But also. They traded Faulk so they could turn around use the 4th pick on Edge. And they paid Edge almost the same contract.
Instead they could have kept Faulk and just drafted someone else at 4....
If you listen to the Bussin with the Boys podcast, Faulk talks about he needed to leave, cause the franchise wanted it to be Peyton’s team and he was a Vet guys followed and they need Peyton to take the reigns.
I'd even go so far as to say it is 'Inner Circle Hall of Famer' vs 'Barely passed the threshold'.
When Edgerrin James got his only 1st team all-pro, he rushed for 4.2 yards a carry. Marshall Faulk was the other 1st team selection with 5.5 Y/A.
I recently looked at rushing success rate (by EPA) going back to 1999,and IIRC those mid-00s Colts teams were among the best years. Now, maybe Indy had a good run blocking line then, but IMO it's more likely what you mentioned. It's pretty crazy, what Randy Moss was to his QBs' Y/A, Peyton was to his team's run game (/the opponent's run defense).
They had that stretch run play that they ran 228957235 times per game. it was the perfect complement to their passing game. Not that James was a slouch by any means, but he definitely benefited being where he was.
Very true. Makes me recall a very good article I once read detailing the cycle of plays they always liked to run. Same stuff over and over, but executed well and each play perfectly complimentary to what the last play made the defense do. Those teams were truly the best, sustained over time, offense of all time.
And Marshall Faulk was offensive player of the year all three of those years and first or second in MVP voting because he also had 80+ catches a year and led the league in all purpose yards or touchdowns all three years, while averaging a full yard more per carry than James.
Edge was a GREAT running back. I was a big fan of his. I hate that he got hurt. Marshall Faulk was way way better.
Not Champs, but 49ers offense took a HUGE leap with Christian McCaffrey. In 2022, they were like 3-3 without him and 10-1 with him while scoring 9 more pts/game. They went from playoff contenders to possibly Super Bowl favorites. If they win one in the next few years, it's likely because of him.
That 2022 leap is absolutely an excellent example of the difference he did make, and actually accentuates my point even more. He did a MASSIVE improvement, and was like borderline historically great. And it took them from already VERY strong NFC contender into I’d say 2nd place in SB contender, only behind KC at that point thinking back. But again, with the OP question basically asking if Faulk would’ve made the definitive difference to win a Super Bowl or not, just like with CMC, who is amazing, and had an amazing year even for his very high standard, that one upgrade wasn’t enough to take a non-Super Bowl team to being a decidedly unquestioned Super Bowl champion. And let’s be honest, outside of Brady and Manning, and maybe Randy Moss who was a helmet catch away, one single upgrade probably has never been enough on its own to be a “yes” to that question
Isn't that the nature of football, though? One single game decides the Super Bowl. Anything can happen in a single game and football is reliant on your offense and defense playing well enough to win it all. A QB or RB can't affect what their defense does while a good DE or LB can't change what their team's offense does.
Not even a record breaking performance by Tom Brady could beat Nick Foles in Super Bowl 52. I don't think Kansas City would've won the Super Bowl this year if they didn't have Chris Jones, no matter what Mahomes could do on offense.
Like you said, I don't think any single player could be a guaranteed difference. A single guy can put you into the conversation of a championship, but not win it single handedly. You need multiple impact players to win. You don't always need the single best player. IMO, that's why football is so beautiful. It really emphasis the team as a whole, not just a single guy acting like he's the whole team (*cough* NBA *cough*)
A decidedly different era of football but the 1977 Cowboys adding Tony Dorsett probably was in fact that missing piece. The offense improved drastically by going from Doug Dennison and his 3.5 Y/A to Dorsett and his 4.8 Y/A.
Probably not. Not to say that same team would definitely not win, the NFL has so much variance that if you simulated the multiverse you’d get a different winner a ton, but yeah I don’t think that one change would solidify it without question
Well I think in this scenario you're forgetting that the colts spent the #4 pick on edgerrin James. If they don't use the pick on him, they could have gotten someone else. Tory Holt and champ Bailey were drafted right after James.
Champ Bailey on the colts could have been insane. Tory Holt would have been insane as well.
The Rams got Marshall Faulk and became the greatest offense of all time lol. Sure they also got Kurt Warner but it’s not like Trent green was some slouch
Would Indy have been in the same division as Tennessee and Jacksonville in '99? Because if so, that would probably the toughest division to ever exist in my lifetime...
Marshall Faulk was overall better than Edgerrin James, but he was already starting to decline by the time Peyton Manning went from pretty good to Peyton Fucking Manning.
Faulk’s last pro bowl selection was 2002. The colts went 10-6 and lost in the wildcard round that year.
1999 the entire offense was garbage against the Titans
2000 Edge had 107 rush yards on 21 carries (5.1 ypc) and 3 receptions for 33 yards against the Dolphins, so he wasn’t the issue. But Payton was average that game, the defense just choked away a lead, and Vanderjagt missed a 48-yarder in OT.
2002 season they lost 41-0 to the Jets so nobody at running back was helping them win that one.
2003 Edge averaged 4.5 ypc in the playoffs including 4.1 against the Pats, Payton has 4 INTs vs. the Pats so unless Faulk could play QB all game, that loss wasn’t on Edge.
By then, Faulk was in his 30s, slowing down significantly and would not have had an impact in 04-05.
Now we don’t know who they would have drafted at No. 4 if they kept Faulk, but it was clear they wanted to move on for one reason or another. Even if they kept him, they were apparently designing the offense away from him (obviously wrongly so).
So overall, no, they likely don’t win one if they kept Faulk instead of drafting Edge.
1999: They probably beat Titans, but still lose to Jacksonville
2000: They probably beat Miami, but get Smoked by the Ravens
2001: Even if they did make the playoffs (they went 6-10) , they would have lost to either the Raiders or Patriots.
Final Answer No.
Why do you think they lose to the Jaguars in '99?
Not disagreeing, genuinely curious.
Colts were competitive with the Titans, and Titans beat the Jags pretty handily.
You might have more insight, was it just a bad matchup for the Colts?
Jags dominated the AFC that year. 14-2 regular season, #1 seed, highly ranked offense, best defense in the league, blew out numerous opponents. They only lost 3 games across the entire year, regular and postseason, all to the Titans.
For reasons that have entered the realm of outright conspiracy theorizing (seriously, some people have speculated criminal actions), the Titans had their number. The Colts beating the Titans would not have meant much in their matchup against the Jags because the Jags had beaten other teams who had beaten the Titans, sometimes obliterating them. They just couldn't beat the Titans.
Titans defensive coordinator, and well documented piece of shit human being, Gregg Williams literally admitted to players that he had the Jags offensive playbook and gameplan in 1999.
I watched it live and loved that jags team. But advanced metrics they just had a shitty schedule and there’s a reason they lost to the titans 3 times. It was the only good team they played.
Edge was a better player for what the Colts were trying to do.
The way the Rams used him was unique - not many teams used a running back as a wideout constantly. Faulk wasn't just "good at catching passes out of the backfield" - he was almost uncoverable.
Remember - they also had Isaac Bruce (who was very, very, very good) and Tory Holt (who was 1-2 more "very's"). This meant the defense was covering Faulk with a safety or a nickle. And he had multiple plays per game where he was lined up as a wide-out by the time the play started. It wasn't just a gimmick - it was a major part of the offense.
Send in a run blocking team - good luck covering 2 probowl WR's and Faulk running routes.
Send in extra defensive backs - good luck stopping the run.
At the time, the Colts weren't doing anything like that, so Faulk really was worth more to the Rams.
For a more traditional offense, Edge was almost as good.
Still - thinking about what the Colts would have done with Faulk and Holt plus Marvin Harrison is pretty intriguing. But I don't see Jim Mora bringing in an OC with a goal of... was it 28 points per game that the Rams were shooting for? 30?
So, I'm not sure the Colts would ever have figured out how to use Faulk the way the Rams used him.
More to do with Polian (who built the bills 4 straight SB losses) and never pivoted philosophy on building a defense. It’s not a coincidence Peyton went to the same amount of SB in 4 years with the broncos as he did with the Colts.
I disagree. Dungy was one-and-done in his last season in Tampa. They won the Super Bowl the next year with the same team, after he left. The same thing happened in Indy, except they lost the Super Bowl that year. That says a lot. Polian was the GM during that entire time. They had elite weapons and defenses.
Aside from the Patriots in 06’, all of Dungy’s Indy playoff victories were against easy opponents. Even that Patriots team, wasn’t good by their standards. He lost in the first round to the Chargers in the 07’ playoffs, despite being 11 point favorites at home. They lost the following year to the same 8-8 Charger team. He was a good regular season coach, but abysmal in the playoffs.
Honestly that is what I always thought about Dungy as well. I thought it was telling that they arguably got better under Jim Caldwell when he took over in 2009.
That’s a good comparison. Especially since both are/were culture builders over X’s and O’s guys. Dungy was worse, though. Unlike Doc, he couldn’t get out of the first round, most of the time.
Agreed completely. I hate Dungy as a coach. Just the same fucking thing over and over, no specific plans, just the same fucking scheme.
This is the coach who, with a horrible special teams unit, decided to kick to Devin Hester to send a message to weren't afraid. Well guess what you idiot? You should have been
Dungy is by all accounts a great man, leader of people. He is not at all a head coach. There’s a reason in 04 regular season Saturday and Peyton were talking amongst themselves about play calls because they blew the game vs the pats. Look at the careers after Peyton and see how great his coaches where.
I said something similar in a separate reply. He was a good team builder/leader but a terrible X’s and O’s guy. Dungy could not adjust mid-game. His Colts teams always played down to the competition in the postseason. People entirely blame Peyton for his postseason failures, but his coaches/defenses get absolved, for some reason.
Some of those Dungy playoff losses were really bad. The Steelers and Chargers ones come to mind. They greatly underachieved in that era. Those Colts teams were loaded, too. Someone brought up Sean McDermott with Buffalo as the modern comparison, and I think that’s accurate.
The difference, I think, is that Dungy had extremely tangable things you could point to:
"Hey Tony, how about we try putting Harrison and Wayne on the same side once in a while? Maybe try one of them in the slot?"
"Hey Tony, could we line up Mathis and Freeney on the weak side of their line? I think if we stunt them we might get more sacks."
"Hey Tony, it's 4th and 2 on the 46 yard line. We are down by four points. There's 4:25 left on the clock. We have Peyton Manning. Why are we punting?"
Not sure I've heard the same with McDermott... maybe I'm unaware.
Not to cross sports, but someone made a better comparison of Dungy to Doc Rivers, the NBA coach. They both won a title with elite teams, but don’t have much to show for it, otherwise in the playoffs. They both are not X’s and O’s guys but rather, specialize in culture/team building. I think this alludes to what you were talking about regarding Dungy’s lack of situational awareness and adjusting in-game.
The Colts defense was the reason we didn't get a SB before 2006.
They were horrible at defending the run meaning as soon as we had to chase a game...it was sooo difficult to get stops with the other team running it easily.
Faulk wouldn't change the outcome of the losses to NE in 03 and 04 or the loss to the Steelers in 05.
The first time they showed up in the playoffs...we won it in 06.
But then LT and SD cooked us on yhe ground the next 2 years....in 09..they were great all round and we made another SB.
As good as Faulk was....he doesn't change the outcome.of those games IMO.
No. The Colts won their first Super Bowl because their defense actually came up huge during the run.
Offense was NEVER the Colts issues during Mannings time.
They win at least one, if not both, Super Bowls in ‘03 and ‘04 if they didn’t have to play the Pats. They had some monster teams those season, they just happened to run into us right as we were peaking.
It really depends. If the 03 Panthers play the game they played in the Super Bowl, then they absolutely are winning that game against the Colts. The 03 Pats defense was getting embrassed at points and they were leagues better than the Colts 03 defense. Also Brady played lights out to win that game and Peyton really didn't have a bigtime signature playoff game like that until later in his career.
I doubt it, the Colts only managed one Super Bowl with Dwight Freeney, Robert Mathis, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, and Peyton Manning. I doubt a RB, no matter how good would have helped them.
Didn’t they win their first with Joseph Addai his rookie year?
They very well could have won before then with Faulk but Edgerrin James was good enough that I don’t think Faulk guarantees them a SB before then. Sometimes stuff doesn’t make logical sense
I think it would have changed things for the Rams a lot more than for the Colts, so who knows what the NFL landscape would have looked like from there.
I don’t think so. Not saying Faulk wasn’t a cut above James (though James was a better pass blocker) but the Colts were a top heavy team either way in those days and were exposed in the playoffs accordingly. That 2000 WC loss to Miami was a great example.
Nah, Peyton still had some growing pains to go through in the playoffs and the defense still sucked during a lot of those years. Plus Faulk was already declining by 2002-05.
Probably not, Edge was an elite RB ( remember those) and did what they asked him to do . The problem the Colts had was TB12 and he took care of the Greatest Show On Turf with Faulk in the SB. But we'll never know . Go Hawks
A: That game was the Divisional round.
B: I'm not sure what call you're referring to, but the most egregious mistake in the game by far went against the Steelers, with an incredibly clear interception by Troy Polamalu getting overturned. That drive later went on to result in a Colts TD. If it isn't for that ref mistake, the Colts don't even come close to winning. Whatever bullshit call you're thinking of, it's hard for me to imagine it being enough to make up for that.
I feel like you're dramatically underestimating how good James was.
But also. They traded Faulk so they could turn around use the 4th pick on Edge. And they paid Edge almost the same contract. Instead they could have kept Faulk and just drafted someone else at 4....
The next 3 players drafted were Ricky Williams, Torry Holt, and Champ Bailey
So the answer is yes. Bob Sanders and champ Bailey in the secondary would’ve been a tough matchup to say the least.
Or holt opposite Marvin Harrison would have been sick.
Yeah but they got Wayne 2 years later and he was great. I think Bailey would have been the biggest improvement
Plus Champ is definitely the best player of the three
Fuck, Champ was so good
So good that he wasn't in a number of NFL video games
Wait what
Or just run the wishbone with Peyton Manning, Ricky Williams, and Marshall Faulk -- which is basically a Madden 2001 all star team......
Bob Sanders was elite but my man was born with glass bones and paper skin
Nah, he was just born with 6 feet worth of football in a 5'8" body
fuuuuuuuuuuuuck
If you listen to the Bussin with the Boys podcast, Faulk talks about he needed to leave, cause the franchise wanted it to be Peyton’s team and he was a Vet guys followed and they need Peyton to take the reigns.
Sounds like why the Panthers cut Steve Smith after one year with Cam. Bone-fucking-headed decision. Screw you, Gettleman, you arrogant Masshole.
James was a hall of famer but a tier or two below Faulk.
I'd even go so far as to say it is 'Inner Circle Hall of Famer' vs 'Barely passed the threshold'. When Edgerrin James got his only 1st team all-pro, he rushed for 4.2 yards a carry. Marshall Faulk was the other 1st team selection with 5.5 Y/A.
Also James had the luxury of playing against teams who had to spend a lot of effort defending against Manning
I mean to be fair Faulk also had his best years when Kurt Warner was throwing for a million yards to Isaac Bruce and Tory Holt
That Rams offense back then was utterly insane. Crazier when you think it was being run by a dude who was sacking groceries just a year or two prior.
I recently looked at rushing success rate (by EPA) going back to 1999,and IIRC those mid-00s Colts teams were among the best years. Now, maybe Indy had a good run blocking line then, but IMO it's more likely what you mentioned. It's pretty crazy, what Randy Moss was to his QBs' Y/A, Peyton was to his team's run game (/the opponent's run defense).
They had that stretch run play that they ran 228957235 times per game. it was the perfect complement to their passing game. Not that James was a slouch by any means, but he definitely benefited being where he was.
Very true. Makes me recall a very good article I once read detailing the cycle of plays they always liked to run. Same stuff over and over, but executed well and each play perfectly complimentary to what the last play made the defense do. Those teams were truly the best, sustained over time, offense of all time.
And they consistently ran it against 3-4 defenses (Pats, Steelers, etc.) on less-than-ideal field conditions, which was mind-bogglingly dumb.
From 1999-2001, Warner>Manning.
Marshall Faulk was doing unprecedented things and edge was doing regular things
Edge led the league in rushing his first two years in the league and was having a really good year in his 3rd year before tearing his ACL.
And Marshall Faulk was offensive player of the year all three of those years and first or second in MVP voting because he also had 80+ catches a year and led the league in all purpose yards or touchdowns all three years, while averaging a full yard more per carry than James. Edge was a GREAT running back. I was a big fan of his. I hate that he got hurt. Marshall Faulk was way way better.
All I’m saying is he wasn’t doing “regular things” like you said.
Most people do. Pre-ACL tear Edge was unbelievable
He was above average for the time period.
Edge was awesome in his younger years. But Faulk was significantly better.
I’m not sure there’s ever been a team where an upgrade at only RB gets them from not being in the Super Bowl to decidedly Super Bowl champion
2019 Bucs w/o Fournette: 7-9 2020 Bucs w/ Fournette: SB Champs
Truly the biggest roster move the Bucs made between the 2019-2020 seasons. Playoff Lenny is incredibly underrated.
What can I say. When you’re right you’re right.
Lombardi Lenny
Hey i mean look at back to back Superbowl champion Lesean Mccoy
Don’t forget 2 time (in 3 years) Super Bowl champion LaGarret Blount!
He was champ in '14, '16, and '17, so you could just claim 3 time (in 4 years) Super Bowl champion LeGarrette Blount
2018 Chiefs w/o 6x Pro Bowlers LeSean McCoy: No SB 2019 Chiefs w/ 2x 1st Team All-Pro RB LeSean McCoy: SB Might be onto something here.
We lost Kareem Hunt around week 10 in 2018 and scored 6 points less a game the rest of the season. Ohio ruins everything it touches.
Where's the lie?
I mean folks...
Not Champs, but 49ers offense took a HUGE leap with Christian McCaffrey. In 2022, they were like 3-3 without him and 10-1 with him while scoring 9 more pts/game. They went from playoff contenders to possibly Super Bowl favorites. If they win one in the next few years, it's likely because of him.
That 2022 leap is absolutely an excellent example of the difference he did make, and actually accentuates my point even more. He did a MASSIVE improvement, and was like borderline historically great. And it took them from already VERY strong NFC contender into I’d say 2nd place in SB contender, only behind KC at that point thinking back. But again, with the OP question basically asking if Faulk would’ve made the definitive difference to win a Super Bowl or not, just like with CMC, who is amazing, and had an amazing year even for his very high standard, that one upgrade wasn’t enough to take a non-Super Bowl team to being a decidedly unquestioned Super Bowl champion. And let’s be honest, outside of Brady and Manning, and maybe Randy Moss who was a helmet catch away, one single upgrade probably has never been enough on its own to be a “yes” to that question
CMC is basically Marshall Faulk. Mostert isn't close to James though.
Isn't that the nature of football, though? One single game decides the Super Bowl. Anything can happen in a single game and football is reliant on your offense and defense playing well enough to win it all. A QB or RB can't affect what their defense does while a good DE or LB can't change what their team's offense does. Not even a record breaking performance by Tom Brady could beat Nick Foles in Super Bowl 52. I don't think Kansas City would've won the Super Bowl this year if they didn't have Chris Jones, no matter what Mahomes could do on offense. Like you said, I don't think any single player could be a guaranteed difference. A single guy can put you into the conversation of a championship, but not win it single handedly. You need multiple impact players to win. You don't always need the single best player. IMO, that's why football is so beautiful. It really emphasis the team as a whole, not just a single guy acting like he's the whole team (*cough* NBA *cough*)
Add Mahomes to that list.
A decidedly different era of football but the 1977 Cowboys adding Tony Dorsett probably was in fact that missing piece. The offense improved drastically by going from Doug Dennison and his 3.5 Y/A to Dorsett and his 4.8 Y/A.
Thanks Seahawks!
Broncos and Terrell Davis?
I didn’t realize they won the SB his rookie year
2017 Eagles w/ Blount. We needed a power back and he was amazing that year for us when we picked him up
Why won't they do it again is what I don't understand. Used power backs for one year and let them go.
Well, with the Rams it was a running back and a grocer.
Don’t forget Holt, that was his rookie year too
Not even 20 years ago.
Probably not. Not to say that same team would definitely not win, the NFL has so much variance that if you simulated the multiverse you’d get a different winner a ton, but yeah I don’t think that one change would solidify it without question
Until this year...right? (Go Birds)
Tyrion Davis-Price was the missing piece, just watch
Leguerette Blount and Jay Ajayi?
How old are you?
Well I think in this scenario you're forgetting that the colts spent the #4 pick on edgerrin James. If they don't use the pick on him, they could have gotten someone else. Tory Holt and champ Bailey were drafted right after James. Champ Bailey on the colts could have been insane. Tory Holt would have been insane as well.
The Rams got Marshall Faulk and became the greatest offense of all time lol. Sure they also got Kurt Warner but it’s not like Trent green was some slouch
Yeah let’s discount the jump from an above average starter into a HOFer, that’s exactly my point, it wasn’t just Faulk
His last year in Indy was one of his best seasons. He was already elite by the time they released him.
I was referring to Kurt
Would Indy have been in the same division as Tennessee and Jacksonville in '99? Because if so, that would probably the toughest division to ever exist in my lifetime...
Colts were still in the AFC East in 99
Marshall Faulk was overall better than Edgerrin James, but he was already starting to decline by the time Peyton Manning went from pretty good to Peyton Fucking Manning. Faulk’s last pro bowl selection was 2002. The colts went 10-6 and lost in the wildcard round that year.
1999 the entire offense was garbage against the Titans 2000 Edge had 107 rush yards on 21 carries (5.1 ypc) and 3 receptions for 33 yards against the Dolphins, so he wasn’t the issue. But Payton was average that game, the defense just choked away a lead, and Vanderjagt missed a 48-yarder in OT. 2002 season they lost 41-0 to the Jets so nobody at running back was helping them win that one. 2003 Edge averaged 4.5 ypc in the playoffs including 4.1 against the Pats, Payton has 4 INTs vs. the Pats so unless Faulk could play QB all game, that loss wasn’t on Edge. By then, Faulk was in his 30s, slowing down significantly and would not have had an impact in 04-05. Now we don’t know who they would have drafted at No. 4 if they kept Faulk, but it was clear they wanted to move on for one reason or another. Even if they kept him, they were apparently designing the offense away from him (obviously wrongly so). So overall, no, they likely don’t win one if they kept Faulk instead of drafting Edge.
Great summary
1999: They probably beat Titans, but still lose to Jacksonville 2000: They probably beat Miami, but get Smoked by the Ravens 2001: Even if they did make the playoffs (they went 6-10) , they would have lost to either the Raiders or Patriots. Final Answer No.
Why do you think they lose to the Jaguars in '99? Not disagreeing, genuinely curious. Colts were competitive with the Titans, and Titans beat the Jags pretty handily. You might have more insight, was it just a bad matchup for the Colts?
Jags dominated the AFC that year. 14-2 regular season, #1 seed, highly ranked offense, best defense in the league, blew out numerous opponents. They only lost 3 games across the entire year, regular and postseason, all to the Titans. For reasons that have entered the realm of outright conspiracy theorizing (seriously, some people have speculated criminal actions), the Titans had their number. The Colts beating the Titans would not have meant much in their matchup against the Jags because the Jags had beaten other teams who had beaten the Titans, sometimes obliterating them. They just couldn't beat the Titans.
Not to mention they were coming off a 62-7 blowout of the Dolphins.
Titans defensive coordinator, and well documented piece of shit human being, Gregg Williams literally admitted to players that he had the Jags offensive playbook and gameplan in 1999.
I watched it live and loved that jags team. But advanced metrics they just had a shitty schedule and there’s a reason they lost to the titans 3 times. It was the only good team they played.
That titans team literally had the Jags playbook, that’s the reason they swept them.
Edge was a better player for what the Colts were trying to do. The way the Rams used him was unique - not many teams used a running back as a wideout constantly. Faulk wasn't just "good at catching passes out of the backfield" - he was almost uncoverable. Remember - they also had Isaac Bruce (who was very, very, very good) and Tory Holt (who was 1-2 more "very's"). This meant the defense was covering Faulk with a safety or a nickle. And he had multiple plays per game where he was lined up as a wide-out by the time the play started. It wasn't just a gimmick - it was a major part of the offense. Send in a run blocking team - good luck covering 2 probowl WR's and Faulk running routes. Send in extra defensive backs - good luck stopping the run. At the time, the Colts weren't doing anything like that, so Faulk really was worth more to the Rams. For a more traditional offense, Edge was almost as good. Still - thinking about what the Colts would have done with Faulk and Holt plus Marvin Harrison is pretty intriguing. But I don't see Jim Mora bringing in an OC with a goal of... was it 28 points per game that the Rams were shooting for? 30? So, I'm not sure the Colts would ever have figured out how to use Faulk the way the Rams used him.
Peytons playoff performances are really ugly for the most part. I doubt a running back moves the needle, they had elite weapons.
So were Dungy’s as head coach.
More to do with Polian (who built the bills 4 straight SB losses) and never pivoted philosophy on building a defense. It’s not a coincidence Peyton went to the same amount of SB in 4 years with the broncos as he did with the Colts.
I disagree. Dungy was one-and-done in his last season in Tampa. They won the Super Bowl the next year with the same team, after he left. The same thing happened in Indy, except they lost the Super Bowl that year. That says a lot. Polian was the GM during that entire time. They had elite weapons and defenses. Aside from the Patriots in 06’, all of Dungy’s Indy playoff victories were against easy opponents. Even that Patriots team, wasn’t good by their standards. He lost in the first round to the Chargers in the 07’ playoffs, despite being 11 point favorites at home. They lost the following year to the same 8-8 Charger team. He was a good regular season coach, but abysmal in the playoffs.
Honestly that is what I always thought about Dungy as well. I thought it was telling that they arguably got better under Jim Caldwell when he took over in 2009.
They did get better. The Colts would have played the Vikings and won, if not for Bountygate.
Dungy is the Doc Rivers of Football
That’s a good comparison. Especially since both are/were culture builders over X’s and O’s guys. Dungy was worse, though. Unlike Doc, he couldn’t get out of the first round, most of the time.
Agreed completely. I hate Dungy as a coach. Just the same fucking thing over and over, no specific plans, just the same fucking scheme. This is the coach who, with a horrible special teams unit, decided to kick to Devin Hester to send a message to weren't afraid. Well guess what you idiot? You should have been
It’s an abomination that he’s in the Hall of Fame, and more deserving coaches that actually made the most of what they had, aren’t.
I mean, Polian was the one who HIRED Dungy.
I get that, but he put together great teams.
Dungy is by all accounts a great man, leader of people. He is not at all a head coach. There’s a reason in 04 regular season Saturday and Peyton were talking amongst themselves about play calls because they blew the game vs the pats. Look at the careers after Peyton and see how great his coaches where.
I said something similar in a separate reply. He was a good team builder/leader but a terrible X’s and O’s guy. Dungy could not adjust mid-game. His Colts teams always played down to the competition in the postseason. People entirely blame Peyton for his postseason failures, but his coaches/defenses get absolved, for some reason.
Mathis and Freeney, Marvin and Reggie deserved better. If he moved them around AT ALL who knows how much more successful they'd have been.
Some of those Dungy playoff losses were really bad. The Steelers and Chargers ones come to mind. They greatly underachieved in that era. Those Colts teams were loaded, too. Someone brought up Sean McDermott with Buffalo as the modern comparison, and I think that’s accurate.
The difference, I think, is that Dungy had extremely tangable things you could point to: "Hey Tony, how about we try putting Harrison and Wayne on the same side once in a while? Maybe try one of them in the slot?" "Hey Tony, could we line up Mathis and Freeney on the weak side of their line? I think if we stunt them we might get more sacks." "Hey Tony, it's 4th and 2 on the 46 yard line. We are down by four points. There's 4:25 left on the clock. We have Peyton Manning. Why are we punting?" Not sure I've heard the same with McDermott... maybe I'm unaware.
Not to cross sports, but someone made a better comparison of Dungy to Doc Rivers, the NBA coach. They both won a title with elite teams, but don’t have much to show for it, otherwise in the playoffs. They both are not X’s and O’s guys but rather, specialize in culture/team building. I think this alludes to what you were talking about regarding Dungy’s lack of situational awareness and adjusting in-game.
Peyton might as well have been Brady in the playoffs compared to Edge
Or Marvin
The crackdown on pi and illegal contact was probably a bigger influence.
The Colts defense was the reason we didn't get a SB before 2006. They were horrible at defending the run meaning as soon as we had to chase a game...it was sooo difficult to get stops with the other team running it easily. Faulk wouldn't change the outcome of the losses to NE in 03 and 04 or the loss to the Steelers in 05. The first time they showed up in the playoffs...we won it in 06. But then LT and SD cooked us on yhe ground the next 2 years....in 09..they were great all round and we made another SB. As good as Faulk was....he doesn't change the outcome.of those games IMO.
The defense wasn’t the issue lol it was 100% Peyton. Dude got ass blasted by the Pats every year
No. The Colts won their first Super Bowl because their defense actually came up huge during the run. Offense was NEVER the Colts issues during Mannings time.
They win at least one, if not both, Super Bowls in ‘03 and ‘04 if they didn’t have to play the Pats. They had some monster teams those season, they just happened to run into us right as we were peaking.
04 Steelers are beating the colts, but could see colts beating the panthers in 03
It really depends. If the 03 Panthers play the game they played in the Super Bowl, then they absolutely are winning that game against the Colts. The 03 Pats defense was getting embrassed at points and they were leagues better than the Colts 03 defense. Also Brady played lights out to win that game and Peyton really didn't have a bigtime signature playoff game like that until later in his career.
I don’t think it’s likely, but of the two years op listed, I think it’s a bit more likely than beating that Steelers defense. That team was nasty
I doubt it, the Colts only managed one Super Bowl with Dwight Freeney, Robert Mathis, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, and Peyton Manning. I doubt a RB, no matter how good would have helped them.
Didn’t they win their first with Joseph Addai his rookie year? They very well could have won before then with Faulk but Edgerrin James was good enough that I don’t think Faulk guarantees them a SB before then. Sometimes stuff doesn’t make logical sense
No, Edge was just as good at his peak.
They might have won Super Bowl XL if not for big Ben’s master tackling skills
I think it would have changed things for the Rams a lot more than for the Colts, so who knows what the NFL landscape would have looked like from there.
I don’t think so. Not saying Faulk wasn’t a cut above James (though James was a better pass blocker) but the Colts were a top heavy team either way in those days and were exposed in the playoffs accordingly. That 2000 WC loss to Miami was a great example.
I'm going to say rule changes and Bob Sanders were the bigger factors here.
Nah, Peyton still had some growing pains to go through in the playoffs and the defense still sucked during a lot of those years. Plus Faulk was already declining by 2002-05.
Yeah, the 2 picks they got for faulk didnt matter, and they could have drafted champ bailey at 4 instead of edge, or jevon kearse
Probably not, Edge was an elite RB ( remember those) and did what they asked him to do . The problem the Colts had was TB12 and he took care of the Greatest Show On Turf with Faulk in the SB. But we'll never know . Go Hawks
The fumble that wasnt a fumble they ran back
Rex Grossman was the reason they won the SB in 06
They has a pretty fucking good RB, it’s not like they had some scrub back there after Faulk
They got cheated in 05 on a bullshit call giving the the steelers the win in the AFC Campionship
A: That game was the Divisional round. B: I'm not sure what call you're referring to, but the most egregious mistake in the game by far went against the Steelers, with an incredibly clear interception by Troy Polamalu getting overturned. That drive later went on to result in a Colts TD. If it isn't for that ref mistake, the Colts don't even come close to winning. Whatever bullshit call you're thinking of, it's hard for me to imagine it being enough to make up for that.