Pats, Colts and 16-0

Going undefeated is really hard, and on any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team, "that's why they play the games" as Chris Berman would say. But having a team pulling their starters the final couple of weeks may not be a factor this year, and I'm surprised I haven't heard PTI, Around the Horn, SportsCenter, etc. take this angle yet.

We all know how good the Patriots are, but I've seen every one of the Indianapolis Colts games and they are right there beside them.
INDIANAPOLIS COLTS:
W 41-10 New Orleans Saints
W 22-20 @Tennessee Titans
W 30-24 @Houston Texans
W 38-20 Denver Broncos
W 33-14 Tampa Bay Buccaneers

With two teams this good, home field advantage in the playoffs is critical. No matter which one of these teams is victorious on November 4th, the winner is going to be pushed by the loser all the way until the final week of the season in a battle for best record and home field advantage. Neither team can afford to rest their starters because they both have to fight tooth-and-nail to the bitter end for best record in the AFC. Just a thought.

IRNG 960

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
No matter which one of these teams is victorious on November 4th, the winner is going to be pushed by the loser all the way until the final week of the season in a battle for best record and home field advantage. Neither team can afford to rest their starters because they both have to fight tooth-and-nail to the bitter end for best record in the AFC.

Absolutely.

Another thought: A criticism of the Patriots that I don't understand is that they "run up the score", which is apparently frowned upon. However, aren't points and net points used in tie-breaking schemes? If so, then I see no place for criticism in a team getting as many points as possible in a game especially early on in the season.

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
Going undefeated is really hard, and on any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team, "that's why they play the games" as Chris Berman would say. But having a team pulling their starters the final couple of weeks may not be a factor this year, and I'm surprised I haven't heard PTI, Around the Horn, SportsCenter, etc. take this angle yet.

We all ...[text shortened]... t tooth-and-nail to the bitter end for best record in the AFC. Just a thought.

IRNG 960

Jacksonville will beat the Colts on Monday night.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Jacksonville will beat the Colts on Monday night.

😲

Originally posted by Phlabibit
😲

No guts, no glory.

EDIT: And the Giants will win the NFC East.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Jacksonville will beat the Colts on Monday night.

Now that's bold.

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
Going undefeated is really hard, and on any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team, "that's why they play the games" as Chris Berman would say. But having a team pulling their starters the final couple of weeks may not be a factor this year, and I'm surprised I haven't heard PTI, Around the Horn, SportsCenter, etc. take this angle yet.

We all ...[text shortened]... t tooth-and-nail to the bitter end for best record in the AFC. Just a thought.

IRNG 960

This all sounds vaguely familiar...

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
This all sounds vaguely familiar...

Oh. Maybe I already said this before in another thread? I probably did. 🙁



IRNG 27

Originally posted by darvlay
Absolutely.

Another thought: A criticism of the Patriots that I don't understand is that they "run up the score", which is apparently frowned upon. However, aren't points and net points used in tie-breaking schemes? If so, then I see no place for criticism in a team getting as many points as possible in a game especially early on in the season.

You're right about net points, you never know when you might need those tie-breakers in the tough AFC.



IRNG 3

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
Oh. Maybe I already said this before in another thread? I probably did. 🙁



IRNG 27

Well, I like your line of thought here, but I'm giving you a 0 for originality...since I posted this weeks ago

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
Here's a prediction. The Pats go 8-0 before they face their first real challenge in the form of the Colts. They lock up their division by week 11, and sweep the playoffs. No, I'm not kidding with this prediction.

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
Pats have a legitimate shot at an undefeated season. As I stated weeks ago, their biggest challenge will come when they face Indy, which they will do with an undefeated record.

er...I think the Patriots are slightly better than the Colts right now, but I guess we will see soon enough.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
er...I think the Patriots are slightly better than the Colts right now, but I guess we will see soon enough.

This stuff is hard to grasp. Last year Dallas beat the Colts and yet the Colts went on to win the Super bowl.

Now if New England beat Dallas and the Colts were to beat New England and Dallas was to beat the Colts. Who would be the best? < scratches head >

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
Well, I like your line of thought here, but I'm giving you a 0 for originality...since I posted this weeks ago

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
[b]Here's a prediction. The Pats go 8-0 before they face their first real challenge in the form of the Colts. They lock up their division by week 11, and sweep the playoffs. No, I'm not kid ...[text shortened]... st challenge will come when they face Indy, which they will do with an undefeated record.[/b]

I was trying to add that even though teams have a legitimate shot at 16-0, they often get so far ahead of the competition and lock up home field advantage so early, that they rest their starters the last couple of games of the season and lose a game or two all for the sake of getting healthy and rested for a Super Bowl run. This year though, no matter who loses the the Pats-Colts game, the loser will continue to win, thus pushing the winner to keep winning, all the way to the end of the season, thereby not allowing the team with the perfect score to rest their starters lest they should lose a game and fall into a tie and somehow blow home field advantage in the playoffs. If you mentioned that subtlety (which I didn't think you did, and I keep hearing the talking sports heads fail to mention this when they say no one will go 16-0) then I am sorry for stealing your thunder.

Originally posted by cashthetrash
This stuff is hard to grasp. Last year Dallas beat the Colts and yet the Colts went on to win the Super bowl.

Now if New England beat Dallas and the Colts were to beat New England and Dallas was to beat the Colts. Who would be the best? < scratches head >

The Patriots would still be best because The Hoodie wins all tie-breakers.

IRNG 8040

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
I was trying to add that even though teams have a legitimate shot at 16-0, they often get so far ahead of the competition and lock up home field advantage so early, that they rest their starters the last couple of games of the season and lose a game or two all for the sake of getting healthy and rested for a Super Bowl run. This year though, no matter who ...[text shortened]... l to mention this when they say no one will go 16-0) then I am sorry for stealing your thunder.

I am skeptical of how much of resting of the starters affects the offense of both teams later on this season. The Patriots have 3 RB's and 4 WR's that they can count on. The Colts also have RB's and WR's that they can count on, though they don't have the depth that the Patriots have. I think they will do fine if they rest up their players at the end of the year. Hell, they have already shown that they can do well without their starters; the Patriots have used three different RB's over the past 6 games and their rush offense has not slowed down one bit. The Colts benched Addai and Harrison while Gonzalez and Keith picked up the offense. I think the starters will be able to get what ever rest is necessary for the playoffs; the only way I can see the Pat's and Colt's offenses suffering from this is if they bench Brady and Manning.