Will The Colts Go Undefeated?

I'm not a Colts Fan, but I do hope that they go undefeated. I really like the way they play the game. I like dominant football teams, because dominant teams raise the level of play for all teams.

Look at the 49ers of the 80s and early 90s. Their success influenced how the game is played. Peyton Manning will change the way QBs run the game. In the future, QBs will be re-gain their ability to call their own plays because of what Peyton is doing.

prediction, but my hope! The only chance they have of losing is at Seattle, but I think they'll win.

Indy is the dominant team, but I can't see them winning it all AND being undefeated. They need to get a loss out of their system if they plan to win it all.

won't go undefeated. I think they'll also choke in the playoffs (again).
However, if they lose in the reg. season, they may win it all.
If they're undef. headed into playoffs, they will lose.

The 1972 Dolphins are the only team in 1712 chances since 1920 to go unbeaten and untied. That includes every NFL team plus the AFL in 1960-1969, which the NFL includes in official historical stats. So if the Colts did it that would make 2 of 1744. Extraordinary.

The NFL has historically been an incredibly balanced league as verified by that number. The Colts still have some obstacles but I'm more convinced they will do it. As a '72 Dolphin season ticket holder I distinctly remember the same undertone late that season, that Miami would inevitably lose a game or two. We were so dominant I knew it was laughable rubbish. I have the same impression of this Colts team. The only difference is Indy is dependent on Manning, while the Dolphins were overwhelming in the trenches which is what enabled Miami to survive unbeaten despite playing 11 games with a 38 year old backup QB in Earl Morrall.

I completely dispute the notion Indy is more likely to lose in the playoffs than the regular season. I believe it is completely the opposite. The Colts get a bad rap for losing twice at New England in the playoffs. Those were excellent Patriots teams that matched up well with Indy due to smarts in the defensive back seven plus having Brady and the massive home field edge in the playoffs.

If you look at projected pointspreads and the accompanying theoretical likelihood of victory, Indy is still an underdog to finish the regular season unbeaten, although very small at this point, in the 2/1 range. The Colts will be even money or somewhat less once the playoffs begin. With an awesome QB averaging more than 8 yards per attempt, a running game that meets all the historically needed stats and a defense with growing confidence, I can't see Indy losing at home in the playoffs or against flawed NFC opponents, especially since the Super Bowl will be indoors.

Their next 3 are: at Jacksonville, San Diego at home, and at Seattle.

Two of those are outdoors, where the Colts struggle the most.


Losing one would probably work to their benefit. Once they got to the playoffs, they would only have the Super Bowl to think about, rather than the Super Bowl and "The Streak."

They don't play inside any more?

Boy, I wish I could see them play this year some time before the playoffs.

And now play football the way it was meant to be played, outdoors and on grass:

http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/nfc/QwestField.htm

1) Jacksonville.....sorry a backup QB, even a good one, is not going to beat this team and their defense will not be able to get to Manning even with that great front 4.

2) San Diego...San Diego will be desperate as they have to win out to even have a shot at the playoffs but everyone and their grandmother here in SD thinks they have zero chance in this game, which is why the loss to Miami was so big.

3) Seattle...are pretenders to the throne who I can guarantee will sqwauck about not getting respect in the week leading up to the game, just enough motivation for Pewyton and company to bury their asses. If you think Seattle had trouble with the Giants, wait till they see big brother's well oiled machine both on O & D.

The playoffs are tough and I'm not ready to say they will sail thru though at this point I consider the NFC representative to be a sacrifical lamb.

Spare me. Since Ruskell came in, the last thing you're going to hear is the Seattle players complain about not geting respect...he has instilled a sense of professionalism in these guys that is rarely seen these days. Now, us fans are a different story all together. Funny how you can claim they are "pretenders to the throne", yet they had the number one ranked offense for the entire season (and the only reason thir ranking went down was because they sat the starters for the second half of the blowout in Philly), their running back owns the top spot in virtually every rushing category, their quaterback is playing solid and running the offense extremely effectively, they have 2 perennial pro-bowlers on the left side of the offensive line, they have a shoe-in for rookie of the year (Lofa Tatupu) on their D-line, and they are 22-3 at home over the last couple of years. Of course, their secondary is a little suspect, but they have also consistently made HUGE plays when they were needed most. Go ahead and keep misunderestimating the 'Hawks though. It just makes the taste of victory that much more satisfying.

we all know that this year's team is the exact same bunch of guys as all those previous years.. I mean, they didn't add anybody new, or anything! :eyes:

Rinsd since the seahawks are pretender what does that make the new york Giants?(since we beat them and all!!) At least our feild goal kicker did not miss three feild goals in a row.

:eyes:


Am I really the only person in the world who believes that seasons can be 'pre-determined' ??

and coaches of the other 31 teams.

Case in point: do you really think the NCAA wanted UNLV to win a national championship if they had their choice?

And - how many teams have wanted new stadiums? Have they all gone undefeated?

This is horseshit.

n/t

The league doesn't need the Colts in Indy all that badly.

The Colts, however, do need a new stadium. I went to the Packers game in Indy last year; I found the RCA Dome wanting in a few different ways. The concourses are tiny, the seating capacity is miniscule, and the building seems very cheap(IIRC, the place was built on spec). I've got to believe the team wants more luxury suites, better locker-room facilities, and more on-site parking(with the revenue going to the team).

Didn't seem like there was an out-pouring of support for the team by the natives. Is there a stadium referendum planned in the near future? If I were a citizen I'd push hard to make the Irsays come up with a big chunk of the financing before I voted yes(with their history, the Irsays might be loathe to do this, I suspect). The Tigers and Lions footed the bills for their respective new stadia in Detroit, with the city, county and state governments picking up the tab for infrastructure improvements. Not a bad deal, really.


BTW, what's the funky smell in downtown Indy? Smelled vaguely like sewer gas. Is it the river?

(edited for spelling)

Lord knows what goes on behind the doors of big pharm.

go 16-0 next year or win the Super Bowl.

...the city and the team have already worked out the details, and its scheduled to open in 2008. Now whether or not they're going to go 16-0 and then 19-0, is a different story.

we are watching history in the making.

They will lose to someone...:) Maybe my Hawks will get them, but I doubt that...but I can hope!...:) go Seahawks!...:)

Cards are good for an upset or two during the season.

That's a terrific number and richly deserved. A team loaded with premium talent. As a Dolphin fan it feels like theft that Chris Chambers was picked ahead of Reggie Wayne. Chambers is dramatically overstated via selective highlights on ESPN. For some reason they show his highlight grabs only, particularly on NFL Primetime, yet ignore his huge number of drops, often in critical situations. In general, Dolphin fans don't have nearly as lofty a view of Chambers as fans do nationwide.

I'm still baffled how so many fans on this website and others seem to think the '72 Dolphins were overrated. It's like a blinders-on determination to ignore obvious talent and ability, apparently based on dislike of the celebratory aspect of preserving the unbeaten season as unique to themselves.

The '72 Dolphins had 9 Pro Bowlers and the '73 Dolphins had 11. Those were the days of a 40 man roster so basically 1/4 of the Miami team was voted all-star caliber. Griese missed virtually all of '72 with a broken ankle so he wasn't represented on the '72 Pro Bowl roster, and amazing that Bob Keuchenberg didn't make it in '72 or '73, despite being a Hall of Fame semifinalist for years recently. Remarkable that such a flawed and overrated team was able to fool the Pro Bowl voters as well as the scoreboard for 17 consecutive games.

...whether justified or not, is that they had a weak schedule. That's always been a point of contintion, and why some people put their record in perspective. It was also at a time before the Steelers of the 70's came into their own, and before the Raiders clicked in with the Stabler era. In essence, some would argue that they filled a void. The NFC, their potential competition in a Super Bowl, was also in a down year. Dallas was transitioning, as was Minnesota and the Rams. In essence, it was a "perfect storm" for the Dolphins that year. It may never happen again for another team.