Am I the only one that still thinks the Colts are the team to beat?

Some trendy Super Bowl picks are Baltimore, Green Bay and New York. However, when I look at all those teams, I see two that were dismantled by Indy last year in the playoffs, and a team that Manning will pick apart. I'm no Colts or Peyton fanboy, far from it. I still think they are the team to beat.

Some trendy Super Bowl picks are Baltimore, Green Bay and New York. However, when I look at all those teams, I see two that were dismantled by Indy last year in the playoffs, and a team that Manning will pick apart. I'm no Colts or Peyton fanboy, far from it. I still think they are the team to beat.

monkeytoes61

Some trendy Super Bowl picks are Baltimore, Green Bay and New York. However, when I look at all those teams, I see two that were dismantled by Indy last year in the playoffs, and a team that Manning will pick apart. I'm no Colts or Peyton fanboy, far from it. I still think they are the team to beat.

monkeytoes61

The problem with that is the teams that you mentioned, mainly the JETS have improved throughout. Jet fan aside, the JETS actually played the COLTS well taking the lead into the 3rd Q. If Greene wouldnt have gotten injured and if Feely wouldnt have missed FGs, who knows. Colts won though. The JETS this year can go toe to toe on offense and can stop the Colts offense. With Revis (hes playing if hes smart) he can stay on Reggie and Cromartie can cover Garcon who was a problem after Dwight Lowery was taken out. Wilson can move to whoever and the JETS will continue to get to Manning like they did in the AFC game.

But anyway, ignore all of that since the SAINTS are the real team to beat, not the COLTS

I think that the New Orleans Saints are the team to beat, even after we win the Super Bowl we get no respect.The_Kliq

I agree. Everyone was hyping the Colts going in, then the Saints beat them, now everyone's hyping them coming out. It kinda reminds me of the year that Tampa beat Oakland, everyone and their mother had the Raiders winning and after they lost they were all saying that the Raiders were going to win it all the nextseason, that turned out well for them. Indy isn't Oakland, but I still think they get overhyped.

Especially considering that the team lives and dies on Peyton. Everyone always talks about their win record last season, but how many of those games came by single digits? A lot. That speaks somewhat to Peyton's abilities, but it also means that if you can get a key play like the interception that sealed the Superbowl a good deal of the teams in this league can beat them. Hell, everyone's ragging on the Jets, but the Jets almost pulled off a playoff win against Indy, if they could've jst held onto their halftime lead they would've gone to the Superbowl instead.

colts will always be the "team" to beat (imo)

Well I think they are still the team to beat in the AFC. But this season some playoff teams from last season might be better (Baltimore, NY Jets, even the Patriots). I still think NO is still the team to beat overall.

The Saints' defense was unbelievably opportunistic last season. I'm having a hard time seeing them duplicating that type of year again.dodgerblue13

Like the whole Heat-Lakers thing, the Lakers are the reigning champions, like the Saints, so the Saints are the team to beat until beaten

colts will always be the "team" to beat (imo)

scarecrowM

Until Manning retires:P

Some trendy Super Bowl picks are Baltimore, Green Bay and New York. However, when I look at all those teams, I see two that were dismantled by Indy last year in the playoffs, and a team that Manning will pick apart. I'm no Colts or Peyton fanboy, far from it. I still think they are the team to beat.

monkeytoes61

saints holmes

I think the Colts are the best team in the NFL now, but that doesn't always equate to a Super Bowl season. They're the team to beat now... at least until the contenders and pretenders sort themselves out midway through the season.

Nope I agree with you. I cant see the saints making another super bowl run.

To much talk in this thread about if & but's, Indy does it year in year out. Indy is a safe bet. Master_Live

That's exactly my problem with people picking them to win it all at this point. For one, yes they're a safe bet to make the playoffs, but the playoffs are always a different story. Who would have thought the Pats would've beat the Rams with Tom Brady back in the day, but it happened. Playoffs are unpredicatable ESPECIALLY before the season has even started, so saying Indy is a lock to win, saying anyone is a lock is ridiculous at this point, IMO. Furthermore, Indy's win record in the playoffs shows that, they've been to the championship games how many times but have only two Superbowl appearances and one win to show for it. It's also not like they dominate teams or anything, they dominate the bad ones but the good ones put up a fight. Hell, if it weren't for Belichick being an idiot they would've lost to the Pats last season, and their division opponents played them right down to the wire in most games as well.

I like Peyton Manning and the Colts, but there is no way they are the team to beat. They didn't win the Super Bowl and didn't really do anything to get better. The team that beat them in the Super Bowl, the Saints, stayed the same as well so by default, they would for sure be the team to beat over the Colts. Add on top of that the fact that the Vikings, Packers, and Cowboys are better overall than the Saints and you have at least 4 teams that are better than the Colts and would therefore be the team to beat ahead of them. For me, this is how it goes:

1. Vikings
2. Cowboys
3. Packers
4. Saints
5. Colts

Take your pick ladies and gentlemen:

We ignore Indy because we know they''ll blow it in the playoffs anyways. They're just lucky the Jets beat the chargers last year or they wouldn't have made it to the SB anyways. They will have a good season, and they will make it into the playoffs without a problem, but they won't be winning a Superbowl. fastr

I like Peyton Manning and the Colts, but there is no way they are the team to beat. They didn't win the Super Bowl and didn't really do anything to get better. The team that beat them in the Super Bowl, the Saints, stayed the same as well so by default, they would for sure be the team to beat over the Colts. Add on top of that the fact that the Vikings, Packers, and Cowboys are better overall than the Saints and you have at least 4 teams that are better than the Colts and would therefore be the team to beat ahead of them. For me, this is how it goes:

1. Vikings
2. Cowboys
3. Packers
4. Saints
5. Colts

nickdastick

Colts always under achieve. You would think that the team with the best winning record in like the last 10 years would have more than just one superbowl. Colts good at regular season. Choke come playoff time. chansaet

I like Peyton Manning and the Colts, but there is no way they are the team to beat. They didn't win the Super Bowl and didn't really do anything to get better. The team that beat them in the Super Bowl, the Saints, stayed the same as well so by default, they would for sure be the team to beat over the Colts. Add on top of that the fact that the Vikings, Packers, and Cowboys are better overall than the Saints and you have at least 4 teams that are better than the Colts and would therefore be the team to beat ahead of them. For me, this is how it goes:

1. Vikings
2. Cowboys
3. Packers
4. Saints
5. Colts

nickdastick

I hear that Saints team is kinda good.

You seriously think the Pack and Cowboys are better then the Colts???!!:lol:

coltsfan4ever

Clearly someone hasn't been watching the Cowboy first-teamers this pre-season. No TD's by the first team offense in two preseason games. Not good.

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]

You seriously think the Pack and Cowboys are better then the Colts???!!:lol:

QuistisTrepe_

Clearly someone hasn't been watching the Cowboy first-teamers this pre-season. No TD's by the first team offense in two preseason games. Not good.

[QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]

You seriously think the Pack and Cowboys are better then the Colts???!!:lol:

fastr

Clearly someone hasn't been watching the Cowboy first-teamers this pre-season. No TD's by the first team offense in two preseason games. Not good.

Yeah, because that's clearly what I implied, didn't I?

[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

Clearly someone hasn't been watching the Cowboy first-teamers this pre-season. No TD's by the first team offense in two preseason games. Not good.

QuistisTrepe_

Yeah, because that's clearly what I implied, didn't I?

[QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

[QUOTE="fastr"] Yeah.. because the pre-season matters so much. fastr

Yeah, because that's clearly what I implied, didn't I?

I did. So show me where I said that the pre-season counts towards anything.

[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

Yeah, because that's clearly what I implied, didn't I?

QuistisTrepe_

I did. So show me where I said that the pre-season counts towards anything.

[QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

[QUOTE="fastr"] So.. you didn't say "this pre-season" hm.. odd, I guess my monitor is just acting up huh?fastr

I did. So show me where I said that the pre-season counts towards anything.

Yes, I know what I posted. Do you know, is what I'm wondering. Seriously.

[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

I did. So show me where I said that the pre-season counts towards anything.

QuistisTrepe_

Yes, I know what I posted. Do you know, is what I'm wondering. Seriously.

[QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

[QUOTE="fastr"] Do you even listen to yourself? Your entire post was about how they've been doing during the pre-season. I don't even have to show you anything just scroll up to exactly what YOU wrote. Seriously. fastr

Yes, I know what I posted. Do you know, is what I'm wondering. Seriously.

There's just so much irony in your post.

Preseason or not, the Bears offensive line is looking awful. That's what now, eight sacks allowed in two games?:shock:

[QUOTE="nickdastick"]

I like Peyton Manning and the Colts, but there is no way they are the team to beat. They didn't win the Super Bowl and didn't really do anything to get better. The team that beat them in the Super Bowl, the Saints, stayed the same as well so by default, they would for sure be the team to beat over the Colts. Add on top of that the fact that the Vikings, Packers, and Cowboys are better overall than the Saints and you have at least 4 teams that are better than the Colts and would therefore be the team to beat ahead of them. For me, this is how it goes:

1. Vikings
2. Cowboys
3. Packers
4. Saints
5. Colts

coltsfan4ever

So what happened last year when the Saints played the Cowboys in week 15? Who won that game and ended another team's bid for perfection? And did I miss something or did Favre not have the best statistical performance of his career last year? So why wouldn't they be able to beat the Packers especially since it was only obvious that they were a better team than the Saints (6 turnovers and they still should have won) who beat the Colts in the Super Bowl... You guys can say what you want, but that list is going to end of being too prophetic for any of you haters to handle.

[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

Yes, I know what I posted. Do you know, is what I'm wondering. Seriously.

QuistisTrepe_

There's just so much irony in your post.

QuistisTrepe_, are you seriously that delusional? Here is what you said verbatim, "Clearly someone hasn't been watching the Cowboy first-teamers this pre-season. No TD's by the first team offense in two preseason games. Not good." So... How does that not mean you think the pre-season means something? If you were being sarcastic, maybe you should tell that to fastr since it sure doesn't look like that from what you typed. I don't see the j/k or :P, and what you said was true, so there is no reason for someone to think you were joking. Just figured I'd point that out since you don't seem to get it.

[QUOTE="The_Kliq"]I think that the New Orleans Saints are the team to beat, even after we win the Super Bowl we get no respect.theone86

I agree. Everyone was hyping the Colts going in, then the Saints beat them, now everyone's hyping them coming out. It kinda reminds me of the year that Tampa beat Oakland, everyone and their mother had the Raiders winning and after they lost they were all saying that the Raiders were going to win it all the nextseason, that turned out well for them. Indy isn't Oakland, but I still think they get overhyped.

Especially considering that the team lives and dies on Peyton. Everyone always talks about their win record last season, but how many of those games came by single digits? A lot. That speaks somewhat to Peyton's abilities, but it also means that if you can get a key play like the interception that sealed the Superbowl a good deal of the teams in this league can beat them. Hell, everyone's ragging on the Jets, but the Jets almost pulled off a playoff win against Indy, if they could've jst held onto their halftime lead they would've gone to the Superbowl instead.

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]

[QUOTE="nickdastick"]

I like Peyton Manning and the Colts, but there is no way they are the team to beat. They didn't win the Super Bowl and didn't really do anything to get better. The team that beat them in the Super Bowl, the Saints, stayed the same as well so by default, they would for sure be the team to beat over the Colts. Add on top of that the fact that the Vikings, Packers, and Cowboys are better overall than the Saints and you have at least 4 teams that are better than the Colts and would therefore be the team to beat ahead of them. For me, this is how it goes:

1. Vikings
2. Cowboys
3. Packers
4. Saints
5. Colts

nickdastick

So what happened last year when the Saints played the Cowboys in week 15? Who won that game and ended another team's bid for perfection? And did I miss something or did Favre not have the best statistical performance of his career last year? So why wouldn't they be able to beat the Packers especially since it was only obvious that they were a better team than the Saints (6 turnovers and they still should have won) who beat the Colts in the Super Bowl... You guys can say what you want, but that list is going to end of being too prophetic for any of you haters to handle.

Just figured I'd point that out since you don't seem to get it.

nickdastick

Sigh......how can I spell this out for people.

The "preseason doesn't count for anything" only goes so far. For example, if a team gives up four sacks to one player as the Bears did last night, it becomes a little more difficult to say,"preseason doesn't count for anything." It means that team has some serious problems that need to be addressed and quickly. If you can't block agaisnt defenses employing a vanilla scheme in one to two quarters of a game, I'd hate to see those results over the course of 60 minutes. This sort of thing just happens to have gone on for two games now.

Somehow, this magically translated into, "because a team isn't playing well in the preseason, that means they're going to suck in the regular season," which isn't anything remotely close to what I said. I implied that a given team has things they need to work on.

It's not like I was talking about W/L records. Um, yeah. Believe me, I get it.:roll:

[QUOTE="nickdastick"]

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]I lold at this list. You seriously think the Pack and Cowboys are better then the Colts???!!:lol: I really dont think the Vikes and saints are even better but I cant take number 2 and 3 seriously. Even though people bash the colts for their playoff failures what have the Cowboys done recently? Oh yeah win ONE playoff game in the past ten years. The Pack couldnt even beat an old Favre head to head last year. But both of these teams are better then the Colts?:? Sure.

geaux321

So what happened last year when the Saints played the Cowboys in week 15? Who won that game and ended another team's bid for perfection? And did I miss something or did Favre not have the best statistical performance of his career last year? So why wouldn't they be able to beat the Packers especially since it was only obvious that they were a better team than the Saints (6 turnovers and they still should have won) who beat the Colts in the Super Bowl... You guys can say what you want, but that list is going to end of being too prophetic for any of you haters to handle.

I was saying the Vikings gave up 6 turnovers and still should have won the game... What part of that doesn't make sense? That shows the Vikings are the better team overall as they were still in it after giving up 6 turnovers. I thought that was pretty cut and dry.

[QUOTE="nickdastick"]

Just figured I'd point that out since you don't seem to get it.

QuistisTrepe_

Sigh......how can I spell this out for people.

The "preseason doesn't count for anything" only goes so far. For example, if a team gives up four sacks to one player as the Bears did last night, it becomes a little more difficult to say,"preseason doesn't count for anything." It means that team has some serious problems that need to be addressed and quickly. If you can't block agaisnt defenses employing a vanilla scheme in one to two quarters of a game, I'd hate to see those results over the course of 60 minutes. This sort of thing just happens to have gone on for two games now.

Somehow, this magically translated into, "because a team isn't playing well in the preseason, that means they're going to suck in the regular season," which isn't anything remotely close to what I said. I implied that a given team has things they need to work on.

It's not like I was talking about W/L records. Um, yeah. Believe me, I get it.:roll:

Wow... just wow... I'll leave it that.