I don't think the Colts are playing to lose. Until last night they've been in nearly all their games since Week 1. Hell, they nearly beat Pitt.
Picture this, a lady walks into a bar for a drink on a business trip, and there's this really big dude beating her to a pulp the moment she sets foot into the door. Then she gets up, barely, and along comes a second dude, and he starts swinging. He pounds at her for, say, 55 minutes straight, at which point she just kicks him between the legs and finally orders her drink.
As a fan of the Dolphins I am embarassed for my team. I think colt fans will have an easier time shaking off their loss.
blow outs happen every week in the NFL its nothing new how do you blow a game with 15 point lead 3 mins left and the team has no time outs
And what is the game analysts have been talking about and breaking down non-stop? Not the Colts game, but the MAGIC of Tim Tebow. Ugh.
Almost all of that conversation is about Tebow. They're not talking about Miami either except for those who try to minimize Tebow by saying that it was against a bad team. IMO, most teams in the NFL are close in talent. SF lost a ton of close games last year, brought in a better game manger in Harbaugh and are winning. Being in every game means you're close enough that a few changes makes all the difference. It is far more embarrassing to not even be in a game.
Sources tell me that during the timeout that Tony called late in the 4th, Tim Tebow regaled his entire offensive unit with the story of Jonathan and the walls of Jericho., which may or may not have revived the Broncos' desire for victory on that day. A team which was inferior showed a lot more moxy and eventually pulled out a win vs a team with a clear void in leadership. The Saints were just superior in every aspect, as evidenced by their merciless pillaging of a hapless and miserable Colts squad.
Agreed all except for the QB position. The difference in QB play sets apart most teams in the NFL today. 49ers being one of the exceptions.
I don't necessarily disagree; QB is without doubt the most important position and has become even more important with recent rule changes. But I would argue that there's more to set apart NFL teams today, namely the way teams are built. For instance, I don't consider pass rush a priority anymore. Just take a look at the numbers: there aren't any less sacks or pressures (quite the contrary) but QB ratings and completion percentages still continue to go through the roof. No, I'm not saying that you can do without pass rushers completely, but with the recent TE trend, spread influences and timing routes, you absolutely, positively need quality linebackers. Philadelphia doesn't have less talent than anyone else; they are simply getting killed underneath because their LBs can't tackle and cover. Or take the CB position. A classic cover corner is still a talented guy but with the current rule set that sees PIs and illegal contacts a plenty, you need guys that can play press. The buck starts and stops with the QB, of course, but I think that quite some teams also experience the problem that "proven" roster building blueprints don't necessarily hold true anymore.
Oh yeah, all that is absolutely true. I mean, among the teams that all have a franchise QB then you look at the other things like defense and turnover differentials. Which defense defends against the pass better and all those other things that correlate highly with winning.
Agreed about the QB position with the one caveat that a good match between the system can make even an average QB play well enough to win (or vice-a-versa). You saw that last year with Orton, who played well enough to win even though they didn't. Then the system changes and he's back to looking like he did in Chicago. And you've seen that countless times with other QBs. Warner played poorly and was benched in an ill-fitting system in NY, but played at a HOF level in better systems in St. Louis and Arizona. Of course, if you have an elite guy then he'll probably be elite regardless of the system.
