Who will beat hte colts?

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 3:39 pm

I think the jags, the chargers and the seahawks all beat them.

flint · Post by **flint** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 8:03 pm

not the jags, the colts still need to win that game to clinch home field advantage in the playoffs

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 5:38 pm

flint wrote:not the jags, the colts still need to win that game to clinch home field advantage in the playoffs

lol. The colts and jags have split games in each of the past two seasons. The colts will lose this week and will lose by 3. Jughead (manning's unusually large cranium earns him this name) will be stuck trying to make plays all day, but will again be shut down by the jaguars this year. The only difference this week will be the higher play by the Jaguars linebacking and offence personel. The colts will lose this week.

flint · Post by **flint** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 6:07 pm

Styrofoam wrote:
flint wrote:not the jags, the colts still need to win that game to clinch home field advantage in the playoffs
lol. The colts and jags have split games in each of the past two seasons. The colts will lose this week and will lose by 3. Jughead (manning's unusually large cranium earns him this name) will be stuck trying to make plays all day, but will again be shut down by the jaguars this year. The only difference this week will be the higher play by the Jaguars linebacking and offence personel. The colts will lose this week.

Judging by that logic theres no way the Colts should have beat the Patriots this year. These aren't the Colts of 2003 or 2004. Hell, they aren't even the Colts who played in the first two games of this season anymore.

Higher play by the offense? You mean the offense missing its starting QB and RB (although I hesitate to say they will be "missing" Fragile Freddy... he's always gone)?

The Jags are 9-3 thanks to their rediuclously soft schedule.

BTW, why do you think Manning will be suck trying to make big plays all day? No one has been able to stop Edjerrin James this year. He didn't have to make a big play to beat the Jags the first time.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:06 am

Don't even talk about the "soft schedual" because the first 7 games came against playoff teams from last year, adn they play the same teams for the most part the colts do! Lets see, Seahawks, Steelers, Cincy, Colts (twice no less!) Broncos, Rams (a losing record, but a better team than their record indicates) these aren't easy to beat teams, not to mention the jags had to play THREE STRAIGHT road games (and won each of them, the only team to do it twice in the past 5 years btw) The colts beat the patriots because the patriots are banged up beyond belief. a healthy pats team would beat the colts any day of the week. And yes, the jags ARE missing Byron, but gerrard is just as capable, and Fred was ready to go, but benched by the coaching staff.

Its laughable that the colts get huge props for their 12-0 record, but when the jags go 9-3 playing a tougher schedual than the colts currently have, they have a "soft schedual" For the record, the Jags have lost only to one team with a losing record, St. Louis....the other two? Colts and Broncos, and only lost to the colts by 7. Oh and do the math, the Jaguar's schedual was the toughest opening 7 games in the entire league.

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:24 am

The toughest opening schedule in football easily belongs to the Chargers. The teams they played are only a combined 47-37 when compared to Jacksonvilles opening opponents' 54-30, but you have to factor in a couple of things. The Chargers did not get a bye in their first 7 weeks, the Jaguars did. The Chargers had to play three straight opponents coming off a bye week (at New England, Pittsburgh at home, at Oakland). The Chargers also had to face Philly when they still had Owens and Mcnabb and were a winning team. In the last two years the Eagles with Owens are 17-5, without him they are 3-6.

That crap about playoff teams last year... lets take a look at that. Atlanta, New England, Denver, New York Jets, Green Bay, Philadelphia, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, San Diego, Seattle, and St Louis all made the playoffs last year. This year New England, Denver, Indianapolis, and Seattle are the only teams likely to go back at this point, although I cant count out Atlanta, Pittsburg, or San Diego (I guess Minnesota has an extremely small outside shot). Doesn't say much for teams that made the playoffs last year does it?

The RAMS are a better team than their record shows? The Rams are allowing a league worst 29 points a game (actually a tiny bit over that) and are second only to San Francisco in yardage against. Maybe they would be tougher to beat than their record shows if they still had the greatest show on turf, but they are FAR from it. The Jags even dropped that game to the Rams when the Rams had Isaac Bruce on the sideline, but I can call a fluke a fluke. You wanna know the record of teams that St Louis has managed to beat? 20-40, 11-37 if it wasnt for the Jacksonville upset.

Why is it laughable that a team gets props for going undefeated through 12 games? How many times has that happened in history? Theres only been one team to finish a season undefeated in the history of the NFL, and the Colts have a chance to be the second.

The Jaguars are a good team, no doubt, but they just aren't on the same caliber of the Colts.

Genie · Post by **Genie** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:37 am

Denver went 12 games without a loss the year Elway took em to the big show.

Also, isnt the jacks/colts game in indiana?

I dont like too many teams, specially this year and all, but the colts are one of those teams im watching. I do haveta say that no matter what you say about manning, the boy has talent. He's got one prestige nfl record under his belt already.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:13 am

Genie wrote:Denver went 12 games without a loss the year Elway took em to the big show.

Also, isnt the jacks/colts game in indiana?

I dont like too many teams, specially this year and all, but the colts are one of those teams im watching. I do haveta say that no matter what you say about manning, the boy has talent. He's got one prestige nfl record under his belt already.

no the game is in jacksonville. And i agree, the colts and manning in particular are a spectacular team.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:17 am

flint wrote:The toughest opening schedule in football easily belongs to the Chargers. The teams they played are only a combined 47-37 when compared to Jacksonvilles opening opponents' 54-30, but you have to factor in a couple of things. The Chargers did not get a bye in their first 7 weeks, the Jaguars did. The Chargers had to play three straight opponents coming off a bye week (at New England, Pittsburgh at home, at Oakland). The Chargers also had to face Philly when they still had Owens and Mcnabb and were a winning team. In the last two years the Eagles with Owens are 17-5, without him they are 3-6.

That crap about playoff teams last year... lets take a look at that. Atlanta, New England, Denver, New York Jets, Green Bay, Philadelphia, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, San Diego, Seattle, and St Louis all made the playoffs last year. This year New England, Denver, Indianapolis, and Seattle are the only teams likely to go back at this point, although I cant count out Atlanta, Pittsburg, or San Diego (I guess Minnesota has an extremely small outside shot). Doesn't say much for teams that made the playoffs last year does it?

The RAMS are a better team than their record shows? The Rams are allowing a league worst 29 points a game (actually a tiny bit over that) and are second only to San Francisco in yardage against. Maybe they would be tougher to beat than their record shows if they still had the greatest show on turf, but they are FAR from it. The Jags even dropped that game to the Rams when the Rams had Isaac Bruce on the sideline, but I can call a fluke a fluke. You wanna know the record of teams that St Louis has managed to beat? 20-40, 11-37 if it wasnt for the Jacksonville upset.

Why is it laughable that a team gets props for going undefeated through 12 games? How many times has that happened in history? Theres only been one team to finish a season undefeated in the history of the NFL, and the Colts have a chance to be the second.

The Jaguars are a good team, no doubt, but they just aren't on the same caliber of the Colts.

Its simply laughable because you first call the jags schedual soft, whereas they play nearly the same schedual this year as the colts. thats what laughable. The colts are 12-0 thanks largely to playing the titans and texans 2x the browns, the 49ers. thats half of their games already. Add in the ravens in week 1 and you have yourself more than half of their wins from the bottom of the nfl. I'm not taking anything from the colts, they are a good team, but the jaguars aren't soft, they play the colts tough, and can come out with a win just as easily as the colts can.

RoamingMadness · Post by **RoamingMadness** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:14 pm

What's football? Oh you mean Soccer?

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:33 pm

I still don't see how thats laughable. Yes, I think the Colts have had an easy schedule, I only count 4 quality wins (I personally still consider New England to be a quality team, many people might disagree with that). It is still insane that they are 12-0.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:05 pm

flint wrote:I still don't see how thats laughable. Yes, I think the Colts have had an easy schedule, I only count 4 quality wins (I personally still consider New England to be a quality team, many people might disagree with that). It is still insane that they are 12-0.

my point is flint that you give the colts an insane ammount of respect, but turn around and call the jaguars "soft" by playing a seemingly harder schedual to date. and for hte record, the patriots are going to make the playoffs by default, and likely will be no better than 9-7 when they do. Its not a quality team when everyone is injured. So the colts have played 3 teams that would qualify as quality teams, the jags, steelers and bengals, and only one of those games was a convincing win, whereas the jags have played the colts, Seahawks, steelers, and bengals and broncos. So, whatever. The game should be a good game, and being in jacksonville I believe jacksonville can pull the upset.

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:14 pm

I'd give the Jags the same amount of respect if they were 12-0, but they aren't. They have dropped three games on an easy schedule while the Colts haven't.

About the Pats though, theyve only lost to playoff hopeful teams (Carolina, San Diego, Denver, Indianapolis, and Kansas City; hell those are just about my top 5 teams in the league) and while their division is crap they have still managed to squeak out victories against other powerful squads (Atlanta, Pittsburgh). Thats quality in my book. Im curious though, which of their last 4 games do you think they will lose (Buffalo, Tampa Bay, New York Jets, Miami). I'm guessing Tampa and you think they will lose to Miami because its a junk game?

edit: I never called the Jags soft, just their schedule. But do you really believe they would be 9-3 playing in the NFC East, NFC South, or AFC West?

Genie · Post by **Genie** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:31 pm

I wouldnt call pittsburg a solid team this year. Plagued with too many injuries and no running game anylonger, i'd say they will only make the playoffs becaue the division they play in is mostly tehsuck

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 4:04 pm

True, but Pittsburg wasnt suffering from those injuries and lack of running game when they played the Pats. The Steelers won 5 of their first 7 including games at San Diego and at Cincinatti. Pittsburgh didn't really start their downward spiral until Roethlisberger got injured. I would say that even without their potent offense their defense can still win them games, but Baltimore gave me some serious doubts.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:14 pm

flint wrote:I'd give the Jags the same amount of respect if they were 12-0, but they aren't. They have dropped three games on an easy schedule while the Colts haven't.

About the Pats though, theyve only lost to playoff hopeful teams (Carolina, San Diego, Denver, Indianapolis, and Kansas City; hell those are just about my top 5 teams in the league) and while their division is crap they have still managed to squeak out victories against other powerful squads (Atlanta, Pittsburgh). Thats quality in my book. Im curious though, which of their last 4 games do you think they will lose (Buffalo, Tampa Bay, New York Jets, Miami). I'm guessing Tampa and you think they will lose to Miami because its a junk game?

edit: I never called the Jags soft, just their schedule. But do you really believe they would be 9-3 playing in the NFC East, NFC South, or AFC West?

Yes, i think they'd be 9-3. They are a great team. they have now earned 2 consecutive winning seasons. I think that the team has one of the best defenses in the league. as for KC being a playoff contender, i have to disagree. They have 8-4 record now, but they are definately the worst position schedual wise to make the playoffs. If they lose even 2 more they are likely out. Pittsburgh is likely out, as well. They've got a suspect secondary with one shining star...troy polamalu. The pats won their early games before the injuries began to pile up. The jags held cincy to 20 points whereas they scored more than 30 on the colts. The jags held peyton Manning to a 44.4 Passer rating 0 TDs and an int, and had it not been for our offensive shortcomings in the beginning of the year (a new system and new coordinater 2 games into the season) and WRs dropping a plethora of passes we could have held on to win that game. On top of that, the final play of the game J-smooth was tripped in the Endzone w/o a flag called. The Jags have a legitamate chance of dealing the colts their first loss of the season.

On top of all that, the jags are going to be the cream of hte afc south in 2 years when the salary cap beats the colts.

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 6:13 pm

I agree that they have one of the best defenses in the league, but the offense is mediocre at best. The Colts, on the other hand, have one of the best defenses and one of the best offenses. The Colts are allowing less points and less yards against per game than the Jaguars, and they are scoring more points and gaining more yards than the Jaguars per game.

Yes the Jaguars held the Bengals to less points than the Colts did, but Jaguar could only put 23 points on the board whereas Indy hit them for double that, 45.

If you really think the Jags would be 9-3 playing in those divisions you are in the vast minority.

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:12 pm

flint wrote:I agree that they have one of the best defenses in the league, but the offense is mediocre at best. The Colts, on the other hand, have one of the best defenses and one of the best offenses. The Colts are allowing less points and less yards against per game than the Jaguars, and they are scoring more points and gaining more yards than the Jaguars per game.

Yes the Jaguars held the Bengals to less points than the Colts did, but Jaguar could only put 23 points on the board whereas Indy hit them for double that, 45.

If you really think the Jags would be 9-3 playing in those divisions you are in the vast minority.

actually, the jags are allowing less yards per game than the colts. Currently the jags are ranked 3rd or 4th in overall defence (yards per game) whereas the colts are ranked 5th. The jags offence doesn't need to be stellar to win games. Before Leftwich was injured, they were still scoring on the plus side of 20 points per game - which with a strong defence is enough to get by. Sure you don't see the jaguars flying down the feild in an 80 1 play drive td, but thats not what the offence was designed to do. I'd Say that pitsburgh has a good offence, built on running the ball, and thats what the jaguars are designed to do, run the ball.

And if Indy actually scored 45, ( i was under the impression it was 31-38 Final score) then the colts actually allowed 38 points, as it was decided by 1 td. Moreover, the reason the colts scored so much was because they HAD TO to win. I'm suprised someone with your football knowladge wouldn't acknowldage the fact that the cincy game showed the indy defence for what it is: A small, but fast unit that is easily caught over-persuing plays, and thus suseptible to the big play. If Chad Johnson can have a career day against this "great" indy defence why can't Ernest Wilford, or Matt Jones, both of whom tower over the tallest of the colt DBs at 6'5 and 6'6" (the tallest db is 5'11")

Styrofoam · Post by **Styrofoam** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:25 pm

Btw, even if we took out the eagles from the NFC east (the worst team there, by default we'd have to play 3 division teams, not all 4 in the east), we have the giants, cowboys and redskins.... The I don't see how any of these teams match up against the jags any better than the titans, colts or texans do. Granted the texans and titans are bottom dwellers this year, but that doesn't mean they still don't match up well against the jags. The giants have Eli Manning who for some fluke of a reason has a 53% completion rate and 10 picks. Imagine playing a defence like jacksonville getting pressure on eli...there's no way you can tell me that a 53% passer shouldn't throw more than 10 INTs. Then there's the cowboys. Have you seen how good Paul Spicer and Rob Mier are playing this year? Paul has 6.5 sacks and mier has 5. You have a suspect offensive line in Dallas and a brick QB in Drew Bledsoe. I'm not to concerned that they'd be able to run the table against the jags. THen the redskins are mediocre at best. The only division i could see us doing worse than 9-3 realistically is the NFC south. Again, taking away the worst team, that'd leave us with the jags, panthers, bucs and falcons... It'd be hard to come out of that division this year with a 9-3 record.. .but then again, the falcons have shown weakness in losing to the packers, and the bucs i think are overachieving this year. In the AFC West, you'd have the broncos, chargers and cheifs, but last year we beat the broncos, and cheifs... this year we lost to the horses, but I think it was more of a bad game than a bad team playing a good one. We'd probably go 5-5 if we played the broncos 10 times this season. Then again, we're taking out the worst team in a hypothetical situation...what if we took out the best one? That'd make things a bit different. We'd beat the raiders more often than not, the saints 9:10 times, and the eagles, i hate to say, are dead this season. Why argue whether they could be 9-3 in other divisions? as it stands they're in the AFC south, 9-3 and poised to run into the playoffs. But more than that, they're ready to dethrone the Colts.

flint · Post by **flint** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:41 pm

The score was 45-37, the Bengals needed 1 td and a 2pt conversion.

The colts are allowing 282.6 yards per game, the jags are allowing 283.3. So technically the colts are allowing less, but I'll call it even... lol. The Colts are 3rd in overall defense and the Jags are 5th.

Are you really serious about comparing Chad Johnson to Ernest Wilford and Matt Jones? Thats just absurd. Chad Johnson is a premier wide receiver. Hes had 4 straight 1000 receiving yard seasons now. Ernest Wilford is best known for being the putz who dropped a pass wide open in the end zone in a huge rivalry game for VT. Matt Jones is a rookie converted quarterback with impressive stat lines and thats it. He had what, 7 yards last game? Hes played one game with over 100 yards receiving, the rest have been under 50 yards.

How are you going to hold it against the Colts that they got caught in a shootout with, the best offense in the nfl (and came out on top)? Cincinatti doesn't "expose" defenses... they just stomp all over them. The Bengals have the best yard per game average and 4th best points per game in the nfl.