Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Cat Cries

The Jholes and their fans are hopping mad. They think that Fred Taylor was shafted. For some reason, the their ire has centered on Joe Addai instead of on Willie Parker, who despite leading the NFL in rushing (due in large part to his league high carry totals), has questionable value. I realize that Taylor has put together four good games in a row (after 10 mediocre ones), but as we delineated the other day, this really shouldn't be an issue. Taylor isn't good enough. He's a part time back who rips off a few big runs and lots of empty ones. He is made better by splitting carries with MJD.

Some have intimated that Dwight Freeney wasn't deserving of his status as #1 vote getter in the AFC. That's true of course, since he hasn't played for about six weeks now. He was, however, having a tremendous season before he got hurt, and the pass rush has suffered without him (though in fairness it's impossible to get a read on this defense when it's constantly without multiple starters). I'm not defending the fans, mind you, they should have stopped voting for him when he went down. That's not his fault, though.

Who would ever have thought the Colts would win the Super Bowl and get FEWER players sent to the Pro Bowl. Glenn's retirement and Freeney's injury stole two who would have been rubber stamped in, but it's still interesting what a sham the whole thing is.

One Boston commenter questioned Manning's selection in a Boston paper (just some idiot not worth linking to). Really? He's got better numbers this year than Tommy ever had. If Manning doesn't belong, then Brady never did till now.

I'm still mad about Gary Brackett. He's the MVP of this team this season.

The Chargers have 9 Pro Bowlers? Norv Turner must be the worst coach ever...oh wait...

I know it's sort of a boring topic, but week 16 of the NFL is typically this way for these Colts. Nothing to talk about until the playoffs. And you know what? That's not a bad thing.

CHFF may be nasty, but they are not wrong about Gary Brackett. I also appreciate them not tooting the Fred Taylor horn.

Michael Smith is dead on about Dungy. We've been saying it all year, but it's nice to get the echo.

Demond Sanders: Thanks to anonymous for posting this great article about the MVP award. Can't I say I agree with the author's final conclusion, but I appreciate the research and outside-the-box thinking. Lemmings is indeed an appropriate word for most NFL experts. Manning has been great this season, but, unlike past seasons, he hasn't been the only glue keeping the Colts together. Guys like Gary Brackett, Bob Sanders, Raheem Brock, Reggie Wayne, Jeff Saturday, and obviously Tony Dungy deserve a lot of the credit as well. I think it would be disingenuous to argue that anyone besides Moss or Brady deserves the MVP. The truth is Manning is much more interested in matching Brady's second Super Bowl MVPs.

Deshawn Replies: I believe in consistency when it comes to arguments. I thought that Manning deserved the MVPs he won over fools who wanted Brady to win with vastly inferior numbers, and I'm not going to play that game this time. I agree with the author that Moss is more valuable than Brady this year, and I believe Manning to be more valuable to than Brady as well, but would not vote it that way, because my belief is not proof. My NFL MVP Ballot would read:

1. Moss
2. Gary Brackett (SHUT UP! I LOVE HIM)
3. Brady
4. Manning
5. Favre
6. LT (the Chargers would be LOST without him)

In a vacuum, I think Manning is both better and more valuable than Brady (even this year), but in the real world, I believe stats have to count for something, so in the name of consistency, I'll put him ahead this season. Ultimately, however, the Moss factor cannot be over estimated. If the Pats replace Moss with any other receiver in football, no matter how good, Brady would return his typical 90 rating with 25/15 and 3800 yards. As the weather has neutralized Moss, we've seen Brady's numbers start to slip. If he was not present at all, they'd fall back to where they've always been.

Has it really come to this? Arguing Manning and Brady again? Ugh. January can't come soon enough.

33 comments:

JC said...

Has anyone seen my boy Seymour (now healthy and back to his disruptive self) collapsing offensive lines the last two weeks?

Deshawn Zombie said...

and against such excellent offensive lines! Oh....

zac said...

Forget the Cats...we are heading on a collision course to what may be the greatest Sunday in NFL history.

We easily could have a Dallas(15-2) v Green Bay (15-2) rematch in Dallas followed by a NE Patriots (17-0) vs Indianapolis Colts (15-2) rematch in NE. Combined records of 62-6, with three of the losses coming when teams in this group faced others. Now THOSE are conference title games!

My goodness. I think my head just exploded.

Joel said...

Holy crap, did you read Vic's answers to both the Pro Bowl thing and to Wilbon saying the Jags are the 2nd best team in the league? I about peed myself. He thinks Taylor should have gone in over Addai (he's wrong, but never mind that), but went so far as to say the following:

"Willie Parker leads the league in rushing and in attempts. That’s a fantastic achievement. Jaguars fans talk about rushing attempts as though less is more and that’s just not true. Workhorse backs are premium players."

and:

"...I will not deny that Addai is a worthy back. He’s got a lot of yards and carries and touchdowns, and his real worth is as a receiver. Addai has 39 receptions."

Then, to answer the Wilbon question, said:

"I think the Colts are the second-best team in the league and they deserve that distinction based, in part, on their two wins over the Jaguars."

I'm stunned. Vic using normal human reasoning! I think the temperature in hell just dropped a few degrees.

Joel said...

jc:

Kellen Clemens and Chad Pennington have been sacked for a combined 44 times this season. Roethelisberger has been sacked 43 times. Only Kitna has been sacked more than the QBs for the Jets and Steelers. So Seymour collapsing those two lines is not much of an accomplishment.

Joel said...

Crap...as soon as I praised Vic for being reasonable, I read the second link where he talks about the "integrity" of the Pro Bowl being compromised by the fan voting. Um, Vic, it's the Pro Bowl. It's relatively meaningless. Get over yourself. Because heaven forbid a game with zero competitive implications be tainted by letting the FANS decide who they want to see play. I love how he says that "the sportswriters would have put Fred in the Pro Bowl." I've never heard a more compelling argument for why they SHOULDN'T be allowed to vote. What a doofus.

JC said...

The guy is like.......a 5 time pro-bowler and was on PUP until the Indy game, which I don't think he was even active for.

Then it took him 3-5 games to get in game shape.

The Jets blow....granted. But he looked like the old explosive 93 blowing up double teams and collapsing pockets.

Believe me he's a difference maker.

Kind of like Freeney is. Or was for that matter.......

JC said...

Demond:

That Michael Smith book you're eagerly awaiting might be around by 2017.

Unless of course, Belichick drafts another Hall of Famer in the 6th round of the 2015 draft.

Deshawn Zombie said...

Yeah, no one is deny Seymour is a force. I'm just busting your chops because good games against the Jets line means as much as Marooney's 100 yards against the Jets D line. Not much. He is actually a great player though (seymour I mean)

Anonymous said...

Allen Barra has the intelligence to point out that Randy Moss is the Pats' MVP and that the NFL MVP should go to Peyton.
http://www.nysun.com/article/68350

Bob M. said...

Allen Barra is good and no lemming, though I don't always agree with him. This time I do. great link, thanks!

I wonder who his coach of the year would be....?

Bob M. said...

Oh, and Gary Brackett is no MFL MVP. For a defender to get it he has to not just be the glue to the best defense (give or take a ranking slot), but totally dominate in some statistical category, and have huge games on national TV. That's just to overcome the offensive weighting (or more accurately, the QB/RB weighting).

Just for argument's sake, for Gary to win MVP, Indy would need at least 12 wins (check) and have to be a top-3 D (check). In addition, I'd say he'd have to be top-5 in tackles (meaningless) and have at least 7 INTs or 10 sacks or some combination thereof. Plus one or two game winning plays on national TV--a pick or FF returned for a winning TD perhaps. Think Heisman voting. They love stats, but Steve McNair (my pick, years ago) and Colt Brennan never won because of inferior competition. National TV heroics are a big part of it.
The hurdle for a D player to get MVP is insanely high.
This coming from a guy who would have voted Manning #1 in 2005 and Walter Jones #2--surely not Shawn Alexander. And Manning #1 Last year. See, even I have an offense bias. QB is just too central a position. Having said that, I'd vote Moss this year.

Deshawn Zombie said...

I'm kidding about Brackett, obviously. But following your logic Bob, Gary ought to be a contender. He has 4 picks, but TIPPED FIVE more balls that were picked off. That's insane. He also played huge on national TV against the Ravens. Obviously, a linebacker will never win the MVP, but I can dream.

Anonymous said...

Deshawn:

Always with the "ifs".

If any other receiver besides Moss blah blah blah.

If Reggie Wayne doesn't drop that touchdown blah blah blah.

If Adam makes that kick against San Diego blah blah blah.

Yea....and if the Germans won the war........oh wait. They DIDN'T.

And it IS Moss and Wayne DID drop the surefire TD and we ARE 14-0.

I know where you're coming from being a bitter Brady-hating hater.

Much like the much overblown Nomar-Jeter debate that raged in the mid 90's. Nomar had better numbers, Jeter won more. Time eventually told that Jeter was better. I was on the wrong side of that one as I feel you are on the wrong side of this one.

Obviously you'll never concede this - as you run a Colts blog - but we'll see what time says about Brady-Manning.

Actually...who cares what time says?

Brady's better.

jc said...

That was me by the way if you couldn't tell.

Deshawn Zombie said...

JC-I'm not a Brady hater. I'm a Brady realist. I actually respect the Patriots whole team, unlike idiots from Boston which think Brady is a god instead of a really good QB who plays with some all time greats on defense. If you had read the article, it summarized pretty well the argument against Brady. What Moss is doing is par for the course for his career (when he chooses to grace the team by playing). What Brady is doing has nothing to do at all with his previous numbers.

As for the 'ifs', they are only relevant in terms on analyzing what might happen this year. They aren't any good after January 21. My whole point all season with the ifs is that the gap between the Pats and Colts is nonexistant. The next time they play there is reasonable evidence to predict a different outcome. The Pats benefited from some circumstances and plays that are not likely to go their way twice. Hence the 'ifs'.

You'll get no more ifs in about three weeks.

As for history, after Manning takes his second ring, humiliating Brady on his home field, you're right. History will have settled the debate. My whole point in the post is that the argument is boring, because it'll settle itself soon enough.

jc said...

C'mon.

Come correct. You hate him.

Deshawn Zombie said...

As an opponent? Sure. In a vacuum where he's wearing the generic jersey of some random team like Seattle? I'd feel about him more or less about how I feel about Matt Hasselback. They are pretty much the same player. Real good QB, in the right system, with the right team, he'd be a winner. I simply don't think he'd be an all time great on any other team. I also think about 4 other QB could have won multiple titles with those same Pats teams. I mean, how hard is it to throw the big pick in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl, only to get bailed out by both teams' kickers?

JC said...

Probably not as hard as it was to set the Superbowl record for completions in the same game.

You know throw the pick, then answer Carolina's touchdown with a sick TD drive of his own capped with a 2 point conversion to retake the lead.

Check your history bro.

Jacob Burch said...

yeah, brady was a god on that two point conversion.

seriously silly debate.

Deshawn Zombie said...

No, seriously boring. There isn't any point in it. We'll find out in about a month.

Bob M. said...

Link to an article on Parcells' spotty employment-seeking history.
I never knew how much we really owed him, for encouraging the Glazers to fire Dungy. (I mean, what idiots fire a coach who consistently brings his team to the playoffs? Never mind.)

Thanks Bill!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22333932/

Deshawn, I love Gary too, and think if any LB has MVP legitimacy this year, it's him. (Part of my "short guys from Jersey get no respect" campaign, in its 43rd year. What? You've never heard of it? See what I mean!) But he's probably ranked 6th-8th on my "what's just" meter and 50th in my estimate of what's likely. Hell, those a-holes left him out of the pro bowl, so they assume at least 2 other ILBs are ahead of him. Wouldn't you just shit a brick if Ray Lewis won it this year? DeMeco Ryans? Their teams are a combined 10-18 so far.

His proper reward in addition to Hawaii, were he on a big-market big-dollar team, would be a contract extension at season's end with nothing too unusual, but a signing bonus of about $2M (prorated for cap calcs) as basically a "thank you" for being the best this year. It would have minimal cap implications and be a pretty nice chunk of change, plus tie-up his services up for a couple more years. He's 27 now and we have him for probably 3 more years. I'd cold-heartedly guess that 3 additional seasons would bring him to his reasonably-expected useful end as a starter. After that, they can one-year him a couple times until he retires as a Colt.
Next fall it's time to get my sons new jerseys. I'll replace 18, 32, and 93 with..... I don't know, but 58 is in the running along with 21, 11, 44. 88 I'll get for myself.

PatsRule said...

"The Pats benefited from some circumstances and plays that are not likely to go their way twice."
Deshawn, you can't be serious. The refs had it in for the Patriots during the Colts game. It was an officiating travesty. I've even heard Colts fans admit that the calls went unfairly against the Pats. The score shouldn't have been that close.
And Brady is succeeding only because he has "all-time greats on defense"? All I've heard from Colts fans all year is how the Patriots defense is old and wrinkly. So which is it?

Deshawn Zombie said...

The Pats defense is old THIS season. My comments on the greatness of it referred to the season they won Super Bowls. I'm sorry if that was unclear. It wasn't old 5 years ago.

Your comments on the officiating are funny and off base. When I watched the game, I thought the Colts had benefited from some calls. Upon rewatching it, there was really only one call that was truely questionable. That was the PI on Reggie Wayne's deep ball. Even that call didn't probably change the outcome of the game. The Colts would have had a 2nd and 10 at the NE 40. They only got a FG out of that possession anyway, so it's hard to argue that that one call really altered anything.

I think all the Pats penalties that game were because they were unprepared for Indy's speed. They were clearly shocked and frustrated that a team was playing them tough, and didn't handle it well. The Colts finished that game without a left tackle, and only one viable receiver. Dallas Clark was playing with a concussion, for crying out loud. I just can't see that all playing out the same way if Indy has a healthy team.

Sorry, we are sooooo not scared of your team. I just hope they survive Jacksonville so we get a shot at them.

jc said...

Nor are we scared of you, especially without the Jason Taylor-esque Freeney.

Bob M. said...

Freeney has more hair that Taylor!

In seriousness, the Colts cannot expect to benefit from 100+ penalty yards again, that is for sure. I was stunned back in Week 9 when it happened. Plus Seymour is presumably better now than just a couple weeks off the PUP list. But the Pats PROBABLY won't benefit from the Colts numerous MIAs either. Sure more guys can get injured or not recover in time between now and then. But assuming Marvin Harrison and Ryan Diem and the nicked up DLs and Antoine Bethea are at full strength, I think the Colts have the edge (no pun intended, Mister SB ring) on a neutral field and it's even in Foxborough.

Remember, without assigning blame, each team had some flukey things in the last game--penalties hurt the Pats and a dropped TD pass for the Colts. I assume the Pats play with more discipline next time and that Gonzo catches that ball next time.

BTW, looking at the playoff seeds as of today and assigning my own odds of winning (Jags and SD = 60% chance of winning in the first round), I have the Pats most likely to face Cleveland (40%) and then the Jags (36%). If SD wins, (they "should," but can Rivers keep up with Anderson in a shootout?) Pats face the Jags and Colts face the Chargers. Sweet revenge, two weeks in a row. That is, if the Pats beat the Jags. Of course if SD and Pitt wins, the Pats get a second bye week. (let the Pitt hate-mail fly.) I'd love to host the AFCCG again and facing the Jags for a third time would be great.

Countarfit said...

If you look at the history of the Pats' Superbowl wins you'll notice that AV saved their asses quite a few times. Tom Brady is a good QB but he simply managed those games. He didn't really win it for them.

As for their defense being "old and wrinkly", i kind of question. A Thomas is the youngest member of their starting Linebacker core. You'll notice that almost everyone else on their starting defense is getting old and starting to lose a step or two. I"m not saying that they're not good, because they still are, they're just not carrying the team like they did during those superbowl years. Those games were won by a defense that stopped the opponents. The offense simply managed to put enough points on the board to win. Thank you Adam Vinatieri. However, this year it is the offense that is controlling the show for them now. They can blow people away and not have to worry about the fact that the dolphins put up 28 points on them. That was with the starters still in the game. I mean you can't say that your defense is the greatest ever when a 1-13 team scored 28 points on them.

The colts highest point total allowed this year is to the #3 Team in the AFC. And that was 25 points. Meaning that the we have the defense carrying this team this year (due to a lot of injuries on the offensive side of the ball) and our offense is simply putting enough points on the board to win us the game. This is excluding the embarassment, i mean ass handing to we gave the ravens...or should i just say "Baltimore".

I do think that we have a chance to win this game. If we can keep it a low scoring affair I think that our boys will be able to knock off the "ESPN's" in the AFCCG, unless those pesky Jholes can do it for us. Which would prove we are the better team since we have already beaten three times.

Anonymous said...

Just go look at the numbers.

Trent Dilfer "managed" his SB win.

Brady's 03 and 04 bowl performances were solid, 03 was top 3 ever statistically.

Deshawn Zombie said...

Yeah, '03 was great. Other than the HUGE pick he threw in the fourth quarter. They had the Panthers dead to rights, and he let them off the mat with a terrible decision. Yeah, he had another drive after that, but my point is that he wasn't quite so bullet proof as people remember. They want to elevate him above Joe Montana, but Joe never threw even one pick in the Super Bowl, let alone a huge, game changing one in the fourth quarter. If two kickers don't save him, people's opinion of him would be vastly different today. And that's the problem. So much has been credited to Brady and taken from Manning based on playoff wins and losses, when in most every game things happen that the QB couldn't influence. It wasn't Brady's greatness that made AV hit multiple GW FGs any more than it was Peyton choking that made Vandy yank them.

I don't hate Brady. I do hate the selective memory of Pats fans. I hate that the same people that used to say wins are all that matter, are all drooling over stats from ONE season. I think he's a fine QB who has had the good fortune of never having to have lost a playoff game because his kicker got the yips. He also managed a team in '01 that was so solid that even Drew Bledsoe won a PLAYOFF game. He's been great sure, but he's been lucky. Manning's been greater, but has had worse luck. I think over time that evens out. Hence, in 5 or 10 years, we might have a different opinion.
(reposted-someone else was logged in on this computer)

Bob M. said...

Brady was more than a game manager after his first season. He is a very good QB. Maybe if his D was as bad as ours was a few years ago he'd have elevated his game. Or maybe he would have imploded. We'll never know.
I kind of like the Matt Hasselbeck analogy--he's a good QB too, who has had a good OL, generally good rushing game, and poor receivers most of his career. If their situations were reversed, it's possible nobody might notice but Giselle. ("Tom, you are so... bald!") And Matt, a Boston kid and would-be 2nd generation Pat, would have the 3 SB rings.

Regarding Vinatieri, while he did bail the Pats out at the end of a playoff game or two and 2 SBs, remember he also missed earlier kicks during those bail-out games. While he appeared to be mister clutch, his earlier mishaps added to that need to come through in the end. Had he made the earlier kicks, he'd have been putting up insurance points rather than the GW FGs, which is a lot less memorable. I think the selective memory works both ways. Brady is not as God-like as he is often made out to be (except maybe this year) and neither was AV.

Speaking of Tom Terrific (used to be Tom Seaver's nick name), do you think Vegas has a series of prop bets predicting his final TD number? I bet those Massholes who put down $100 on 55-60 a month ago are feeling pretty stupid about now. And I think 48, 49, or 50 look about right. Assuming he plays 8 more quarters. Which would be about 8 quarters MORE that Manning played when he threw 49. But in 5-10 years, only about a dozen people will remember that. Selective memory again..... damn.

JC said...

DZ:

If Peyton doesn't play as poorly as he did in most of his career playoff games (he was a total meltdown in the '05 Pitt game) then Vanderjagt doesn't HAVE to win the game.

I mean, for you going back to Brady's pick in the '03 Bowl, Tom has never had three consecutive post-season nightmare exits.

He just hasn't. The Denver game in 2005 was bad.....but we fumbled three times and deserved to lose.

I can be very selective when it comes to Manning sucking when it counts.

Deshawn Zombie said...

See, now THAT'S a hilarious post. Manning wasn't horrible in '05. He had exactly ONE bad playoff game (AFC Champ 04). He was fine in '05, but the Colts recievers kept fumbling the ball. He was great against Pitt in '06, but had about 0.1 seconds to throw. It was bizzarre how the media blamed him for those games, because both times I watch and said, Geeze, this is a disaster. At least they won't blame Manning. Then they did. It was queer. So as long as you are being selective, you should at least pay attention. Not everything Terry Bradshaw says is true.

Deshawn Zombie said...

Once again, check our 5 myths article on the main site. http://18to88.com/Articles/5myths.html

Idiots blame their QB for every loss and incompletion. Idiots praise their QB for every win.

And people wonder why I hate the Patriots.