Are the Colts underachievers?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

The situations aren't remotely comparable. Now, if the Falcons are a top 2-3 pick in the NFL for 6-7 years in a row and only win playoff games in 3 years during Ryan's career (where he encounters no injuries), then yes, they underachieved. That they've been a top 5 team the last 6-7 years. The Colts have something that the other teams have not, no injuries. Over the last 7 years: Manning has missed 0 games Harrison has missed 14 games, but 11 were in one season Wayne has missed 0 games The starting running backs have missed 11 Clark/Pollard have missed around 6-7 Their starting OL have missed relatively few games Their defense has been banged up, but nobody ever accused them of being a defensive team. Over the last 6 years, they've clearly been a top 5 team each year (maybe one year they were 6). Their D wasn't the problem in most of the losses. 17 points to an 8-8 team 18 points at home against the Steelers 3 points against the Patriots 14 points against the Patriots 0 points against the Jets

I agree with your first two points but disagree with your last point.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by Nza

I don't think an overachieved label is that good a compliment, it suggests to me they're not as good a team as their record suggests. At least, I didn't particularly care for it when the Titans were labelled overachievers in 06 and 07. It's probably not as bad as being underachivers but neither is good IMO. I consider choking and underachieiving to be the same thing basically. At the very least, I think Manning underachieves in the playoffs and can basically thank his D for the ring he got, even if he was given a freebie SB MVP in the process. Perhaps that is the real variable with the Colts once they get to the postseason, as he's been sensational during the regular season, but isn't the same once January rolls around. The rest of the team could very well be doing the exact same things, just not Manning.

Overachieving either means people were underestimating you and you exceeded expectations (good thing) or the players and/or coaching staff did so well as a group, you ended up better than you generally would have (good thing).

I'd consider underachieving and choking about the same thing too, and I wouldn't put the Colts in that group. I think Manning and the offense play on a playoff level all season. They can't play any better. Most defenses can and do get better during the playoffs. The gameplan gets better, players come out with more heart, etc. The Colts D doesn't have many players that can make a big difference there. The year they did, they won.

What SB MVP do you know that couldn't thank his D? Kurt Warner? I think that D was a bit underrated too. You know Eli's still thanking his D... Brady definitely is too.

[Exonerated]

The Colts need a running back to win in the playoffs. When Manning isnt winning you the games, you need a running back that just flats out win it for you.

I don't rate Addai at all. He's early success IMO, was because defense overestimated him because of the Colt offense. They now realize he isn't that good indicative of his paltry 3 ypc.

Maybe a Chris Wells sorta powerback could be useful?

[tehova]

Goal of any franchise is to be competitive every year make the playoffs and if everything breaks your way you win a championship.

Mission Accomplished

[BAMJ6]

The Colts won a championship. Bottom line. What more does a team have to do.

Now the Eagles Reid argument is more valid, Perfect in the first playoff games, but no title 3 straight diappointments and 1 SB loss, but Reid gets lauded. Dungy gets slammed. We all know what that means

[Chip Douglass]

Quote: Originally Posted by BAMJ6

The Colts won a championship. Bottom line. What more does a team have to do?

Alot more. If the Colts have been in the playoffs 9 out of 10 seasons since '99, with a first round bye in three of those appearances, isn't a 7-8 playoff record, with more than half of those coming in their SB run, a bit disappointing?

I guess your line of thinking exonerates the Atlanta Braves?

[ProfessaPackMan]

LOL @ people saying that ONE Super Bowl they won in their last 10 playoff appearances all of a sudden exonerating them.

I hate to bring them up, but if this was the Cowboys we were talking about instead of the Colts, they would've gotten murdered in this topic.

[BAMJ6]

Quote: Originally Posted by Olson-for-Heisman

Alot more. If the Colts have been in the playoffs 9 out of 10 seasons since '99, with a first round bye in three of those appearances, isn't a 7-8 playoff record, with more than half of those coming in their SB run, a bit disappointing? I guess your line of thinking exonerates the Atlanta Braves?

Yes it does. To me it's impossible to underachieve in a run unless you fail to win a title in that run. (01-06 Eagles for NFL, The Stockton-Malone Jazz run and the Reggie Miller Pacers run in the NBA, MLB's Twins of this decade)

From 1992-2005, the Steelers had the kind of run the Colts have now, and had nothing to show for it until 2005. That was all it took to validate the run.

And also i don't count the seasons that Dungy wasn't there yet, but you're counting 99-01 i bet because of Peyton Manning right?