PDA

View Full Version : Colts tanked in 2011 - revisited



rvz1020
11-07-2012, 09:43 AM
after watching the game Sunday there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the colts tanked last year. Yes a great qb will make a world of difference but after winning what was it? 2 wins last year? And now they have 5 wins midway thru this yr just proves it. I didn't see a colts defense that was getting shredded in every game last year. It is just too night and day from last year to this year. I can't believe the NFL allowed this to go on. The NFL should have implemented the NBA draft lottery and have a lottery. What is everyone's bought on these cheating colts and the idea of using the NBA draft lottery?

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 09:52 AM
Yes to all of the above but its shocking how many fans right here on FH seem to be ok with getting cheated out of the next Marino,Elway,Young and dare I say it...Manning. The say "move on" or "They were just that bad" instead of contemplating they are the very one who had the bread ripped from their mouth and gave to the undeserving.

Yes the NFL needs a lottery system and YES FH should have had an organized movement to complain to the NFL about what took place last season but neither will happen because in the NFL the rich get richer and the poor...well you know how that old chestnut goes...

BTW...Have you seen Curtis Painter lately? Funny...Me either Matter of fact if you really look at it and THINK...everything from the Coach (Jim Caldwell) down to the ball boy were set up to fail last season to get Andy.

DaTruth1
11-07-2012, 09:54 AM
So true. The system is broken, incentivse favor the cheaters.

Zounds
11-07-2012, 10:02 AM
I dont believe the players were in on tanking last season. I seriously doubt that.

I will say the fact that Curtis Painter wasn't pulled as the stater last year until they sured up the #1 overall pick is very suspicious.

Dolph N.Fan
11-07-2012, 10:10 AM
Miami wouldn't have got luck anyways if the colts haven't tanked.

hooshoops
11-07-2012, 10:17 AM
Miami wouldn't have got luck anyways if the colts haven't tanked.

very true...not with how far we would have had to go to get there...and yeah the colts tanked...i watch dwight freeney last year...very obvious he mailed it in...

Zounds
11-07-2012, 10:22 AM
Miami wouldn't have got luck anyways if the colts haven't tanked.

Ive never seen anyone suggest that we would have got Luck if the Colts didnt tank

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 10:25 AM
It matters not who "would" have got Andy...The point is the Colts should NOT have him on the roster.

Pinkboy
11-07-2012, 10:26 AM
they're smart

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 10:29 AM
They are "Cheaters"

Cheater:To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases. 2. To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land. 3.To get Andy by laying down like a sick dog for 1 season until you obtain the overall #1.

datruth55
11-07-2012, 10:35 AM
I think they gave up at some point after the 5th or 6th game. They were in a few of the early games like 23-20 loss to Pitt and 28-24 loss to KC but the 62-7 loss to the Saints was the obvious game where they quit. Add to that their coach was Jim Caldwell who was one of the absolute worst coaches anywhere, it made for a perfect storm. I know Caldwell from his days as the head coach of Wake Forest when he was 26-53 in 8 seasons...watching him on TV in a preseason interview when asked about recruiting he replied "we're not going to get good recruits, this is Wake Forest"...that just told me all I needed to know. Him being hired was a similar situation to when Jimmy Johnson brought Wannstedt in here to be his replacement. Tony Dungy brought Caldwell in to be his replacement and he set the team up for failure in the process. Peyton Manning was the real coach of that team.

russianbear
11-07-2012, 10:47 AM
I'm sorry but who ****ing cares? I remember last year there were people on these boards promoting that we "suck for luck"....of course a star draft pick like Luck is going to make the entire team (Offense and Defense) play better.

Why is this even in Miami Dolphins Discussion?

J Tes
11-07-2012, 10:48 AM
May some of the players mailed it in mid way thru the season because their season was lost and they had nothing to play for? I'm sure some did. Especially those that weren't concerned with losing their job for this season. Did the Colts as a whole decide they were better off "sucking for Luck" and players decided to purposely miss tackles, drop balls, fan on blocks etc? No!

The Colts lost their best player and leader and were demoralized. They had no one to play his position at the NFL level let alone come close to replacing him and had a first place schedule. The Colts having a last place schedule and Luck is the reason they have 5 wins, not because they are loaded with talent and decided to "tank" for Andrew Luck!

JCane
11-07-2012, 10:48 AM
So let me get this straight, OP...

A QB makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and the Colts lost one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game of football and proceed to go 2-14 as a result.

Then, they draft the first legitimate franchise QB since John Elway in 1983, he immediately makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and you say the Colts tanked.

You can't have it both ways here. Which is it?

Dolphins7273
11-07-2012, 11:03 AM
What we should be upset about is that the morons here didn't try harder to do the same.

DolfanISS
11-07-2012, 11:08 AM
Then who was the worst team in the league last year?

Twitches Brew
11-07-2012, 11:08 AM
Caldwell was just a horrible decision as a head coach. I think he was the main reason they were so bad, and why the players didn't care to turn things around. And with that, Pagano really knows defense and always has tough units, and his scheme change on that side of the ball looks like it worked really well.

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 11:55 AM
Then who was the worst team in the league last year?

If the Colts had "tried" on defense (with the same players they used to defeat us last weekend mind you) and got even a Brady Quinn caliber QB who was readily available through FA...They easily win 7-9 games last season. They lost several by 3 with Curtis Painter...Who is Curtis Painter?

Vertical Limit
11-07-2012, 12:05 PM
Colts are smart for doing that. They have 15 more years to look forward to. We just went through a what, 13 year drought without a franchise quarterback? I wish there was someone worth tanking for 13 years ago for we didn't have to go through this bull****. And then some of you complain about fans not showing up to games, pretty sure the Colts won't have that problem for another 15 years because of Luck.

I'm happy we have Tannehill but after Tannehill's career is over, I sure hope we don't have to wait 13 more years again for a quarterback. That's pathetic.

rvz1020
11-07-2012, 12:08 PM
So let me get this straight, OP...

A QB makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and the Colts lost one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game of football and proceed to go 2-14 as a result.

Then, they draft the first legitimate franchise QB since John Elway in 1983, he immediately makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and you say the Colts tanked.

You can't have it both ways here. Which is it?

We all know Painter was garbage but their defense never showed up in any game. I watched some of their games and it was so obvious that it was laughable. Their defense on sunday looked nothing like that defense from last year. If we had played the colts last year with our offense now we would have scored 40. They tanked it on purpose. I know a lot of people would say never happen but their owner is a s**mbag and I wouldnt trust him as far as I can throw him.

Zounds
11-07-2012, 12:11 PM
If the Colts had "tried" on defense (with the same players they used to defeat us last weekend mind you) and got even a Brady Quinn caliber QB who was readily available through FA...They easily win 7-9 games last season. They lost several by 3 with Curtis Painter...Who is Curtis Painter?

The could haave easily won a few more games if they let Kerry Collins play QB or went with Dan Orlovsky at QB. It was a concious decision by the owner/coach to keep Curtis Painter the starting QB in order to lose more games imo.

NY8123
11-07-2012, 12:30 PM
We all know Painter was garbage but their defense never showed up in any game. I watched some of their games and it was so obvious that it was laughable. Their defense on sunday looked nothing like that defense from last year. If we had played the colts last year with our offense now we would have scored 40. They tanked it on purpose. I know a lot of people would say never happen but their owner is a s**mbag and I wouldnt trust him as far as I can throw him.

The same Colts defense that allowed Miami to lead most of the day? The Colts D wasn't the reason they won the game, it was Miami's lack of 1) rushing the football or line play in general and 2) Miami's inability to stop ridiculous 3rd and long conversions.

This loss has more to do with what Miami didn't do than what the Colts did do.

rvz1020
11-07-2012, 12:55 PM
The same Colts defense that allowed Miami to lead most of the day? The Colts D wasn't the reason they won the game, it was Miami's lack of 1) rushing the football or line play in general and 2) Miami's inability to stop ridiculous 3rd and long conversions.

This loss has more to do with what Miami didn't do than what the Colts did do.

I agree but do you think the colts defensively are playing the same as they did last year? Not even close. Last year the defense didnt care how obvious it looked, they were tanking. what about the fumbles by Clark? the laterals that went into the opposing teams hands? Just too much stuff stood out last year.

dolpns13
11-07-2012, 01:11 PM
I find this thread hilarious. Who really give a s**t if they sucked for luck. They got him fair and square and thats the reality of it. There were MANY MANY people on this board wanted us to tank the season for the rights to draft Luck, myself included.

WVDolphan
11-07-2012, 01:19 PM
So let me get this straight, OP...

A QB makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and the Colts lost one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game of football and proceed to go 2-14 as a result.

Then, they draft the first legitimate franchise QB since John Elway in 1983, he immediately makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and you say the Colts tanked.

You can't have it both ways here. Which is it?

They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.




Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton. :lol:

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.



Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him. :bobdole:

Twitches Brew
11-07-2012, 01:26 PM
WV - i gotta say, your above post^ is pretty convincing as to what the Colts did--particularly points 2 and 3. And you account for the fact that the players didn't have to know; they were simply in a position to lose without even trying to tank. Surprisingly compelling.

AquaInferno
11-07-2012, 01:39 PM
They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.




Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton. :lol:

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.



Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him. :bobdole:

Good post but John Fox is better than a lame duck like Caldwell or Sparano. John Fox's problem was sticking with Jake Delhomme after his 2008 NFC championship meltdown. But it's hard to ditch a QB who has played in the Superbowl and a NFC title game or 2 for you.

NY8123
11-07-2012, 01:51 PM
So the CIA did shoot Kennady..........interesting.

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 02:10 PM
So the CIA did shoot Kennady..........interesting.

And the Colts ARE the biggest cheaters in the NFL...Bank it

N-E-O
11-07-2012, 02:15 PM
I find this thread hilarious. Who really give a s**t if they sucked for luck. They got him fair and square and thats the reality of it. There were MANY MANY people on this board wanted us to tank the season for the rights to draft Luck, myself included.

And for you I have a nice piece of ocean front property located on AZ....Dont be so gullible Mcfly...There are crooked people who will cheat you in this world *Shocker* and some of their clueless victims never even know they have been had but accepted it like it was just their fate. No...Your fate may have been different had you not been shafted.

Codemaster
11-07-2012, 02:26 PM
They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.




Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton. :lol:

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.



Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him. :bobdole:

Excellent post. Thank you for your work on this and I agree completely. I believe Reggie Wayne was in on it too. The game that convinced me is the one where they had a chance to win and he threw the ball on the ground untouched. It made my jaw drop that they could be so blantant about it. Of course Reggie got a new contract with the Colts too. :)

DANTODUPER
11-07-2012, 03:35 PM
After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him. :bobdole:

I agree with you. After seeing the overated Jake Long being abused year after year by athletic DE's, I think that was our biggest mistake on draft day since Ireland. Now we just need to pray that Tannehill is our franchise QB. So far he looks better than Henne, Beck and White. I think the worst case scenario he becomes a Flacco, the best ... he becomes a Steve Young. (hopefully)

sharp
11-07-2012, 05:57 PM
I dont believe the players were in on tanking last season. I seriously doubt that.

I will say the fact that Curtis Painter wasn't pulled as the stater last year until they sured up the #1 overall pick is very suspicious.

I wouldn't go as far as saying that guys like garcon would fumble on purpose at end of games, but they did a lot of dumb things that most teams don't do. They let the injured guys ride the pine and like you said about painter playing. Just a total lack of will to win, basically packing it in for the next season. They played it well. We had too much pride to go down like that and the coach's job was on the line. Luck is great but im happy with Tannehill for the future.

royalshank
11-07-2012, 07:20 PM
after watching the game Sunday there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the colts tanked last year. Yes a great qb will make a world of difference but after winning what was it? 2 wins last year? And now they have 5 wins midway thru this yr just proves it. I didn't see a colts defense that was getting shredded in every game last year. It is just too night and day from last year to this year. I can't believe the NFL allowed this to go on. The NFL should have implemented the NBA draft lottery and have a lottery. What is everyone's bought on these cheating colts and the idea of using the NBA draft lottery?Right on bro. I said it after the Colts were 0-5 that they just threw in the towel. They only started to win a couple after they pretty much had the no 1 pick locked up. And Irsay is such a @#$# that you know he told the coaches to "lose". I complained all last season about what was going on but who's going to listen? It was so obvious.

J. David Wannyheimer
11-07-2012, 07:27 PM
Excellent post. Thank you for your work on this and I agree completely. I believe Reggie Wayne was in on it too. The game that convinced me is the one where they had a chance to win and he threw the ball on the ground untouched. It made my jaw drop that they could be so blantant about it. Of course Reggie got a new contract with the Colts too. :)

Yep, I remember that play. Was bizarre.

DolfanISS
11-07-2012, 08:00 PM
after watching the game Sunday there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the colts tanked last year. Yes a great qb will make a world of difference but after winning what was it? 2 wins last year? And now they have 5 wins midway thru this yr just proves it. I didn't see a colts defense that was getting shredded in every game last year. It is just too night and day from last year to this year. I can't believe the NFL allowed this to go on. The NFL should have implemented the NBA draft lottery and have a lottery. What is everyone's bought on these cheating colts and the idea of using the NBA draft lottery?

So the 07 Dolphins must have tanked for Jake Long. Afterall they went 1-15 with a defense that couldn't even stop Daunte Culpepper and the Raiders then won the AFC East the next season. That was so unfair.

Still think Indy just sucked ass last year. Someone mentioned Kerry Collins, well if you can remember the players said he could never learn the offense fast enough and Painter should be the starter. There's no doubt this all started with Painter being the QB, having a bad QB will lead to many losses we know that. I can also believe there were times in games where the players felt like they had no shot and mailed it in. At the end of the day the 6-10 Dolphins weren't gonna get the 1st overall pick anyway and if you were getting excited about it at 0-7, you're an idiot. I would have started getting excited maybe at like 0-13, 0-14, but 0-7 haha are you kidding?

And is the Colts defense that good? Maybe it's our offense, lets not forget our buddy Sparano and his crappy offense hung 35 points on them. Hard to believe the Jets could hang 35 points on anyone having seen them play us. I just think we didn't have a very good day offensively.

Also the Colts were slightly more competitive then we were in 07. They lost 7 games by 10 points or more and we had lost 9. They lost to KC by one and many games by 8 or less. They also almost won in week 17, not sure if that would have screwed up their pick or not.

Stloc
11-07-2012, 10:07 PM
You guys are hilarious and obviously still mad Luck wiped his ass with your defense. We only have 20...TWENTY...players from last year. Out of the pathetic group of 53. Our ENTIRE team is new. New coaching staff, Gm, QB, RBS, WRs you name it. Alot changes when you have a top QB and actual coaching. We sucked ass last year because there was inept coaching and players starting that were at best 2nd stringers on other teams. Many people say "its obvious because their defense was pathetic last year now look at them now". Like I said, Almost every defensive player is new. And we have awesome coaches now. There was no tanking invloved, just pathetic football play last year. If the Rams got Luck you guys would be saying they tanked too... which they didnt. They were just bad like us.

Stloc
11-07-2012, 10:12 PM
Did you guys tank in 07? Did the Lions tank in 08? Rams in 09?
This board is hilarious.....

Stloc
11-07-2012, 10:16 PM
If the Colts lost this game none of you would come up with these dumb ideas...

roy_miami
11-07-2012, 10:45 PM
They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.




Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton. :lol:

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.



Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him. :bobdole:

Bravo!! 100% how I feel.

A lottery makes too much sense. Manning was said to be worth something like $500 million to the the colts franchise, Luck may be worth even more. Even if the Colts didn't tank it is inevitable that somebody will (or already has as you alluded to), its just human nature. The draft system they have in place was good in theory at the time but now its time to tweak it. When they came up with the system I doubt they realized that a single player could be worth more than every other player in the next 10 drafts combined. Also, you never want to put the fans of a franchise in a position to hope for losses.

Plus the Lottery for the NBA brings big ratings, its another opportunity for the NFL to make a buck.

If they do it I think they should come up with something pretty creative, don't just copy the NBA. For example, the worst 3 teams draw for draft order regardless of record. Then have a weighted draw for teams 1-20 where the lower teams get a better chance at winning the lottery but even give the 20th team a 1% shot. Finally, the winner of the draw doesn't just get the first pick, they get the choice of trading multiple picks for it, which picks would depend on their original draft position. If the 20th place team won they could trade their first, second and third for it as an example.

roy_miami
11-07-2012, 11:18 PM
Did you guys tank in 07? Did the Lions tank in 08? Rams in 09?
This board is hilarious.....

You're fanbase is pathetic the way you threw Manning to the curb dawning your Suck for Luck t-shirts. The talking heads seem to have forgotten your putrid behavior but I won't.

Stloc
11-08-2012, 01:22 AM
You're fanbase is pathetic the way you threw Manning to the curb dawning your Suck for Luck t-shirts. The talking heads seem to have forgotten your putrid behavior but I won't.

OUR fanbase is pathetic? We don't go ballistic when we lose a game. And we don't call out our players for sucking. The Dolphins are the most pathetic fanbase ive seem. Think theyre gonna win a SB when they are riding a 3 game winning streak, then go crazy when they lose a game. And we didnt kick manning to the curb. If you payed ANY attention, he was owed more than 20 mil in roster bonuses and we had the #1 pick sitting for us. An aging Manning or Luck? we loved Manning to death but it was clear this team didnt have the talent or the money for him to win another SB. We did the right thing and released him. To choose whichever team he wants and to start our rebuilding process. Gets your facts together

roy_miami
11-08-2012, 02:30 AM
And we didnt kick manning to the curb . If you payed ANY attention, he was owed more than 20 mil in roster bonuses and we had the #1 pick sitting for us. An aging Manning or Luck? we loved Manning to death but it was clear this team didnt have the talent or the money for him to win another SB. We did the right thing and released him. To choose whichever team he wants and to start our rebuilding process. Gets your facts together

So you dumped him because you didn't want to pay him his well deserved 20 million, didn't think he was good anymore and wanted Luck. It seems we're in total agreement of the facts.

I hope it somehow comes out that you did tank the season and they take Luck away and strip you of a bunch of picks. I swear to **** I'll have a smile on my face for a month.

Stloc
11-08-2012, 03:45 AM
So you dumped him because you didn't want to pay him his well deserved 20 million, didn't think he was good anymore and wanted Luck. It seems we're in total agreement of the facts.

I hope it somehow comes out that you did tank the season and they take Luck away and strip you of a bunch of picks. I swear to **** I'll have a smile on my face for a month.
Oh he is well deserving of that 20 mil and more. But its a business. You can't operate out of pure emotion. Tell me, would you have paid a 36 y/o Manning who was rehabbing from neck surgery 20 mil, or take the guy in the draft sitting there for you? Be honest. And you obviously don't know what your talking about, our team was total crap last year and deserved to lose those 14 games. We only have 20 players form that team. Look what a good coaching staff and an actual QB could do for a team.

Maybe the league should investigate the Phins 07 season.. since they sucked so bad.. they obviously tanked right?.....

roy_miami
11-08-2012, 04:16 AM
Oh he is well deserving of that 20 mil and more. But its a business. You can't operate out of pure emotion. Tell me, would you have paid a 36 y/o Manning who was rehabbing from neck surgery 20 mil, or take the guy in the draft sitting there for you? Be honest. And you obviously don't know what your talking about, our team was total crap last year and deserved to lose those 14 games. We only have 20 players form that team. Look what a good coaching staff and an actual QB could do for a team.

Maybe the league should investigate the Phins 07 season.. since they sucked so bad.. they obviously tanked right?.....

After the fact of course its a good decision but how do you not think that wearing "Suck for Luck" T-Shirts during the season isn't a slap in the face to Manning?

Stloc
11-09-2012, 01:18 AM
After the fact of course its a good decision but how do you not think that wearing "Suck for Luck" T-Shirts during the season isn't a slap in the face to Manning?
It is a slap in the face. But every fanbase has douchebags... And I was Dissapointed when I saw those shirts. But us fans cant do anything about the call Irsay made.

JCane
11-09-2012, 01:29 AM
You're fanbase is pathetic the way you threw Manning to the curb dawning your Suck for Luck t-shirts. The talking heads seem to have forgotten your putrid behavior but I won't.

Colts did the right thing.

Try to keep in mind that the NFL is a business first and a game second.

roy_miami
11-09-2012, 04:29 AM
Colts did the right thing.

Try to keep in mind that the NFL is a business first and a game second.

I'm not saying it was stupid on their part, to be honest it would have been a lot smarter if we would have done it because we had literally nothing to lose whereas they were at least taking a gamble that Luck would be the better option than Manning.

That still doesn't mean that these idiot douchbags wearing Suck for Luck T-Shirts and putting up billboards shouldn't be called out. What could that possibly accomplish except insult Manning? I never really took a stance on the whole Suck for Luck debate, I think its stupid to think that the coaches or players would lay down just because I'm wearing a t-shirt but I think its equally as stupid to say you would rather have a single win over say the Raiders than get Luck.