The Hypocrisy Of Fandom
by Tim on Dec 29, 2009 11:08 AM CST
in News
109 comments
With all the anger being directed at the Colts (or, more accurately, at Bill Polian and/or Jim Caldwell) for the way they handled last Sunday's game against the Jets, I find it somewhat amusing that so many of us, as Texans fans, are speculating/hoping that the Patriots elect not to play their starters on Sunday. I grant you that the Colts' situation had additional nuances not pertinent to the Patriots' current state (e.g., the potential for 16-0/19-0, the hometown fans getting the short end of the stick after paying to see Peyton Manning & Co. yet getting treated to the debut of The Curtis Painter Experiment, etc.). Nevertheless, the following duality is always present:
When it's beneficial to our team (as it would've been for Texans fans had the Colts kept their starters in the entire game, beaten the Jets, and helped the Texans in their quest for the first playoff berth in franchise history), we want the starters to play. When it's not beneficial to our team (like the Patriots playing Tom Brady and Randy Moss on Sunday), we want the starters to sit.
In that same vein, you can bet that no Houston fan will take kindly to the Bengals resting their starters against the Jets on Sunday. We (Texans fans) need you to beat the Jets, and there's a much worse chance of that happening if Carson Palmer, Cedric Benson, and the like aren't playing. Play to win, Cincinnati! Yes, you've already clinched your division. So what? Don't you want the third AFC seed instead of the fourth? Of course you do! The third seed is slightly better than the fourth! Besides, you've got a playoff game in a week! Got to keep your guys sharp, Marvin Lewis! So play like your season depends on it, Bengals, even though it's actually our season that could potentially hinge on what you do! The integrity of the game is paramount! Rabble, rabble, rabble!
But hey...New England. Rest your starters. Take a knee. What do you have to play for? Who cares if you finish third or fourth in the conference? You don't get a bye week regardless, and your stalwarts could probably use the rest. The goal is the Super Bowl, and putting your starters in harm's way against a Houston team with everything to play for could put that ultimate goal in danger. The real season starts next week. Be smart. No need to be heroes.
That's a wee bit hypocritical, isn't it?
Patriots vs Texans coverage
2 recs |
109 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Nope.
Because the Jets got bailed out last week during the toughest game on their schedule—one that they were most certainly going to lose. If the Bengals play their starters and New England rests this week, then we’re even. Sort of. Except that the Bengals really aren’t that good anyways.
Either way, it’s a fucking travesty if the Jets get in with seven wins and two gifts. It’s just going to give us one playoff game that bores everyone to tears.
Yup
The first sentence is what irks me. It’s not that the Colts rested their starters. Whatever, that’s their right, even if it’s lame to play Manning for a half and then have him pacing the sidelines in the second half because he didn’t want to sit. But for the Jets to get a giftwrapped win or two in games where a loss means you are done? That’s the irritating part. And THAT’S why I want the Bengals to play their starters—so the Jets have to actually beat a team in one of these last critical games.
Now, is it hypocritical to hope that the Pats rest their starters? Eh… probably. But, then again, we are all rooting for laundry, pouring hundreds and thousands of dollars into watching a greedy monopolistic enterprise that doesn’t give two shits about the fans (see, e.g., the potential disaster of no football in 2011), and (at least in my case) doing things like getting up at 3AM and driving 90 MPH all the way to Nashville to get there in time for a noon start. Point being, we ain’t exactly rational creatures around here. So, if we throw a little hypocrisy on top in the form of hoping for a situation that helps our rooting interest and makes it less likely that I throw my remote against the wall, that’s not much more than throwing a match on a raging fire, is it?
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
by MDC on Dec 30, 2009 9:08 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Over at Mile High report we do a 'Limerick' thing when we play divisional rivals. Here was one of my contrbutions:
Still stuck in the fader home shock,
In Philly had hope we would rock,
And now host KC,
At home and will be,
The truth of our team’s real stock.
Reduced to hoping that faders,
Will somehow show up as the Raiders,
And show Baltimore,
The toughnessof ’lore,
Which turned all Bronc fans into haters.
And Texans must prep their attack,
Let’s pray for our friend Kubiak,
If Pats they do fall,
It helps build a stall,
For cards to fall in the right stack.
And not since Csonka and Kiick,
Have I prayed Miami be slick.
And put Pitt in a place,
Where there is no more trace,
Of their chance to the dance to stick.
The next prayer makes me quite queasy,
The way we beat Cincy was sleasey,
But they beat the Jets,
Of which I place bets,
The door to the dance becomes easy.
With Raven, Steeler, and Jet,
No longer in the big bet,
One chore, only one,
Yet this must be done,
We must put the Chiefs in a net.
.
I admit I’m no Longfellow, but if all this happens Broncos and Texans both make the playoffs!
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Gonsoulin, Taylor, Little, Wright, Gradishar, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Dec 29, 2009 11:26 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I love you
Don’t ever leave us again.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 11:46 AM CST up reply actions
I was in your last game thread the entire game
Unfortunately I then watched the Broncos lose.
Funny me, I’m better luck for your team than my own.
It would, however, be fun if we both made the playoffs
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Gonsoulin, Taylor, Little, Wright, Gradishar, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
I'm ok with that
Let’s make it happen!
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
What about people
Who don’t really give two shits what the Colts do and hope that Brady sits this one out? Or people who think that maybe the Texans shouldn’t have choked against one of the Colts, the Titans, the Jags, the Colts or the Cards?
Where does that group hang out?
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 11:47 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
We grill sometimes
Or if we’re lazy, hit a bar.
- Rivers McCown, From Mom's Basement | Twitter
by riversmccown on Dec 29, 2009 12:02 PM CST up reply actions
Sign me up!
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 12:34 PM CST up reply actions
Top reason why Tom Brady should Sit out
Bernard Pollard plays on our D.
Kubiak should call a SS Blitz every play until Brady gets pulled or hurt
I would challenge you to a battle of wits, but you appear to be unarmed.
by The Night Owl on Dec 29, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions
This is football, not politics
Its ok for us to be as hypocritical as we want whenever it comes to sports as long as it isnt some bullshit like someone claiming 2 favorite teams. I will say though, this really isnt hypocritical, your looking at it the wrong way. Both of these views of resting starters are completely consistent with one thing, whats best for the Texans playoff chances. Thats all we as fans should ever be concerned about when making decisions about which other teams to “pull for”. Gotta put your battle red glasses back on, and then assess things Tim.
by AFTexan on Dec 29, 2009 11:57 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
Not quite right...
I disagree with your analysis that it’s hypocrisy. To me and most others, I think Jim Caldwell/Bill Polian (whoever ultimately is responsible) are idiots for not giving an undefeated season a shot. They were not deciding between Super Bowl or undefeated, they should have been trying for both. And I don’t think ANYONE blames the Jets for taking advantage of it. And I don’t think Texans fans would HAVE A PROBLEM with use taking advantage of the Patriots sitting their starters. I agree the win doesn’t mean as much in respect, but who cares about respect at this point, a W is a W for those who need it.
Ultimately the Colts make their own decisions and can do whatever they want — I see no way or reason to stop them or discourage it. But it’s fully our responsibility to criticize them for not taking a shot at 19-0 and making History. Who won the super bowl the last 40 years? I bet you can’t name them all. Who had undefeated seasons, and even more specific, throughout playoffs and won the superbowl. You can count them on 2/1 fingers.
The Patriots had an undefeated season
And still fell at the final hurdle. If I’m the Colts brain trust, I would gladly sacrifice a game if we were 14-0 and had everything sewn up if it meant that key players would get a little bit of rest.
Winning the Super Bowl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> losing a Super Bowl, even if it means your only loss is the Super Bowl.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions
I've got nothing wrong with what the Colts did
I just don’t understand why they even went through the motions of playing the starters at all if they were so worried.
I mean from their standpoint, it makes no sense. Either bubble wrap them or don’t, don’t pussy foot about it.
Personally I woulda gone for 16-0, but that’s not a clear-cut choice. They earned the right to make it for themselves.
- Rivers McCown, From Mom's Basement | Twitter
by riversmccown on Dec 29, 2009 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
The Colts did earn the right...
At the same time, I really do think it hurts the integrity of the game when a team can get into the playoffs thanks to what the Colts did (not play to win). It’s not just the Colts, but every time a team does it against someone chasing a playoff spot…..that’s just my own personal response to it.
Although that’s nothing in comparison to what the Colts did to their fans. I’d be royally pissed if I paid for parking, a regular season ticket, food/beer, and then saw my team tank it and cheat me out of my hard earned money. The Colts earned the right do what they want, but they really didn’t think about the fanbase there.
In this hypothetical
Would you forgive them if the won the Super Bowl?
I sure would.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
But still, your fans are gonna be upset. Especially those who aren’t rolling in dough.
It just would be nice to see them apologize or offer their fans something (like access to an afternoon autograph session). That’s just my opinion. The Indiana faithful are still gonna root for the Colts no matter what, so they can do whatever they want.
hate to see Indiana fans upset
they may do something crazy like order a large size slurpee and drink it until they get a brain freeze.
And yes, that means
I wanna beat the Patriots. The Tom Brady/Randy Moss Patriots. If we’re a real playoff contender, we could beat them. Would I take a cheap win? Yeah, but I wanna see how the Texans stack up to the measuring stick. The Patriots are the team of the 2000s, and that’s how I would like to earn 9-7.
I wanna beat the Pats
whatever 22 happen to be playing.
9-7 >>>>>>>>>>>> 8-8.
One stigma at a time.
Mount Cody in round 1
Why does this keep coming up
The problem with your suggestion is that you are NOT guaranteeing a super bowl by losing this game, just as you are not guaranteeing a super bowl loss if you do play through this game. Basically you are giving up the change for the undefeated season for completely unknown rewards. Does it work in your advantage or not? Nobody knows for sure. The only way you redeem yourself is if you do go on to win the super bowl, but it still doesn’t mean you couldn’t have had them both.
No one has called it a guaranteed Super Bowl win. This is a false choice.
The idea is that, because winning a Super Bowl is more important than having an undefeated regular season, you make adjustments accordingly so that you can maximize your chances of the latter.
I personally would much rather sneak into the playoffs at 8-8 and win the Super Bowl than go 16-0 and lose it. I suspect most people would.
It’s nice to go undefeated and all, but if you tire yourself or develop key injuries in the process and end up losing the Super Bowl, it sucks just as hard.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:12 AM CST up reply actions
OK, aside from the injury part
which I don’t think we can really factor in here when Manning actually played part of that game (unless, of course, there’s reason to think a player is more likely to get injured in the second half), no one has pointed to anything other than the Pats’ experience to suggest that losing that game (or, more accurately, resting the starters for a half) somehow maximizes or even improves the Colts’ chances of winning the Super Bowl.
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
That's the question isn't it?
I think to some extent where you sit on this depends on how much you feel maximizing your starters helps you later on down the line.
I’m not sure I buy it but I don’t blame Polian for feeling that way. We now know for sure that if something happens to Manning the Colts are on par with the Rams.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 9:25 AM CST up reply actions
True...
you can understand the fear vis-a-vis a Manning injury. But to throw Painter out there with pretty much NO starting WRs/linemen in a game where you are holding a very slim lead? I think that’s where it goes from maximizing injury prevention to losing for the sake of losing because of what happened to the undefeated Pats.
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
View from a New Englander here
It was never a choice. Losing a regular season game would not have guaranteed a SB win, and even though the Patriots were two minutes and a freak helmet catch away from ‘perfection’, they gave every game their all and played their hearts out. If anything, what the Colts brass did only solidified how proud I am of that 2007 Pats team.
The Colts chose the easier, softer way – deliberately losing under the guise of protecting their starters so that the team wouldn’t face the same pressure that the Patriots players were under. It’s Polian’s prerogative to do what he feels is best for his team, but I strongly disagree with his decision. It’s a plan made out of fear of failure, rather than confidence and strength.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Dec 29, 2009 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
Would you trade that undefeated season for a Super Bowl victory
If it meant losing a game because you rested your starters?
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:13 AM CST up reply actions
Absolutely... if it was a choice.
The players and coaches definitely would. And any Colt would trade a dozen of those regular season wins they have the most of this decade for another SB ring too. Even if the Colts win the big one this year, they will never know for sure if they could have done it all – had the ‘perfect’ 19-0 season. It’s a different animal entirely with the pressure on.
Bill Polian made a point on NFL Network to say that it was never about a 16-0 season with them as if it were a point of pride. But it’s not about going 16-0; it’s about a team trying to win each game they take the field for – one game at a time, 16 times.
The Patriots played their last regular season game hard that year against a Giants team also playing all of its starters. It was a great game between two well-matched teams, where the Patriots had to come from behind to win. No one knew that those two teams would be facing each other again in the SB that year. If they had known, would they each have shown their hand to the other? We’ll never know, but it was a year to remember that’s for sure.
Keep the faith!
OK
And maybe my perspective is tainted by the fact that I would strongly consider giving one of bfd’s tesicles giving bfd’s remaining testicle for the Texans to be 14-1 at some point. But I still can’t imagine getting that upset by this.
Granted, you can never guarantee a Super Bowl victory but Bill Polian is a pretty sharp football mind. If, in his rationale, resting starters now that his team has home field clinched is the best way to maximize his chances then I would accept that.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 7:46 AM CST up reply actions
That's the weird thing though, it was clinched before the Jacksonville game
but there was no thought of injury to Manning there – against the division-rival Jaguars who always play the Colts tough and physical.
And I also don’t get the big deal about beating the Patriots consecutive regular season win record. Why not go for it all – they could have had the most wins period, but the Patriots still have that record, including playoffs.
I’m done beating this horse here, but this is a terrific site and a thoughtful post. (The anti-Jets blog of SB Nation, lol.)
Keep the faith!
Didn't they limit Freeney and Mathis's
playing time against the Jags?
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 9:23 AM CST up reply actions
And you're right about Polian being a sharp football mind
He has to be the best drafter in the NFL. But even the best minds can blow it once in a while.
Keep the faith!
Resting your players for the last half of the last game of the season is fine.
Pulling them with 2 games left is not.
"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."
The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related
Mercenary is not the same as hypocritical
I want whatever is best for our playoff chances. I’m not angry at the Colts for resting their starters on principle (though I think it was a stupid thing to do), I’m just angry that they may have fucked us over.
by OremLK on Dec 29, 2009 12:03 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
whst i have a problem with
Is that the colts where at home in front if paying fans with a shot at a winning season and chose to tank a competitive game.
by nolander on Dec 29, 2009 12:09 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Obviously
as homers, we root for whats beneficial to our team.
To give reasons and expect them to hit a chord with the teams in question may be called hypocritical, but I think its rather pointless.
Who cares WHY they should be motivated to sit/start/try/not try? I say just root for them to do whats beneficial for us. All the time.
Mount Cody in round 1
being a fan is about supporting your team(or at least it should be), so naturally anything that benefits them you are going to root for. That doesnt make you a hypocrite, it makes you a fan.
I was more mad about the Colts thinking from a colts fan perspective, an undefeated season is way cooler imo. Someone wins the super bowl every year, dont get me wrong its awesome, but only 2 teams in history can say they won all their games at the end of the year.
Be judgmental about the actions of the past, be hopeful about the actions of the future. -The Homers Creed
I actually agree with this
Being a fan is inherently irrational. Why else would we argue about this shit or even care after the wringer that the Texans continually put us through? There’s no use in trying to find hypocrisy in something like that – it’s not about logic or reason. It’s about passion and emotion.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 29, 2009 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
This is what I've heard (so far) from various media
The Pats are worn thin at a lot of positions and just played a flawless game. It would not be surprising to see Brady and company only play 1 quarter or 1 half.
The Bengals’ Marvin Lewis has said that he will “play to win.” The Bengals haven’t looked great the past month, so there’s no reason to “rest.”
and ironically
the nationwide response to the Colts laying down may motivate Marvin even more.
Belichick marches to his own drum. He’s gonna go for every 4th down, just because they have it locked up.
And Brady will play… both ways.
Mount Cody in round 1
Whoa now
Only Patrick Willis plays both ways.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:14 AM CST up reply actions
In any other situation I understand
Sitting your starters, but the chance of making history, there is no way I sit my players. And from the look on Pytons face I would say that it might have been more demorilizing to them to make those guys sit and have a bigger effect on their future preformance than if someone had gotten hurt.
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
Fire Caldwell!
we need some turmoil at that franchise up there.
Try as he might, BBS has no impact on them.
Mount Cody in round 1
I think, at the end of the day.
We’re better to focus at a winning record, getting to second in the AFC South and playing mistake free, competitive football for 60 minutes this weekend.
While there is a mathematical chance of a playoff spot for us, it is highly unlikely that the dice will roll in our favour this time, too many teams are better off resting up rather than competing for our needs.
I think most of us knew that we blew our chances with the 0-4 stretch in the middle of the season.
One thing to look at though. How many teams can finish 2nd in their division after going 1-5?
by distant_texans_fan on Dec 29, 2009 2:08 PM CST reply actions
the good thing is
they are not mutually exclusive.
Our guys have to win on Sunday. That will be their focus, regardless.
And the even better thing is, the scoreboard watching won’t hurt us. I think the games that matter are late.
Mount Cody in round 1
I hope Brady and Moss play.
I want Texans in the playoffs, and to beat the real Patriots on their way.
You are banned from Music City Miracles.
Happy Now Tits?
You are banned from Blogging The Boys.
by CFHTim on Dec 29, 2009 2:09 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Super!
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:14 AM CST up reply actions
I have no problem with the Colts, or any team sitting players if they want to
I just don’t understand why you’d play your starters for 2 1/2 quarters then sit them with just a 5 point lead. If the outcome of the game didn’t matter anymore than that, I don’t understand why the starters played at all, or at least why they’d come out in the 2nd half. I was just dumbfounded by the ‘when’ of the sit downs, not the sitting down itself.
But to be honest, i’d kinda rather beat the Patriots with all their starters rather than get the win against backups. I guess if things fell just right and the win really would put us in the playoffs, then anything that helps the cause is a good thing, there’d always be the playoffs to pontentially leave a mark. I just know that typically when i’m sitting down to watch a game, i’d rather see the best both teams have to offer regardless of who won because of it.
I've seen this come up a few times, so...
You’d want your players to play SOME of the game, so they keep their skills sharp, going against actual live competition. You’d just try to bide your time with enough work, but not too much to risk injury. Otherwise, your team is sitting on their BBS’s for a month, and not playing. That’s a luxury really good teams have, so I’m not upset if anyone’s doing it.
If we were so worried about it, we should’ve won all the games we lost.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
"If we were so worried about it, we should’ve won all the games we lost."
Can’t argue with this, but I don’t know that I buy the whole “enough work, but not too much to risk injury.” For one, I doubt Caldwell (or anyone involved) determined that the point where Manning came out struck the perfect balance between reps and danger. For another, you see just as many players injured in the first possession as you do in the mid-third quarter. So, unless you’re just pulling him to prevent extra exposure, you’re not really limiting injury risk are you? Stated differently, once Manning stepped on the field, he was just as likely to get hurt on any single passing play; the only way to prevent injury risk was to not play him at all.
Also, fuck Manning to death. I hate that guy.
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
Oh, I agree...
Just trying to see their side of it. Again, it was their choice, so their option. If they think that they’ve got a better shot at the ring doing what they did, regardless of how they calculated the “pitch” counts, all anyone can do it just see if it worked in the end.
I only brought it up because people asked why they were playing at all, and that’s the common answer you’d get. Honestly, there’s no right or wrong answer to that decision. The thing that justifies sitting them is winning the SB, and that’s what I’m assuming they based the decision on. Give your team the best shot to win the crown, and fuck everyone else. Of course it sucks that we might be one of the ones getting fucked, but it’s not like that’s anything new, and I certainly don’t blame anyone else for it coming down to this.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
Good point
if Chris Brown has testicles, we score against Arizona and this is moot.
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
I my opinion....as if it mattered...
The colts disrespected football, by basically giving the game to a team that needed it. Against an opponent that was out of it, I understand, but a team should expect a team to give its best when your trying for a playoff spot. Yes I do want Brady and Moss to play because, I think we can beat them.
From a Colts standpoint, I understand the move, but dont like it.
GO TEXANS!!!!
Our time will come...
by Texanmaniac on Dec 29, 2009 3:40 PM CST via mobile reply actions
They did give it their best...
Their best from their backups. You think those guys weren’t trying to win it?
Not only are teams that sit players preventing injury to some select starters, but they’re giving valuable minutes to shore up depth they may need.
Again, anyone that’s upset by this should be more upset that their team didn’t win more games to make it moot.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
I keep hearing that.
But why don’t those rules apply to the Jets? People say, “oh, the Texans didn’t take care of business earlier in the season. They don’t deserve to be in the playoffs”.
Well you know what? Neither did the fucking Jets. They beat up on shitty teams just like we did, then when it came down to the hard part of their schedule they got a free pass. Talk about how shitty we played all you’d like, but do you think there’s a chance in hell that Curtis Painter makes that 2nd-half comeback against us?
And I don’t really give a shit if the Colts’ back-ups were trying to win it; we’re talking about a team that ranks dead-last in the NFL in rushing and has arguably the best QB of all time sitting on the sidelines during that game. There’s not a bigger drop-off in all of football than going from Peyton Manning to Curtis Painter.
We probably don’t deserve to be in the playoffs, but neither do the fucking Jets.
by Nashmeister on Dec 29, 2009 4:41 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Had we beaten the fucking jets...
I’d be right there with you. Maybe. But we didn’t do that either.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
We beat the Bengals.
That doesn’t mean we should have their playoff spot.
If the Jets actually beat the Colts’ and Bengals’ starters, then more power to them. They earned that tie-breaker with the beat-down they handed us in week one. But they didn’t.
If we lose next week or if Baltimore and Denver both win, all my rage will have been for naught. But if the Jets are one of the two teams ahead of us next week, I’m going to shit in a box and mail it to Jim Caldwell.
by Nashmeister on Dec 29, 2009 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
I'm not upset with the Jets at all
Then again, I’m not upset with the Colts, either.
I do, however, want to club Rex Ryan, if that counts for anything.
If the Jets can get in by beating a team that rests its starters, well then we should be able to as well. Sounds good to me!
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:17 AM CST up reply actions
There was a similar drop off once upon a time.
Back in the 60’s when Unitas and Gary Cquozzo (sp?) went down the Colts played a running back at QB for several truly ugly games.
by coltfan59 on Dec 30, 2009 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
They are not allowed to have moods
unless BBS says they can. Otherwise…
(wait for it)
(wait for it)
BANNED!!
Jim Caldwell delenda est.
Its okay to be hypocritical as fans....
but the bottom line is that the Texans put themselves in this position. If we won one of those 4 games during that divisional streak or if we beat the Jets in week 1, we would control our own destiny. ITS THAT SIMPLE. The Colts, Bengals, and Patriots are going to play how they think is best for them, whether that hurts us or helps us is no concern to them and it shouldnt be. It is the Texans’ fault that we are mad at the Colts right now and the Texans’ fault if we dont make the playoffs. We have had our chances to be in a better position and we blew them.
"Every time you turn on ESPN you see Bama" - Earl Thomas' answer when asked what excites him most about the National Championship.
To all Houston sports fans, Houston is the 4th biggest city in America, there will be traffic on the way to your respective sports game. Come Early, Be Loud, Stay Late.
by TexasHoosier on Dec 29, 2009 3:52 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Who cares?!
I want what’s best for me, Texans success. It makes me happy, and subsequently, my entire family happy. Feel free to call it whatever you like. I’m all for it.
"So I got that goin' for me, which is nice." ~ Carl Spackler
Colts management was wrong, very wrong
I’ve been a Colts fan for 50 years. There’s been good years and bad years but this is the first time the team has embarrassed me.
The problem with the decision during the Jets game was that the game had playoff implications. The Jets and the other playoff contenders (and their fans) have the right to fair play. Plus, every team and fan has a right to an honest effort. The NFL fines players for unsportsmanship but what about teams that lose games to improve draft positions or roll over and play dead in games with playoff implications? The NFL needs to clarify under what circumstances it’s okay for a team to chuck it for a game of two.
No one cares about the Colts-Bills game. Announce before the game that one or both teams will be giving 50% efforts and let it go. The only ones that get hurt are the teams who lose out to the Bills on draft day in the event that they out dog it and manage to lose to the Painter-led Colts.
by coltfan59 on Dec 29, 2009 4:49 PM CST reply actions 8 recs
I understand that you're upset
I respect that, especially coming from someone who has followed the team from their glory days to their shitty days and back. If the Colts win the Super Bowl, will you forget this incident?
And likewise, if they lose, do you think most fans will blame it on the fact that they let up towards the end of the season?
I’m not trying to pick a fight or prove a point. I’m legitimately interested in a Colts fan’s perspective.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:19 AM CST up reply actions
No, I can't forget as it's all about the integrity of The Game
If we win the Super Bowl I’ll obviously be happy but the taint will remain on the season. We intentionally played dead and screwed up the playoff hopes of the fans in Houston, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh,and Denver and helped New York get into the playoffs through a side door (i’m sure the Jets’ players would have preferred winning straight up).
I know a lot of fans “hate” the other teams from their respective divisions but I’m a true homer. If the Colts don’t make it to the Super Bowl then I become a TexanTitanJag fan if they’re still in it. After that I’m okay with anybody except the Pats and Cowboys. But in the end, it’s The Game. It’s not the teams (you can always change loyalties especially if they move.. I never lived in Baltimore so moving to Indy meant nothing to me) and it’s not the players (they will eventually retire or as the Pack’s fans have found out join your enemy).
Anybody notice that the screwed teams are from small TV market cities and that if the Colts had beaten the Jets there would have been NO New York City team in the playoffs? As Peyton would say… just saying.
by coltfan59 on Dec 30, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Thanks for the perspective
I don’t really know how you can stop this stuff. The league can’t mandate starters start every game, and if they create some rule to make these games competitive, guys like Bellichick are just going to find creative ways to skirt the rules.
Also, rec for hating the Cowboys.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 31, 2009 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
My son had Dallas Clark on his fantasy team
and lost the league’s SB by 3 points last Sunday. Man, you should have heard him when he realized they were pulling their starters, lol. Poor kid, this was the closest he’d ever come to winning.
Keep the faith!
I hear you Tim, and what you portray is hypocrisy
but I don’t feel that way, and bet (OK at least hope) that I am not alone. Given that the Ravens, Jets and Broncos are all 10+ point favorites, the chances of at least 2 of them losing is remote at best. If the Texans are going to earn their first winning season, it would take a lot of the steam out of it if we do it against the Pats backups. Furthermore, as a fan I would rather watch Brady, Moss, Welker, et al on the field than whoever their backups are. Yes it would make it harder for us to win, but it would be more rewarding on many levels. It would give the Texan players much more satisfaction too.
I see that the Texans are -8 so the Vegas boys expect the Pats to lay down for us. They’re usually not wrong, but I truly hope that they are this time.
It took the Astros 44 years to get to the Series, the Oilers-Texans are due to get to the big dance...Go Texans!!!!!
by oiler-texan diehard on Dec 29, 2009 6:34 PM CST reply actions
Why I agree with what the Colts did.
Let’s look at it from a different point of view.
If our situation was reversed with Indy, you’d want the same thing for two reasons.
1. You’d want our starters nice and refreshed for the playoffs. Because winning the Super Bowl is the ultimate goal of the entire season, and you do everything you can to win it.
2. Would you want to possibly face the Colts in the post season? No team in their right mind wants to face a division opponent in the playoffs.
The Colts laying down ensures no injuries and, with the Jacksonville loss, makes it almost certain they won’t have to face a division rival in the post season.
Sure the Colts have thumped us over and over again. But the last few times it’s been very close. And of those close times it’s been us beating ourselves more than what they’ve done. And please, give the Rosencopter a break in any responses.
Now the Patriots have every reason to lay down for us for the same reason. If you’re the Pats, do you really want to possibly see the Jets in the post season? I’d rather play Houston if I’m the Pats for the very reason we would barely squeak into the playoffs. We lost most of our games because of turnovers. Our offense is better, but the Jets defense is better. Remember the old “Defense wins championships” saying? Not that Sanchez hasn’t been turning the ball over a lot also. But I still say if you can possibly avoid it, you do not ever want to play a division rival in the playoffs.
Are you saying that the Colts fear the AFC South?
I don’t really get your argument about division rivals.
The way I view it is this: If you were gonna sit them once you clinched…why wait til mid 3rd quarter to do it? The timing was weird, and comes off as they quit.
Personally, you have the bye for a reason. Now they’re running the risk of not playing meaningful football from this past Sunday, through week 17, through the first round (their bye), and to their game. I don’t care who you are, you’re not “turning it on” after 3 weeks off. The Colts never learn their lesson.
re: colts never learn their lesson
good. screw em.
Mount Cody in round 1
I'm a Texan fan
I hope the Colts lose every game* from this Sunday until 20 years after I die.
*unless a Colts win helps the Texans get into the playoffs.
I remain unapologetic in this view.
Mount Cody in round 1
oops, damn
- they must win the two games v. the tits also.
Mount Cody in round 1
What I’m saying is is that division rivals know each other better. Think back to last year. The Titans were 13-0. Who handed them their first loss?
Or this year. Tampa beating New Orleans?
And I wouldn’t second guess the Colts. Say what you want, but remember Manning and most of the current coaching staff are wearing Superbowl rings.
They're wearing a Super Bowl ring
All those seasons of 12+ wins and they only have 1 AFC title and 1 Super Bowl. Why? Because that season aside, they lacked momentum because they rested stars….because this is the NFL and you can’t waltz your way through this. That’s why people get second guessed because we’ve seen this before.
If you’re trying to tell me that Indy doesn’t want to play Houston or Jacksonville in the playoffs….I don’t buy it. The Colts have owned the South. So what they know you well…you know them too. A great team doesn’t care who they play.
I think navigating through the playoffs
has a little bit of luck involved, along with superior talent/coaching, and playing well at the right time.
But I think you’re making a huge leap to say the reason they won that super bowl and lost in the playoffs the other seasons was solely because of their decision to rest or play their stars.
Mount Cody in round 1
Oh yeah, it's a huge blanket statement
But I’m always willing to put my money on the team that had to win 3 straight to get into the playoffs and won a big playoff game versus a team that shut it down with 3 weeks before their 1st playoff game.
You can’t shut it down and then play playoff level football at a whim.
so you're thinkin
Cowboys – Jets for this Super Bowl, huh?
I’d take the side that says that doesn’t happen. For either team.
Mount Cody in round 1
Lots of evidence suggests that teams can stumble into the playoffs and still go a long way
So I’m not sure about this whole turning it on and off thing.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 3:20 AM CST up reply actions
IMO it's really all about injuries
Colts management absolutely fears injuries. More so than just about every other team. There are two reasons for it. First, we play “fast” players which means “small” by NFL standards so our guys always are dinged up. The sheer volume of injuries we’ve seen in the last 10 years is amazing. It’s not all that unusual for 5 starters to be out on one side of the ball… it happened again this year with our defense. Last year we were down to 5 OL guys and I think one of them was the ball boy the week before. And second, the Colts are THIN in talent in a lot of areas… drafting at number 27 and below for a decade will do that to you. If Freeney and Brackett go down we’re dead and if Manning goes down we couldn’t win a game of jacks.
next man up
was all we heard when the Colts had a plethora of injuries coming into our game.
I’ll give you Manning, since he’s obviously superior to anyone the Colts could draft/sign to replace him. But fearing injuries imo leads to tentative play, which I don’t see from the Colts.
Mount Cody in round 1
The most important thing
this situation tells us is that the colts are nothing without Manning and Clarke. Take the penalties to take them out in the first series and win the game. Advise for future playoff teams this year.
It's Manning, Freeney and then Brackett.
Losing Clark would be a big loss but we do have servicable subs at TE so it’s not necssarily an absolute killer… absent another injury in the receiving corps.
good luck with that
we have more talented TE’s than you could imagine, and when our all world TE went down, we lost 4 division games in a row.
I thought he was replaceable before he went down as well.
I think sammocyr is right and Clark is right below Manning on the “must stay healthy” list. Even with Clark its not like you were pounding teams by 20+ points.
Mount Cody in round 1
Polian and NFL Network
From PFT, Florio has a breakdown of douchebag Polian “spin” /PR attempt to soothe the pissed off folks in Indy. After all, the fans their were roasting his ass on his radio call-in show, before they pulled the plug 10 min early to avoid more criticism.
I might be on a “grassy knoll” or wearing an aluminum foil hat but, I find this whole situation BS. If the Jackasses can throw the game to “rest” their starters (reported) because an undefeated season wasn’t a priority/goal, then why put their starters out there to begin the game? Was it to manipulate the playoff seeding and avoid the Texans and Steelers, as a possible playoff foe, by giving the Jets a win? Texans have played them to the wire in the games this year and the Steelers (although having a down year) would love to plant Forehead vs. a Jets team (rookie coach and a QB learning the fetal position) that they were winning against, with their starters in.
The resting the starters argument bothers me when you consider the integrity of the game. The Rams suck and have but, if they pulled out the crappy players (all but Steven Jackson) and put in the office secretaries to insure the #1 pick in the draft, is that sportsmanship or sound football objective in reaching your team goals? Do they celebrate their winning of the “Suh Sweepstakes” and mock the system in order to gain that advantage?
Of course it makes sense
The Colts manipulated the playoff seedings in part to avoid a team that they’ve only lost to once in the last eight years.
Proudly supporting the Qatar National Falconry Team since December 6, 2009.
by tehGrindCrusher on Dec 30, 2009 9:02 AM CST up reply actions
more likely
I think the timing of the starters coming out was based on the way the game was going.
I think they were afraid they might lose with their starters in, and tried to save face.
Mount Cody in round 1
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Battle Red Blog
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
