yeah he was the backup today, but was also the backup to Peyton. I'm saying, what's his place on the roster if you don't even want him being a spot starter? he's had a couple years to get ready, it's not like he's a rookie. remember when they signed Collins, Peyton was still mostly assumed to be back soon.

Somewhere, Jim Sorgi is pissed right the hell off.

Assuming the injury isn't career ending, the people saying Peyton's run is coming to an end are gonna look pretty stupid next year.

Being the "back-up to Peyton" never meant anything. I could claim I was his back-up and nobody would know since he never missed games and never really came out early either. So calling Painter "Peyton's back-up" is glorifying whatever his role was a bit too much.

Assumed by who(m)?

And even if he was "assumed" to be back, there's nothing wrong with adding some depth to the roster in KC. I've heard multiple people on this site ask why Painter is still on the roster/what's his role and I don't really know why. It's like... who cares? He's basically a #3. Worse #3s have been active on rosters. Maybe.

Aside from his 3 (lol) fumbles, KC didn't play that horribly today. He threw for 200 with a TD and nearly another and no picks. The handoff fumble had to be a fluke. 1 fumble was after being jumped on from behind by 6'7" 290 pound Mario WIlliams. His first fumble was awful though, he was not hit that hard and the play was right in front of him. But it's not like Collins is gonna fumble like this every game. I also realize a lot of his yardage was pretty garbage-time stuff, though, too. But then again everyone and their grandma knew he'd be throwing the last 3 quarters so that didn't really help him.

EDIT: Just some more thoughts that aren't really on topic but anyway... I wouldn't be too worried about Collins on this team. He went from standing behind an amazing line with no vertical weapons to a bad line with pretty good weapons. I think if they can build a gameplan around him where he gets rid of the ball sooner he can be effective on this team. I mean he's gonna have to if he wants to survive. They had Dallas Clark blocking Mario WIlliams today. Collins isn't used to having Peyton's mental clock. It can't be easy to learn but we'll see if he can do it. I would look for more slants and more dumps over the top to Clark. Then maybe with all those quick passes they can work in some decent delayed handoffs to Addai and stuff. But they gotta do something to keep him alive and keep chains moving. And give their D some rest.

My real concern is that Collins does shake off the rust and the coaching staff overcomes Caldwell and designs a gameplan that helps the Colts win 4-6 games. Just tank the ****ing season.

This Andrew Luck talk is silly, they are not going to end up in a position to make that decision, so the hypothetical doesn't matter. I know Peyton is worth a bazillion WAR but it's really difficult to actively try and win 1-3 games in a season.

Also the concept of tanking in the NFL is pretty LOL... unless you openly promote practice squadders to the 1st team and tell the guys making millions to sit down, it's pretty hard to get players to stop trying to win games, especially in a game like football. This is a fantasy concept of those who don't play that game at that level.

Not to mention that it would require complicit approval from the owner, otherwise an entire coaching staff risks getting canned after a horrendous season... and for what? A QB who has never played in the NFL, and really isn't directly involved in individuals' success. Give me a break.

Great idea for the fan, really, really, really horrible idea for all of the people in the organization involved. Tanking NFL games of consequence to your team's regular season standings or playoff seedings is impossible.

Lighten up Francis

Salva, football is extremely coach-dependent. While I don't disagree with your premise that players always want to try, it would be easy for coaches to fail without making it even look obvious. Hell, ~26 coaches a week fail and they are trying to win. Colts FO could tank easily if they wanted to. Players can try all they want but if the system isn't designed to work correctly they simply won't have an impact.

Off topic but if I hear someone call a tight end a QB's "safety net" or "security blanket" one more time I will get mad. JFC, what's next? "Jason Witten is Tony Romo's snuggy?" I hate these phrases and they are severely overused.

****, if you really wanted to lose a game against the Texans, I guess you could do something that would look odd but not seem overly suspicious. You could do something dumb like have Dallas Clark try to block Mario Williams by himself on key plays, that would have a pretty big effect on the game.

Joking obv, but lol @ throwing a game not being hard.

It would be easy for an NFL team to throw a game, imo. Coaching has a ****-ton of an effect on the outcome. Setting up a terrible gameplan during the week would not be hard. The guys on the field have an average IQ of like 80. They just put their head down and do what they're told.

Seriously look how much fail occurs by coaches in-game. I don't think it would be hard at all for an organization to throw games with nary an inkling by the fans.

Texans have had some monumentally fail-laden losses over the years and not once have I wondered if tehy were trying to lose.

OK, but only if the owner is in on the fix and promises to spare the jobs of everyone involved. It's pretty easy to tank an NBA season by "resting" a couple of key starters, but football involves so many moving parts I don't see how. You see non-playoff team guys lay out to make a play in Week 16 all the time, they are trying to keep their elite jobs and put money in their bank accounts, how do you prevent them from making plays? The whole idea is just crazy.

I don't think it's remotely possible to purposely tank an NFL season, and even Andrew Luck isn't worth the fall-out for such a horrendous debacle.

And if a team actually tried to do this? Throw SpyGate out the window, that's the most horrendous affront to competitiveness in the NFL ever, they would deserve not only stripping of draft picks but maybe even playoff ineligibility or some other more serious censure, I just can't think of many worse offenses than actively throwing games in professional sports.

And again, sitting starters with playoff spots locked up or resting key players on a team to keep them healthy for future playoff games or seasons is not the same thing.

You coach them to be in the wrong spots.

I'm just having a little fun with the Colts wasted season, I'm not seriously implying they're tanking (although I obv wish they would, 1-15>>>>6-10). That said, it wouldn't even have to be some hugely nefarious plot or anything, just a common understanding that losing games can actually be beneficial under the right circumstances. It's not happening, but it's not crazy.

LDO

Yep, it's up there with betting on the games imo.

Yup

Yeah, I was mostly just responding to PHB, didn't know you were joking. Buuuut... if the Colts really did end up in that position, could be worse.

The extra moving parts is what makes it easy. Tanking in basketball would be way too obvious.

Look at Todd Haley, Jamaal Charles averages like twice ypc than Thomas Jones and doesn't get touches and nobody suspects they're tanking. Colts went out and got Kerry Collins instead of, Favre, or Painter, or someone else and nobody suspects they are "tanking".

In football it's easy for a coach/FO to say "we feel he's our guy" and it's hard for fans to not just accept that, even if they don't agree with it.

How hard is it to start a back-up tackle and claim that he's got "potential"? Or he "fits our scheme better"? Or insert a couple inferior players on special teams? Nobody even knows who plays special teams besides the returners. Or call way too many run plays or way too many pass plays. Or coach take poorly-timed timeouts? Or call in confusing plays with 2 rookies on the line and expect a false start penalty? I mean the list could go on and on and on.

On defense play bend-don't-break if you accidentally get a lead. In overtime you win the toss and you decide to kick to "take the wind" like Fisher once did. lol.

fyp

Well I guess there's a difference between not trying to win that hard and purposely trying to lose a game. Lots of teams seem to do the former out of sheer incompetence, but no team, AFAIK, has ever tried to do the latter. And you would have to purposely try to lose games in the NFL to secure the #1 pick, because "not trying hard" isn't enough, you don't know what would happen.

One is ******ed. The other is borderline criminal offense.

So I agree not trying hard is easy, but purposely trying to get a #1 pick in the NFL as the absolute worst team in the league is impossible to engineer cleanly.

Wow, that guy who tried to kill himself once just mother****ed Peyton Manning for "taking 20 million without playing". Seriously!?

He said "you do not accept a contract like that when you hurt". lol go die, Deion. What an *******.

I said "try to lose without making it obvious". So, yeah, it's not like the coaches/coordinators/FO can just send out replacement players.

I still think you are way overestimating the difficulty of a group of dudes orchestrating failure at the NFL level. Winning an NFL game is not easy for any team. You can't really gameplan to lose and "accidentally" win. Maybe once or twice but it should still be enough to lock up #1. And I'm talking about the Colts, specifically, who look like a 3 win team with full effort (assuming Peyton is out all year). How hard would it be to go from 3 wins to 2 or 1 with a little finagling by the powers-that-be?

Someone said in the game thread that the Panthers are lucky that Andrew Luck stayed in school... hmmm, that may be true?? hehe

Well then that assumes the Colts are a baseline 3-win team without Peyton. Do you really believe this? I mean, they looked like absolute crap today, but 3-13 is pure incompetence as a team. If they are that close to that expectation then they don't have to cheat to get to the #1 seed all that much, they might do it legimately.

The Colts should just consult Belichick. If he can cheat to win and game the NFL, he can certainly cheat to lose and game them as well? (sorry, cheap shot)

Colts can also just trade for Romo - he's tanked teams trying his very best, it's effective and perfectly legal in the NFL

Salva, last year Arian Foster ran for an unexpected 230 yards or so against them and Peyton still managed to only lose 34-24. And that was on a team that clawed its way to 10-6. Foster didn't even play today and they lost 34-7. And Texans basically took their foot off the gas way early. It's not out of the question to think they could go like 3-13 if Peyton is out all year. They could win more but Collins would have to revamp his style because standing in the pocket flat-footed, waiting for hit terrible receivers to get open in Tennessee may have worked but it doesn't look like it will work behind this O-line. Manning is only slightly more mobile than Collins and he almost never gets hit, because he gets the ball out so damn quickly. Collins isn't gonna be able to do that overnight at this age, but if they really dumb down their offense and play "small ball" they may be able to hit 4-6 wins.

I mean let's wait until they play an average/bad team though. Texans were expected to do well this year after their D looked so good in the pre-season and they were returning basically their entire offense.

I, for one, am looking forward to the Colts going 3-13 and landing Luck, grooming him for a few years while the Pats groom Mallett behind Brady. Both teams dump their legends when they get too past their prime, Mallett and Luck go at it for another generation of epic Pats-Colts clashes.

Gonna happen imo

again, my points are:

- wtf is Painter doing on this roster. if you are the 2nd string QB and don't play when the starter gets hurt, you should just be cut.
- Polian botched the entire backup QB situation

yeah, I guess how you could see him falling into complacency given Peytons track record of health, but **** accidents happen.

You are making an assumption that isn't accurate. He is not the "2nd string QB", even if that was his "title" last season. It was meaningless. We know he wasn't/isn't the "2nd string QB" now, since they went out to get Collins. He's #3 on the depth chart, which isn't at all strange considering it is typical of teams to carry 3 QBs.

I disagree that Polian botched the back-up. In fact, I agree whole-heartedly with the QB depth chart strategy he has incorporated over the last several years.