York Yankees, St. Louis, Los Angeles Dodgers and Los Angeles Angels have all been in the playoffs at least three out of the past five years. So out of eight playoff teams, those six teams have been in the playoffs the majority of the time! That is not parity you fucktard!!!!
You MIGHT be able to claim parity for playoff teams because the majority of those teams rank in the top half of the payroll, but not for all of baseball.
Over the past 10 years, here is a breakdown of the number of playoff appearances by each team and their payroll ranking for 2008.
American League NYY - 9 appearances, #1 payroll BOS - 7, #4 TB - 1, #29 BAL - 0, #22 TOR - 0, #12
MIN - 4, #24 CWS - 3, #5 CLE - 3, #16 DET - 1, #2 KC - 0, #25
ARI - 4, #23 SF - 3, #17 LAD - 2, #8 SD - 2, #19 COL - 1, #20
If there were parity, then you would see more appearances by the Pirates, Reds, Royals and Nationals. Of the eight teams that made the playoffs this year, only the Rays ranked lower than 15th and five of the eight were in the top 10.
If anything, last year was more of a sign of "parity" since three of the teams making the playoffs (Cleveland #23, Arizona #25 and Colorado #26) were in the bottom half of the MLB payroll.
Wasn't this sport going to be co-owned by the Yankees, Red Sox and a small number of other gold bullion owners?
The Yankees and Red Sox typically have some of the highest payrolls in baseball, but as has been proven many years, the highest payroll does not guarantee you a ring, or even a playoff spot. It does generally give you a good team that will at least make a run for a playoff spot. But just because you got to the playoffs does not guarantee a trip to the World Series.
"I could write a book on that," said Selig, who then recounted the owners' decision in 2000 to give the commissioner wide powers to bring parity to the game, from revenue sharing to construction of the draft.
The vote, Selig noted, was 30-0. You normally couldn't get a 30-0 vote from baseball owners on what time of the day it is.
Now Selig looks at a world where the Tampa Bay Rays can lose 96 games one season and go to the World Series the next, with a payroll one-fifth of the Yankees.
The Rays made the right draft picks and trades over the past several years that have finally paid off this year. The Phillies payroll is less than half of the Yankees. Why are you not including them in this article?
Where Houston and Colorado and Arizona and Florida are all recent passersby.
Huh? What?
Not many strategies to come out of an office ever work this well. Whatever Selig was aiming at, he nailed.
The Diamondbacks and Rockies were both in the bottom fifth of payroll last year and the Rockies lost in the World Series. So will the Rays be a passerby as well if they lose? The Marlins won with a small payroll and then were blown apart by Wayne Huzinga because he knew he would not be able to afford the players after that. Will the Rays be forced to do the same thing?
"The one thing I always say to the clubs is it's the job of the sport itself as well as all its individual franchises to provide hope and faith in as many places as possible," he said. "Do I believe in the hope and faith theory? I certainly do."
"What a story this is. When I was watching Game 7 on Sunday, I said over and over to myself, 'Unbelievable.' It finally hits you how remarkable this is. And the game is better for it."
Is it? It is the "feel good" story for the Rays to make the World Series after finishing in last place the previous year. However, Fox Networks will probably tell you this is the worst that could have happened after both Boston and the LA Dodgers make it to the Championship Series and then lost.
What does the current poster child of parity have to say?
"Have you seen me?" Not yet.
"Payroll definitely doesn't decide the standings," said Friedman, turning conventional baseball wisdom on its batting helmet. "You look back over the last 10 years and see that.
And it never will. But the teams with the highest payroll generally have the better players.
"The hardest part for a small revenue team is not necessarily to compete in any one given year, but being able to sustain it. Certainly that is our biggest challenge going forward."
Exactly. Let's see if the Rays can keep the core of their young team and start a playoff streak. Or are they just the latest Florida Marlins and be forced to kill their team by breaking it up?
Once this World Series party is over, the price of putting the Rays on the field is about to go up from $43.8 million — which is less than one Alex Rodriguez and one Derek Jeter. Friedman accepts that.
"But relative to other teams in our division," he said, "it won't be in the same stratosphere."
Even if the Rays doubled their current salary, they would only rank 15th, right behind the Houston Astros at $88 million.
Still, if the Rays can win, can't anybody?
Yes, but how long did it take the Rays to be really bad while trying to put together this team? Any team CAN win in baseball, but the smaller market teams have a harder road to travel.
Check back when we look at a World Series and find the Pittsburgh Pirates playing the Kansas City Royals. Parity's last holdouts.
I'm think that won't happen in this lifetime. What about the Reds, Orioles, Nationals who haven't sniffed the playoffs in the past 10 years plus?
Until there is a salary cap, there really will not be any parity in baseball.
Sometimes, there are just mysteries of life that cannot be explained. Examples: who built Stonehenge, how in the hell did the Electric Slide become popular at wedding receptions, and how did Home Alone become a hit movie?
Another mystery is how a certain sportswriter-turned Monday Night Football broadcaster can suck so badly (actually, he sucks really well). Of course I mean Tony Kornheiser of ESPN's PTI and MNF fame. Kornheiser has reached an almost Zen-like level of suckage on the MNF broadcasts. His performance has inspired millions of young people to either enter broadcasting or wear earmuffs indoors.
Until now, the cause of his suck-proficiency has been unknown. But now we may know why:
Tony, glad you asked; I can't really answer
Later this week, I will get my usual pre-"Monday Night Football" Indianapolis Colts telecast phone call from Tony Kornheiser. It will probably come right in the middle of "Dancing With the Stars'' and ruin any chance I might have of seeing Warren Sapp light up the stage with a killer bossa nova.
Oh, God. It's the Suckage-Convergence-Zone (SCuZ)! Tony Kornheiser will call Bob Kravitz to ask Kravitz's opinion on the Colts. Honestly, this is not an uncommon practice, but it shows just how ill-informed Kornheiser is. He watches sports for a living; he should be able to see enough Colts games to do his own analysis.
Can you imagine Kornheiser and Kravitz together? I can imagine them together--in a bus, going over a cliff.
Anyway, let me save Tony the time and trouble, because here are the questions and here are my answers. Well, unless I'm two Johnnie Walkers into the night; then all bets are off:
What's wrong with your team out there? You have an hour? First, the injuries. Peyton Manning had two knee procedures during training camp -- although it might have been seven for all we really know -- so No. 18 got off to an uncharacteristically rough start.
How ridiculous. Peyton did not have 7 knee surgeries. He did, however, have both legs amputated. What we see out there playing is really a hologram.
In all seriousness, I find it interesting how upset some members of the Indianapolis media are about not knowing about the second knee surgery. There was no reason for the Colts or Manning to divulge the 2nd surgery, since it happened well before the first game of the season. Since Manning practiced the entire week leading up to the Bears game, the 2nd surgery wasn't relevant.
Kravitz is right about the injuries, which Zinglebert noted the effects of in the comments section of the previous post.
Is it possible this team has tuned out coach Tony Dungy? I'm glad you asked that question, and I hope you noticed how I used this particular literary device in such a way that I could blame the rhetorical "you" for bringing up such a touchy subject.
Ugh. That would have been clever if Bobby didn't draw attention to it--it may have actually worked. And I get the idea that he's doing this tongue-in-cheek, since he doesn't care if people give him crap about bringing up a touchy subject. But it's Kravitz's idea, so he should just present it and move on.
I think it's possible. I really do. I think today's athletes, like most of today's young people, have the attention span of a fruit fly. Pacers president Larry Bird says NBA players stop hearing a particular coach after about three years. Raiders owner Al Davis once said, in a moment of clarity, that NFL coaches lost their players after 10 years -- and he said that years ago.
Actually, pretty good use of examples, but saying "it's possible" is saying nothing. It's like saying, "it's possible the Colts will win 35-10 Monday night." Of course it's possible. Anything is possible. It's possible all of the Colts players just finished reading Dianetics and have become Scientologists.
What happened to Dungy in Tampa? All of his players professed love and respect for him, but when they needed to win a playoff game to possibly save his job, they got rolled by Philadelphia.
It's true: the Buccaneers (under their Buccan-hat) lost to the Eagles 31-9 in the 2001 NFC Wild Card round. However, the Eagles had won the NFC East and were the #3 seed. Tampa was the final wild card team, making the playoffs with a 9-7 record. Perhaps it wasn't that the Tampa players weren't trying--perhaps they lost because they weren't as good as Philly.
Kravitz seems to think that players can will themselves to victory whenever they want to--that all it takes is desire and love of its coach for a team to win. If that were true, every team would be 16-0 (okay, maybe some teams don't like their coaches very much). It's a little more complicated than that. Yes, sometimes you can see when a team has quit or tuned out its coach. But it's a little simplistic to say that a team doesn't care about its coach because it loses a game that outsiders perceive is necessary to save the coach's job.
There's a reason teams go from players' coaches to authoritarians to players' coaches to authoritarians. After Dungy left Tampa, the Bucs won the Super Bowl under crazy person Jon Gruden. It makes me wonder if associate head coach Jim Caldwell, who is something of a Dungy clone, is really the right guy to take the reins when Dungy leaves, but that's another column for another time.
True. Then why bring it up? None of this is relevant to your point.
Would I save you grief if I asked whether Dungy's long-distance family situation is making some kind of impact?
Again, Tony, brilliant use of a literary device.
Again, great way to ruin its effect by calling attention to it.
Answer: I dunno. But the issue is out there, and before the season, I wrote that if the Colts struggled, we would all wonder whether Dungy's split existence might leave him conflicted. Again, everybody knows Dungy is here and his family is in Tampa. How often does he go home? I'm not sure, and if I asked, I would be told the Colts don't address such questions. But it's fair to wonder, if the players see a coach with one foot in Florida, does it affect their level of commitment and focus?
"...the issue is out there." It is? It's out there because you put it out there! Also, we are not "all wondering." Personally, I don't think it's an issue. Can the team not practice without him? Considering that most, if not all, of the daily work with players is done by the coordinators and position coaches, he's not completely necessary on a daily basis.
Also, Kravitz's earlier point about Caldwell actually hurts his argument here. If Caldwell is a "Dungy clone," then the players shouldn't miss Dungy as much.
I don't buy the argument that the players would either be a) less committed, or b) bothered at all by Dungy's agreement and commitment to his family. I suppose it's possible, but it's also possible that Dungy's agreement could be perceived by the players as making him more committed: "He wants to spend time with his family, but the Colts organization and this team are so important to him that he wants to help us now." Maybe that's not how everyone would react, but it's certainly possible that some of the players feel that way.
Be honest: Is Marvin Harrison finished?
When he struggled the first few games, I said it was too early to tell. When he was great against Baltimore, I said it was too early to tell. I still think it's too early to tell when the entire offense is sputtering.
You can't really disagree here, though I maintain that Harrison looks fine. The offense as a whole has issues, but Marvin is doing his thing. However, one thing I will say is that I think opposing defenses are on to some of the "bread and butter" plays. They seem to be jumping routes (e.g. the Marvin slant) more often.
I will say this, though: I don't see Harrison as a Colt next year, not unless he returns to form the second half of the season. He's scheduled to count for more than $13 million against the salary cap next year, which is a lot of cash for a fading player on a team that's top-heavy on payroll.
Valid point. But will they release him, you think? That seems a bit far-fetched. Then again, in the hard salary cap era, anything is possible.
This is a must-win for them, right?
Yes, absolutely yes.
Technically, no, but I'd hate to see them try to come back from 4 down at this point.
They can't go four games down in the division with nine to go. They're fortunate that nobody besides Tennessee is pulling away in the AFC, so 10 wins might get them a wild card, but as far as the division, they lose Monday and they're done.
Ten wins "might get them a wild card"? As Zinglebert pointed out awhile ago, 10 wins in the AFC usually gets a wild card. If the season ended now, the Colts would be out of the playoffs, but its only due to a head-to-head tiebreaker.
I'll make a prediction now: if the Colts win 10 games, they are definitely in the playoffs.
So, you want to be a guest host one day on "Pardon the Interruption"?
If that ever happens, welcome to the 8th layer of Hell: Fucktards on Parade.
Sorry for the lack of posts lately--it's been a very busy time here for everyone at LomHenn.com. Of course you already know about the birth of Hildegard Bembledack, which has kept Zinglebert busy. I've taken an extra part-time job at a kanuter valve plant in Oolitic, Indiana. Kringlebert has had an extra project thrown on him at work that involves replacing dirty-bomb components with used pinball machine parts. Oswald is doing only God-knows what. And as Lom Henn is a millionaire playboy author/celebrity gynecologist, he is jet-setting and isn't around to post very often.
But enough excuses...now on with the countdown!
Colts stats worst in Dungy era Stats reveal why Colts have stumbled to 3-3 start this season
As you probably know, the Indianapolis Colts are 3-3. Of course, no one can just say that right now--what they say is that the Colts are 3-3, but could easily be 1-5. This due to the 4th quarter combacks against Minnesota and Houston.
They could also be 6-0, if they tackled better and had scored more points in the games they lost. But I digress.
Mike Chappel's article doesn't really have any big problems in it. Even though the headline indicates the article will talk about statistics, there aren't many included. The article focuses more on the fact that this is the worst start for the Colts since Tony Dungy arrived and that the upcoming Monday night game against Tennessee is a "must-win."
Here is the graphic that ran with this story in the newspaper. Basically, it shows that the Colts are 3-3, which is their worst record after 6 games in the Dungy era. As a reasonable person might expect, each of the statistical columns included on the graph show this year's Colts are not very good compared to Colts' teams of the last few seasons. However, this year's team is not the worst in every category.
So what does this story tell us that we didn't already know? The Colts are 3-3. Going backwards, the Colts were 6-0, 6-0, 6-0, 4-2, 5-1, and 4-2. Do we need a statistical analysis to show that this year's team is worse than the others? Basically, the Colts aren't scoring as much as in the past and they are allowing more points than they did in previous years. But their stats are pretty typical for a 3-3 team.
This article is merely another attempt to answer the question a lot of people have been asking thus far: what's wrong with the Colts? The simple answer is just that they haven't been playing very well. And the best stat that indicates this is the only stat that matters: 3-3.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Who's the Youngest of them All?
Yes, the Tampa Bay Rays are the "feel good" pick to win the 2008 World Series and both the Phillies and Rays have young pitching staffs. Take out the elder statesman Jamie Moyer at the ancient baseball age of 45 and both starting rotations are 28 years old or less. Bob Nightengale's article in yesterday's USA Today gives us a comparison of the Rays set of whippersnappers to the babies of the 1969 New York Mets rotation.
Overall, I do not have an issue with the article, but I do have an issue with the following comparison that Bob pulled from the Elias Sports Bureau.
"The Mets' starting trio in the '69 series - Gary Gentry, Jerry Koosman, Tom Seaver - has combined for 106 career victories. The Rays' quartet of Scott Kazmir, Matt Garza, Andy Sonnanstine and (Jamie) Shields have combined for 117 regular-season victories."
First of all, pitching wins are a shit statistic. Wins are based on the entire team, not just the pitcher. Just ask Roger Clemens. You can have an ERA under 2.00 and go 1-10 because your team cannot give you any fucking run support. Or you can have an ERA of 6.00 and go 10-1 because your team smacks home runs faster than Joey Chestnut can choke down hot dogs.
Secondly, I know that the '69 Mets only used a three-man rotation in their World Series, but that does not make an exact comparison to the '08 Rays who currently plan a four-man rotation. If anything, three men with 106 victories sounds more experienced than four men with 117 victories.
Career regular-season pitching wins is definitely not the statistic I would have used to show experience. For all we know, the Mets' rotation could have had a 106-150 win-loss record and the Rays could have had a 117-40 record. At least show the number of games they appeared in or the combined win-loss records for the players.
Here is the a comparison of the 1969 Mets and 2008 Rays starting pitching rotation.
1969 Mets
Gary Gentry - 35 games - 13 wins - 12 losses Tom Seaver - 107 games - 57 wins - 32 losses - 1 save Jerry Koosman - 76 games - 36 wins - 23 losses
Mets Total - 218 games - 106 wins - 67 losses - 1 save
2008 Rays
Scott Kazmir - 125 games - 47 wins - 37 losses Matt Garza - 56 games - 19 wins - 22 losses Andy Sonnenstine - 54 games - 19 wins - 19 losses James Shields - 85 games - 32 wins - 24 losses
Rays Total - 320 games - 117 wins - 102 losses
Bob and Elias are correct, at least in this incorrect comparison, that the Mets were a less experienced team. I do not agree with the means Bob used to prove his point, but he was correct. Even if you remove the Ray's #4 pitcher to have a three-on-three comparison, the Mets would still have a less experienced team.
Interestingly enough, if we include the #4 pitcher from the Mets' 1969 team to have an equal four versus four comparison, the Rays would have had the "less experienced" team. The #4 pitcher for the Mets was Don Cardwell.
Don Cardwell - 378 games - 109 wins - 151 losses - 7 saves.
Don was 8-10 in 1969. The other three pitchers had a combined record of 55-28, so Gil Hodges must have felt his other three pitchers were either better than Cardwell or that Seaver and Koosman were better on short rest.
It must be a "Bob" thing. This analysis is similar to a Bob Kravitz-type article in that your conclusion is correct, but the process in which you get there is all wrong.
Bob, if you are going to make a comparison, make sure it is apples-to-apples or we will start making Bob-to-Florence Nightengale comparisons.
LomHenn.com would like to welcome a new addition the Bembledack family. Hildegard Vladmira Bembledack was born on Friday, October 10th at 8:14 am. Hildegard weighed in at 6 lbs. 12 oz and was 20" long. Mother and daughter are doing fine. Hopefully Hildegard will grow up and show the idiots on this site exactly how it should be done. Hopefully Zinglebert will be able to forgo sleep and add some entries in the coming weeks. Congrats to the Bembledacks!
Or maybe even, this one? (No, I wouldn't watch this one, either).
You may or may not know that these programs did not exist 10 years ago. High School sports received very little coverage, even on local newscasts. Oh, there were highlights each week of one, or at most, two games, but there wasn't the extended coverage given to HS sports as there is now. With Operation Football, Hoosier Friday Night, and the others, local Indianapolis TV stations give much more time to games, sometimes devoting up to 15 minutes to highlights and scores in an evening.
If you enjoy this much coverage of Indiana high school football and basketball, you should thank this show, and this guy. When Indiana Sports Talk started in August of 1994 on Network Indiana, high school sports was an afterthought on local television newscasts. Indiana Sports Talk, even as a radio show, changed that by showing that there was definitely an audience--and subsequently, advertising dollars--in covering high school sports.
Indiana Sports Talk hasn't changed much in its 14+ years on the air. The host, Bob Lovell, interviews high school coaches from around the state after their games. In addition, scores are updated every 15 minutes. Pretty simple, but it's proven to be a winning formula. Evidently, the Indianapolis TV stations thought so, too--which is why they followed and increased their own coverage of high school sports.
Make sure you remember who's responsible for that increased coverage when you tune in to watch your team's highlights on Friday night.
There is a cry throughout the NFL, or at least here in Indy, that referees are not calling offensive holding like they used to.
Philip B. Wilson of the Indianapolis Newspaper Monopoly has actually done some research on the topic. [Phil, could you please teach Bob Kravitz about trying this research-thing out?] Based on the number of holds called through the first 71 games, the projected number of holds for the entire season will be the lowest in the last 20 years. This is after an all-time high of 880 penalties called in 2005.
Below is a year by year comparison of the number of offensive holding penalties and the type of play they were called on.
OK, and here are the current numbers through 71 games and the season projections:
So far - 71 games - 157 holds - 61 on runs - 57 on passes - 39 on kicks Projections - 256 games - 543 holds - 211 on runs - 197 on passes - 135 on kicks
While the 543 calls would be a 20-year low, look at the numbers for calls on runs and on passes as compared to 2006 and 2007. Notice that the numbers are relatively close and that the numbers for on pass calls would be higher. The drop is due mainly to the lack of calls on kicks.
What does the article focus on? Dwight Freeney and how there is a lack of call on pass plays! No, the number of calls on pass plays would be the highest in three years. If the article had focused on the last three years of no calls, then this would be OK. However, Phil only seems to point to this year.
It is also speculated that the decrease in calls was to speed up the game. If there are 256 games per season and there were 880 calls in 2005 and 543 calls projected for 2008, that works out to be only 3.43 and 2.12 calls per game, respectively. A decrease of 1.31 calls per game does not really speed the game up that much.
Phil is correct is that Freeney does look like he gets held on many plays and it is even obvious to those sitting in the upper deck. I do not like the fact that we have moved away from the rules stating what a hold is to letting the referee have a subjective opinion of whether the hold impacted the play or not. Yes, we have those types of judgments on pass interference if the ball was uncatchable, but we can see the result of whether the pass was catchable or not. If a player is held, we don't know if he could have gotten to the QB or not.
I applaud Phil for doing some research for the article and your hypothesis that Freeney and the Indy D-line are being held and not getting calls seems to be correct. However, I believe that your data does not quite back up your theory since there looks to be more offensive holding calls than the previous two years.
Pop quiz, Hotshot! If your team has 20 points going into the 4th quarter of a game and with 0:12 left in the game your team has 30 points, how many points did your team score in the 4th quarter?
According to Mike Tirico during the Vikings-Saints game on Monday Night Football, the answer is 13.
Just another reason to watch the game with the mute on.
Sorry, I was busy yesterday and did not get to read Kravitz's column from the Sunday paper until just now. And now I say, "Kravitz you freaking fucktard!"
When Michael Vick was led toward a federal courthouse, weighted down by handcuffs, leg shackles and several charges involving the depraved sport of dogfighting, protesters and unaffiliated citizens stood on the sidewalk and hurled invective at the doomed NFL quarterback.
When Helio Castroneves was led toward a federal courthouse Friday in Miami, also weighted down by handcuffs, leg shackles and felony charges of tax evasion, curious onlookers and IndyCar fans around the country prayed that the charges were false, and that Castroneves would eventually be found guilty of nothing more than ignorance.
So where's the righteous rage this time?
Well...one was indicted for sending the family pet into battle that can cause physical deformity or death, while the other one was indicted for not paying his taxes which we all hate doing!
Part of the disparity in the way America has reacted to these stories has a racial tint. I would like to think, though, that most of this is a reflection of the way we view the crimes in question.
Oh, hell no! As stated previously...one was indicted for sending the family pet into battle that can cause physical deformity or death, while the other one was indicted for not paying his taxes which we all hate doing!
I maybe off-base on this but I really do not think that race has anything to do with the fact that Helio hasn't been crucified by the media and I am really incensed that Kravitz tries to instigate race into this topic the way he does.
In Vick's case, we've all seen the underground dogfighting footage, usually on one of the undercover TV news shows, of pit bulls let loose on one another and tearing each other apart for the entertainment and wagering pleasure of the subhumans involved.
In the case of Vick, we had eyewitness accounts of Vick being a part of the dogfighting, putting down losing dogs and being a part of something horrible and just plain wrong.
In Castroneves' case, there's no blood, no clear victim, no underground footage. This is as pasty as white-collar crime gets. While there are victims any time a rich man hides his money from the government, those victims are not readily identifiable. And keep in mind, there is a segment of society that despises the government and specifically the Internal Revenue Service, and in whispered voices they are saying, "Yeah, stick it to those SOBs."
In the case of Helio, we have the government saying that we believe you have done something illegal from the tax code that is volumes thick that people go to school for many years to try and understand that can still get things wrong when they think they were right. We do not have a "smoking gun" or eyewitness account stating that Helio and/or his sister or attorney willfully hid the money to avoid paying taxes.
I would like to think that if Castroneves was indicted on dogfighting charges and Vick was hit with tax-evasion charges, our reaction would reflect the crime, and not the skin color of the men charged with the crime.
Is that naive?
Maybe.
Are you a fucktard? Mayb...yes, you are!
If the reaction to Castroneves has been muted, clearly the media coverage has been strangely close to nonexistent.
There is not much to get a reaction for. Yes, he was indicted for tax fraud. I'm betting the reaction would be a lot different if it was vehicular manslaughter, domestic abuse or drug smuggling. What can you really report? You can interview his team owner, Roger Penske. You can interview other drivers and other racing commentators. You can interview a tax attorney. You can interview race fans for their reaction. Not much else you can really do at this point.
When Vick got popped, ESPN gave us breathless, almost nonstop coverage, with legal expert Roger Cossack explaining every step in the process. It was a morality play.
Dogfighting is a much better headline than tax fraud. The evidence was much easier to evaluate and know what was damaging and what was circumstantial to Vick's case. The tax law is so convoluted that most people probably would not understand what was being said to them. Plus, we really do not know what involvement Helio really had in the matter.
With Castroneves, just check out espn.com. His story is in the middle of top headlines, right there with stories about how Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers is a game-day decision and Phoenix's Amare Stoudemire was poked in the eye during practice.
The lead story?
O.J. Simpson. Guilty.
Yes, that is big news. Thirteen years too late, but it should be a bigger headline than Helio getting "indicted". If Helio was found "guilty" of tax fraud on Friday, then you could argue which headline should have been bigger.
The question is why Castroneves' legal troubles have garnered so little attention in the national mainstream media. We're talking about one of the two most visible people in open-wheel racing. And we're talking about a guy who gained national prominence for winning "Dancing With the Stars.'' If I were the IRL, I would be alarmed by the lack of coverage, even though it's a sad and devastating story. Is the IRL so insignificant that one of the top two drivers gets hauled into federal court in shackles, and almost nobody notices?
Helio is not a Tony Stewart or a Dale Earnhardt, Jr. or a Jeff Gordon and the IRL is definitely not NASCAR. The story got the amount of attention it deserved. When more facts are found out, then the media will begin to side one way or the other on the matter.
...
Like most Kravitz articles we critique, the story goes on and on. He does a quick comparison to Pete Rose and Bill Whittington, how exuberant a person Helio is and how could he end up in cuffs, and how we really do not know the athletes and that those happy, seemingly nice athletes can turn out to be another O.J.
What Krapitz fails to bring to the story is the fact that Michael Vick had legal issues prior to the dogfighting indictment the already had his character in question. In 2004, two people were arrested for distributing marijuana in a truck registered to Vick. In 2005 he was sued by a woman who allegedly get genital herpes from Vick. The case was settled out of court. In 2007 he was detained at Miami International Airport where he surrendered a water bottle with a hidden compartment. No illegal substance was found but the suspicion was there. Additional issues also have surrounded Vick due to the people that he employed or hung out with. So Vick's character was already in question when the dogfighting incident came about.
Helio has been shown to be a happy-go-lucky kind of person that won on "Dancing with the Stars" a couple of seasons ago and likes to climb fences after victories. We have not seen him have run-ins with the law or shown up on a police blotter. To have the tax fraud issue come up was a shock, but there are some many questions and unknowns at this point that it is harder to drag him through the mud at this point.
This is not a matter of race, it is a matter of character. What is this was Reggie Wayne or Dwight Freeney getting indicted for tax fraud? Do you think that they would be treated like Michael Vick? Hell no.
Helio is not Michael Vick, he is not O.J. Simpson and he is not even Pete Rose. Yes, he is one of the top names from the IRL, but even if this had been Mario Andretti or Rick Mears in the Indy Car heyday, they would have gotten the same treatment as Helio.
Unfortunately, while Kravitz's article is shitty, he still gets points for stirring up articles like this one. Sorry for the long post.
Side note: I love the idiot web person for the Star's website that has the Colts headlines and stories in black with white lettering. After you have clicked on the link, they set the links to appear in either black or something that does not show up with a black background. Niiiccceee!
Yes, we all tend to have our superstitions. Whether they are simple gestures or a ritualistic game day rites, many of us knowingly do things that we feel will influence the outcome of that day's game.
Watching the Colts in Super Bowl XLI, I found myself standing in the doorway to the kitchen watching the game because while I was standing there, the Colts starting doing well and I was not about to jinx the game by moving back to my seat on the couch. Not be left out, the rest of our group watching the game were also having the same thought as everyone maintained their seating or standing arrangements as well.
Fast forward to yesterday. I hopped into the Bembledack Family Vanagon to take a load of furniture to storage. My daughter, Hortencia, had been listening to a children's book on CD. As I was turning off the CD to listen to the Colts game, in my head I hear, "You really need to listen to the remainder of the disc for the Colts to win." Uh-huh. Whatever.
I tuned into the game and proceeded to hear the Colts were down 20-10 and the current Colts drive stall to force a punt. The Texans immediately rumbled off a 40-some odd yard run and quick march down the field. Before they could score again, my mind drifted back to the thought before I turned the game on. Not really wanting to hear the Colts lose AGAIN, I turned the CD back on and listened to rest of the CD, about 15 minutes or so.
When I turned the game back on, the Colts have the ball on the Texan 5-yard line trailing 24-27 with 2 minutes to go. Of course, they scored the go-ahead touchdown and went on to win the game.
According to Kirk Herbstreit of ESPN, Marvin Harrison should just pack up and go home to Philly. Appearing as a guest host on the Tirico and Van Pelt Show on ESPN Radio today, Kirk had this to say during a recap of the Colts "comeback"versus the Texans yesterday:
I know that several people at ESPN have been quoted this year stating that Marvin is done, as noted previously in this blog, as well as a local so-called columnist for the Indianapolis Newspaper Monopoly.
I will admit that at 36 years old, Marvin is not the receiver he was in his prime. However, I am not ready to send Marvin walking either. Marvin is still a great possession receiver and can still beat defenders downfield as evidenced yesterday when he had a sure touchdown if Peyton had only thrown the ball better.
He has lost a step, no doubt, but he is also still recovering from knee surgery. Marvin still draws the top defenders many times, so getting open deep will force him to either run better routes or shorter routes.
Marvin's numbers ARE down this year, but they are on par with his numbers from last year prior to his injury.
The 17 receptions this year is tied for second for Colts receivers with Anthony Gonzalez.
The Colts also have Reggie Wayne, Anthony Gonzalez and Dallas Clark on the roster. Also, Peyton has not helped matters by under throwing passes, passing to Marvin while he's well-covered, or passes that will get him decapitated. I have also seen Marvin open and then Peyton throw to another receiver.
The team as a whole has been playing like crap. Peyton is still recovering from his knee surgery and the O-line is still a work in progress. When the team finally starts firing on all cylinders and Marvin is left out of the offense, then we can start debating whether he has "jumped the shark" or not.
Marvin will not go to the Pro Bowl this year, but when I need a catch on 3rd or 4th down, Marvin is still the receiver I would look to go to first.
If you watched the Colts' 31-27 victory over the Texans on Sunday, you witnessed a great and stunning comeback by the Colts. As wonderful as the comeback was (at least, for a Colts fan), there are some issues with how it is being described.
First off, a common way the Colts' comeback is described by sports media is to say that Houston blew a 17-point lead in the final 4:10, as if the Colts got the ball down 17 with that little time remaining. That's a bit misleading. The Texans scored their final touchdown with 8:18 left in the 4th; on the ensuing possession, the Colts took just more than 4 minutes to score a TD to make it 27-17. So the Colts had 8+ minutes to come back--still a very impressive (and unlikely) comeback, but not quite as madcap as only having 4 minutes to do it.
Secondly, some people seem to have not watched what happened in the game. For example, Tom Jackson, ESPN football analyst, said that the reason the Colts came back is "they have #18. He's the guy that sparked this comeback." Granted, Peyton Manning did his part in the victory--he led the drive to cut the lead to 27-17, and he threw the pass that put the Colts up 31-27 on Reggie Wayne's circus catch. But I didn't see Peyton on the field playing defense and forcing the Texans into 3 turnovers in the final 4 minutes. As great as this comeback was, I expect that Peyton will probably get more credit than he deserves from the media.
But this was a team win for the Colts that was helped out by dumb decisions by the Texans. The defense, which had been pretty lousy all day in giving up 27 points, made big plays to get the ball back. The Texans helped, and not just Sage Rosenfels and his spinning fumble-ruski. Houston's play selection late in the game was very suspect: after the Colts made it 27-24, the Texans still could have killed enough of the clock by running the ball and making the Colts burn their final time out. Instead, the Texans threw incomplete on 2nd down, which stopped the clock and saved the Colts time out. It also seemed to make Houston more desperate to make a first down, so instead of running on 3rd down, the Texans tried to pass, which led to the sack/fumble and the Colts taking over on the Houston 20.
As for the Colts offense, they didn't play well most of the day, but still put a drive together to make it 27-17 when all looked lost. And then they executed when the defense got the ball back with a chance to win the game. Again, this was a team win--snatched from what would have been a team loss. Many members of the media will ignore this and instead focus on Manning.
Oh, yeah: finally, this also from Tom Jackson on Sunday night's SportsCenter: "That's the third time this season that we've looked at the stat sheet and wondered how the Colts won a game."
Really? The Colts are now 2-2 after this win. Maybe Tom Jackson can see into the future.
Game 3 of the NL division series, Philadelphia Phillies at Milwaukee Brewers, 2nd inning, broadcast on TBS. David Aldridge, talking about the number of sporting events happening in Wisconsin this weekend:
"About an hour north of here, in Madison, the University of Wisconsin Badgers host Ohio State tonight."
Hello, folks. Our local fucktard sports columnist actually took the time to write an article this week and it is his usual half-assed drivel with horrible and asinine attempts at humor. Oh, well. At least Kravitz gives me something to write about.
The Indianapolis Colts don't currently reside in Panic City (pop. 53).
Right off the bat we have a shitty attempt at trying to covey the fact the Colts are on the verge of needing to panic and all 53 players are the entire population. I would think if the ENTIRE team was on the verge of panic the population would also include, at a minimum, the coaches, the front office, the owner, just to name a few. I would think you could also include Colts fans in that number as well.
They are, however, keeping a residence in the suburbs.
Oh, and what is the name of that suburb? Anxiety Acres? Consternation Creek? Trepidationopolis?
A victory Sunday in Houston would make most of the doubts go away, at least for a couple of days. A loss, especially a loss combined with another Tennessee victory, and Eli Lilly and Co. will be forced to spike the city's drinking water with Prozac.
Could someone please hook Bob up with someone with a sense of humor? I’m tired of his poor attempts at comic relief.
Let's be honest: This team, a Super Bowl front-runner the minute New England quarterback Tom Brady went down, is one road loss in Houston from a national what's-wrong-with-the-Indianapolis-Colts story.
Well how about this international article on what’s-wrong-with-the-Indianapolis-Colts stories or this? OK, there Canadian, so you can make your own judgment calls on them.
This team, which has a golden chance to win its second title in three years with New England out of the way, is one poor 60-minute performance from being this year's biggest and most inexplicable flop.
Yo, fucktard! There are still 12 games to go after this game. Yes, being 1-3 and then making the playoffs is difficult, it is not impossible. What if we have a decent 60-minute performance, but still lose? With the injuries and retirements and waiving of players, I don’t know if that makes us the biggest flop. I would put the Lions and Bengals ahead of the Colts. While the Lions have sucked for a while, I felt that they could have battled for a .500 record or an outside shot at the playoffs after a decent finish last year. The Bengals have been just awful this year.
There's a thin blue line between a must-win game (that would be any game where a loss would mean elimination) and a need-to-win game. This game resides in that nether region in between. If they lose and the Titans win, the Colts would be 31/2 games behind the AFC South leaders and in last place in the division for the first time, not counting the season's opening week.
If it is a thin line, then how the hell are we in between? We might be right on the line, but personally I feel it is only a need-to-win game. A loss is not the end of the world at this stage.
Consider this: Each year since 2003, the AFC South winner -- always Indy -- has had 12 or more victories.
Ummm, what about the first year of the AFC South in which Tennessee won the division with an 11-5 record?
Jacksonville won 11 games last year and was a wild card. If the Colts lose and past is prologue, that means Indy would have to go 11-1 the rest of the season to hit that magic 12.
Good luck with that.
A 10-2 finish is daunting.
Maybe daunting, but not impossible.
Shoot, 9-3 would get them to 10-6, a record that hasn't been historically good enough to make the playoffs out of this division.
It kills me that the man can spent time to write an article but not spent less than five minutes to do even a minute amount of research. Because if he did, he would realize that most of his assumptions are totally incorrect. In roughly three minutes with the use of just basic search engines and a few pages on a website, I found out that not only do 10-6 teams generally make the playoffs, they even do it from the AFC South.
So five out of the six years the AFC South has been around, at least one 10-6 team has made the playoffs. Better yet, the Colts did it back in 2002 with, yep, a 10-6 record. And both wild card teams we from the AFC South last year! Wow, just a quote bit of research and once again we proved what a lazy fucktard Kravitz really is.
"Can you remember one stretch this season when you've played really good football?'' defensive end Dwight Freeney was asked.
He shook his head.
"Nah, nah, nowhere near that, and that's in all phases: defense, offense and special teams,'' he said. "Across the board. I don't think anybody can sit in here and say we're playing the way we want to play. I don't think anybody's happy.''
Yes, Dwight understands the team has not played well.
That's why Sunday is one of those really-close-to-a-must-win games. At 2-2, the Colts would have survived the first quarter of the season despite injuries to key players, the defection of Quinn Pitcock and the release of Ed Johnson. At 1-3, they'd be in trouble -- even more trouble if the Titans beat Baltimore and move to 5-0.
The Colts still have not played the Titans. If the Colts do go 1-3 and beat the Titans both times this year, they would have the tie-breaker if they finish tied at the end of the year. See, not impossible to come back from.
It's often said that a team can't win a division in September, but a team can lose the division in September. And that's where the Colts find themselves as they prepare for a Houston team that is winless, although better than its record suggests, desperate and preparing to play its first home game in front of rabid crowd that is still rebuilding from Hurricane Ike.
It is also often said, at least on this site, shitty writers will continue to write shitty columns as you prove week after week.
Remember, one week ago, the Texans were one play from walking out of Jacksonville with a victory. These are not you're slightly-older-brother's Texans, despite the uninspiring record.
The Colts must slow somebody's running game. Seriously, if Steve Slaton pulls a Ron Dayne on this group, Indy should wave the white flag of surrender. Or at least think about another Booger McFarland-type trade. Maybe talk Warren Sapp off the dance floor. Something.
Or how about actually tackling someone? How many times have we hit a runner in the backfield and have him still go for plus yardage or even for 44 yards?
I do think we are at the point where we need to consider revamping our defensive line paradigm. I understand the Colts like to have lighter, but quicker D-lineman. But we get pushed around so much in the running game that is keeps biting us in the ass. I can understand having a Freeney on the end, but we need some honking big guys at the tackles to make it tougher to run on us.
Pressure quarterback Matt Schaub the way they used to torture David Carr. Schaub can throw if he has time. Against pressure, he's just another guy.
I do miss watching David Carr get repeatedly driven into the ground.
Re-involve Anthony Gonzalez, who was so active in the first two games. Against Jacksonville, the Colts didn't have enough plays from scrimmage to incorporate their blossoming wide receiver.
The main issue against Jacksonville was not that the Colts did not involve Anthony Gonzalez, it was they did not get enough offensive plays to run. Another factor is that Dallas Clark was back in the lineup against Jacksonville and it seems that when Dallas in on the field, Anthony is not.
Win the turnover battle. Since coach Tony Dungy came to Indy, the Colts have been on the right side of turnover differential in five of six seasons. So far this year they've forced two turnovers and committed five (four interceptions), leaving them an uncharacteristic minus-3.
It would also help to have defensive backs actually catch the interceptions when they get their hands on the ball. There have been at least a couple of instances that we have had sure interceptions dropped and then the opponent continue on downfield and score on us. But Kravitz is actually right (damn that hurt) in that when the Colts win the turnover battle, they have won.
One national writer with a strong football pedigree, Sports Illustrated's Paul Zimmerman, suggested the Colts look "spent.''
Could he be on to something?
He might be, but you never are.
They have looked unorganized, especially against the Bears. Could it actually be that players do need to have a preseason in order to get ready for the regular season? Peyton has been rusty and it did take longer than expected for him to recover from the bursa sac surgery. The bye week should have helped him and the team get more on track and recover from injuries and dings.
It's understood that a slow start isn't a death sentence in this upside-down league. Last year's Super Bowl-winning New York Giants began the year 0-2 and looked miserable in the process. They turned it around late and got on a postseason roll.
They actually turned it around early and kept getting stronger late.
My sense through three shoddy games is that the Colts are still a primary player in the AFC, that the slow start is due largely to injuries, the Pitcock defection and the Johnson release. They are still the AFC South's sleeping giants, the team with the greatest potential to seize control of a conference that lacks a clear and present danger.
Bob, you do not have any sense.
I feel that the Colts are an 11-5 team, but it would not surprise me if they finished 8-8. Even great teams can have an off year where nothing goes right.
Tennessee? Fine. The Titans are better than anybody thought -- except for Colts president Bill Polian, who knows all because he is a football man and serves on the Competition Committee. I'll give the Titans 11 wins. Tops.
Since the Flaming Thumbtacks are also known as the Indianapolis Colts South or the home for the Colts Rejects, it does not surprise me that they are doing well. The Colts won with those rejects even though we were happy to see most of them go. The Titans have had the benefit of an easier schedule and having bounces go their way. The Titans have played three of their first four games at home and their only road game was against the hapless Bengals. Their only tough game so far was the home game versus the Jaguars in Week 1.
I’m going to put on my Nostradumbass hat on and predict that the law of averages catches up with the Titans and they will come into Lucas Oil Stadium in Week 17 with a 10-5 record and either the division title or a playoff berth on the line.
How would have thought that the final game of the season at home versus Tennessee could actually mean something?
Jacksonville? The Jaguars are still the Colts' biggest threat, regardless of their early struggles.
The Jaguars have struggled just like the Colts and are only a couple of plays from being 0-4 just like the Colts are really one play from being 2-1 and then we wouldn’t be reading crap like this. We could easily have a three-way battle for the division this year. Or even four-way battle if the Colts lose this week, but turn it around the rest of the season.
If the Colts lose Sunday, it's not over. But it's moving perilously in that direction. Then it's Panic City, here they come.
Oh for fucks sake. It’s not over until you are mathematically eliminated, so until then you keep playing to make the playoffs.
1-3 is not the end of world and an 8-8 season maybe good for the team and the Colts faithful. We’ve been spoiled the past five years and fans begin to expect that every year. It’s been a fun ride and maybe a few bumps along the way will be the jolt the Colts need to point them in the right direction. Or it might knock the wheels off and turn ugly really quick.
If the Colts lose, this will be Bob on Monday morning.
Nothing like a dose of Kravitz-ripping to get you going in the morning.
