May 21, 2013

Colts Win Puts Draft-Obsessed Fans In Their Place

December 23, 2011 by 42 Comments

Last night the Indianapolis Colts took Andrew Luck’s name out of everyone’s mouth for just a minute.  They came back in the fourth quarter (in an admittedly horribly officiated game) to beat the Houston Texans 19-16.  That ties the Colts in the win column with the St. Louis Rams and Minnesota Vikings at two.

For most of this season everyone has associated Andrew Luck with Peyton Manning and the Colts because most thought the Colts had a good chance to go full Detroit and not win a game this year.  I know I’m going to take some heat for this opinion and “talking down” to some fans out there, but this is just perfect justice for smug fans who want to sit back and tell competitive professional athletes in this nation’s most popular game that they should throw games for draft status.  I don’t mean to be condescending, but it just goes to show how hard it is for me to ever  understand how an organization can ever expect to be good if they entertain the thought of tanking.

That doesn’t mean a team can’t play for next year.  There’s a big difference between trying to lose on purpose and making a decision to give young guys some experience.  In that case you are still trying to win even as you look toward the future.  That was one of the biggest problems that many of us had with Romeo Crennel.  He insisted on throwing Ted Washington and Willie McGinest out there in their late 30s even as the Browns weren’t going anywhere that those guys could carry the team.

How ironic is it for the Colts to be teaching this lesson?  I guess they should know all too well because they’ve most likely hurt themselves in the past by taking their foot off the gas.  They earned what amounted to a bye week when they locked up home field advantage in 2007, but giving Jim Sorgi that time on the field as the Colts dropped a game to Tennessee will always be thought of by some Colts fans as the reason they didn’t go further in the playoffs.  As we all know, that game was Tennessee’s 10th win and kept a 10-win Cleveland team out of the playoffs.***

So the Colts won last night in spite of the draft.  You could see Peyton Manning and his teammates on the sidelines dying to do well.  You could see a 33-year-old Reggie Wayne dying to make a difference and win a second game in a row after losing more than anyone’s seen in Indianapolis in a very long time.  They have a spirit and culture of winning there and they just couldn’t bear to see it die completely.

On the one hand, winning the top pick in the draft is thought to be the best way to turn your team around.  On the other hand, I think it is easy to see how much quicker the turnaround can happen if you don’t need to find someone to inject that confidence that is such an important ingredient to winning football teams.  It is one of the main things that the Browns have been missing other than talent over the years.  They have competitiveness, but they’ve almost always lacked that confidence.  Of course that is all a part of the chicken or the egg thing.  Does winning breed culture or does culture breed winning?

Either way, I would much rather have Indianapolis’ winning mentality and culture and the fifth pick in the draft than the sad sack culture and the first pick.

*** Of course if Derek Anderson could have somehow beat the Bengals by not throwing four interceptions…

Related Posts

Zemanta
Filed Under: Browns, Featured Tagged With: , , , ,
  • jimkanicki

    colts still hold top pick through sos tiebreak.

  • jimkanicki

    ^^so to finish my point, indy was at home last nite and sunday and they played hard for their home crowd.

    we shall see about indy’s winning mentality and so forth when their pick is actually in jeopardy next week at jax.

    not for nothing but ‘draft-obsessed’ browns fans want jax to win as that would move us to #4.

    ps, whose fault is it that browns fans are ‘draft-obsessed?’

  • Grower

    Does anyone think that Houston lost this game on purpose??? They are in the playoffs already, not going to be a 1 or 2 seed, so what do they have to lose…Not having to play the Colts with a “Franchise” quarterback for the next 10-12yrs??? Hmm… Just a thought..

  • DocZeus

    And with that one meaningless game in late December, they are on the verge of murdering their franchise going forward… You tank because that’s how you eventually stop having to play meaningless games in late December.

  • Lars

    That Colts win means nothing with tiebreakers… if they win next week, they are stupid. They had the one of the best QBs for the past decade, they have an oppurtunity to select the guy that most people think could be one of the best QBs for the next decade in a league where having a great QB can mask a lot of deficiencies elsewhere.

    How much did the culture of winning help after LeBron left? Imagine a year of LeBron getting hurt – would you rather have had the Cavs go into the playoffs as an 8th seed to preserve the culture of winning or end up with a top 4 lottery pick and the ability to pick a Rose/Paul/etc? What would ultimately be better for the future of the franchise this year? Winning 15 games and getting a top 6 pick, or winning 28 and being a fringe playoff team?

    Talent breeds winning, and losing meaningless games brings more opportunities to draft talent.

    That being said, I won’t be upset if the Browns win in the next two weeks – but I do hope that the front office could work out a trade to select an impact player in the upcoming draft (Blackmon, RG3, Luck, etc.)

  • MrCleaveland

    In the space of a couple hours, the Browns lost out on a shot at Barkley and then fell into a possible shot at Luck, which had been previously impossible.

    I wouldn’t use our No. 1 on RGIII, but I’d sure use it on Luck if I had the chance.

  • MrCleaveland

    ^
    To clarify my point about the Browns having a shot at Luck: Indy wasn’t going to trade that pick, but the Rams or Vikes might.

  • Mike

    Yeah, but Mr. Cleaveland, is it worth 3-6 Top 2 round draft picks to select one player when a team has multiple deficiencies? Ask the Saints when they drafted Ricky Williams. They were in a hole for years to come.

  • Lars

    @8 for a RB, no. For a QB – probably. An elite RB doesn’t really make anyone that much better than a decent one does, but an elite QB can hide holes in the O-Line, make crap WRs good/great, and allow decent RBs to constantly run without an extra guy in the box.

    I’m not sure if Luck is that guy, but if the F.O. believes he is, I hope they aren’t afraid to make a move.

  • http://serandez.blogspot.com Ezzie

    I also thought the insistence by Wayne that Orlovsky keep the ball was really classy, considering Wayne himself had made two spectacular catches on that drive.

    The idea that teams would play to lose in the NFL is ludicrous. I think it’s telling that while in some places – including Cleveland – you’d hear “Suck for Luck” chants, you never once heard that from Indianapolis.

    Also, somewhat aside, my fellow season ticket holder and I were discussing last night and he feels strongly that the Browns should at least pick one side of the ball and finish it off. If that means drafting a top CB (the guy from LSU say) and a top RDE in the first round, do it. Make the defense absolutely complete, like PIT and BAL and others have done for years, and then it’s easier to bring in players whenever someone goes down or leaves because you only have one hole to plug. Meanwhile, you get to focus on building the offense without having to worry about the D. Thoughts?

  • MrCleaveland

    @8 and @9

    You both make excellent points. It’s a risk either way.

    But if Heckert thinks Luck is all that, then go for it. If not, there’s always a couple of can’t-miss QBs in the next draft.

  • matt tag

    the idea of tanking for a draft pick is ridiculous. Even if it’s the best thing for the franchise in certain cases, do you think the players on the field are tanking? No way.

  • Steve-o

    Rumor has it that Holmgrem offered the Rams our entire draft for Bradford in 2010. Whether we like it or not, I expect he’d offer at least as much for Luck. BTW, the Colts look like they are very capable of beating the Gabbert led Jags next week.

  • BuckeyeDawg

    This certainly does make things more interesting. With Bradford, I think STL would be interested in trading. Not sure about MIN, though. Don’t know if they are committed to Ponder like STL is to Bradford. Bradford has shown that he could be very good…the jury is still out on Ponder.

    No matter what happens, I’m still not sure I want to give up the king’s ransom it would take to trade up to #1 and pick Luck. Not when we have so many other issues to address. It would probably take both of this year’s 1st rounders and 2nd rounder, and next year’s first rounder…at least. That just scares the hell out of me.

  • Wheel

    I am admittedly draft obsessed. It’s the only therapy that can be me through this most disappointing season. Perhaps Barkely staying in school another year is a blessing in disguise, because I think the Browns would have taken him. Are we ready to call Colt McCoy a bust after one season in which the Browns front office did absolutely NOTHING to help him succeed? I think he deserves another chance. Let’ s get Blackmon and on OL with our first two picks. If McCoy doesn’t work out, there will be more QBs to pick in 2013.

  • Subadai

    @ Ezzie

    I like the idea of finishing off the D for a couple of reasons.

    1) We already have a pretty strong core of young players (Hayden, Rubin, Taylor, Sheard, Ward). Add in one more pass rusher and an a really good OLB and it will be a great D for years.

    2) Look at the division we are in. We HAVE to play strong D to win. Flat out.. no other way.

    3) This is most important. I trust Dick Jauron to develop high draft choices into quality NFL D. players infinitely more than I trust Pat Shurmur to do the same w/ offensive players.

    Remember what Hienz Guderian said “Abandon failure and reinforce success.” I hope that is what Heckert is thinking next year.

  • NJ

    culture of winning = culture of talent

  • NJ

    @12- Not to mention coaches. Yeah, I’m going to lose on Sunday so you can fire me on Monday? No thanks.

  • Josh

    The Colts organization was widely accused of “tanking” before the Manning draft. It resulted in a complete transformation of their franchise and over a decades worth of incredible teams, playoff runs, a Superbowl win and one of the most exciting teams to watch in the league.

    Yep, I bet the Colts regret that decision and the “losing culture” it created.

    Winning meaningless November/December games doesn’t carry over to the next year. Ask the 2010 Browns. In situations like the Browns and Colts this year, it is clearly FAR more beneficial to get the better draft pick than to pick up a meaningless win that does nothing to change a “culture of losing”. And this is especially true now that we have a rookie wage cap.

    Tanking doesn’t mean telling players to lose. That’s stupid. It means when Peyton Manning goes down you sign 98 year old Kerry Collins to replace him.

    I’m praying the Colts beat the Jags and the Rams wind up with the Luck pick. Holmgren will give whatever it takes to get him, as he should.

  • Shamrock

    St. Louis doesn’t need a QB and either does Minnesota so Indianapolis still has the cards on Luck. If he somehow falls it’s a no-brainer to me. Blackmon is perfect for St. Louis.

  • pepe

    When has anyone ever said that the players should go out and lose on purpose? You just made that up.

  • pepe

    In fact, the Colts players don’t want Luck on their team at all. They want Peyton Manning. The Colts have more to play for than most teams right now. The players don’t want the #1 pick. The front office sure does though.

    I have never read anywhere where someone suggested that the Colts players were losing on purpose. Where did you get that from?

  • NJ

    It’s called a strawman.

  • Josh

    @pepe, Completely agree. I don’t understand why some people seem to equate hoping your team loses out for a draft pick with expecting players to tank it.

    I actually prefer the Browns play really well the last two games, I just hope they continue to find a way to lose.

  • J2theB

    @ Ezzie – Put me in the camp of those who want us to draft a CB and DE in 1st round as well… as long as we sign a good veteran WR (like Bowe).

  • 216in614

    @Ezzie while I’d be shocked if it happened it would be kind of incredible.

    One less TD per game given up by the D. And one more TD scored on offence a this current browns team would have only loss 2 this season.

    Make sure not to lose any momentum gain on the D this year and that is a real possibility.

    If Colt, Hillis and Little even show a little improvement next year and we are active in FA this is also a possibility.

    Thats the goal in my mind. 1 less TD given up and 1 more TD scored while building this year.

  • pepe

    @26 problem with that is that next year’s schedule isn’t going to be filled with the crapcakes we played this year. Take a look at the QBs we’ve played against this year. It’s a who’s who’s of guys who will or already have lost their jobs.

  • Subadai

    @ 216in614

    Good point. First time I’ve heard anyone put this debate in quantitative, rather than qualitative, terms.

    I think that your goal is attainable, too.

  • Subadai

    @ pepe.

    Our 6 division games will never change. The focus needs to be on winning the division. First step toward winning the division is to beat the teams in your division. If we can beat teams in division… we’ll certainly be able to hang with any out of division opponent.

    Man… I used the word “division” 6 times in that paragraph. It must be more important than I thought when i started typing.

  • pepe

    @29 Couldn’t agree more. What’s our intra-division record? With a few improvements we might be able to beat St Louis and Arizona, but we’re a long way from even competing with the Steelers and Ravens.

  • Subadai

    @ pepe

    Here’s my point. The d is legitimately just two or three players away from being very good… Like top five good… and a DECADE younger than the Steelers’ or Rat Birds’ d’s. We have a good d coordinator who can wreak havoc those three extra players. I say finish that unit off in this draft and use it as the foundation for the whole team next season. Then in 2013 go heavy on O. Barkley will be there then… may be we go all in on a trade for him at that point.

    This is what I would do.

  • pepe

    @31 Again, I agree (mostly). I would love to see them take defensive players with two of first three picks. Our D would be borderline great with another DE (Coples?) and some secondary help.

    IF they go out and get Matt Flynn to compete with McCoy and somehow convince a free agent WR to sign here. Desean Jackson perhaps?

    That would be grand. I don’t care how they address these needs. But they need to address the QB and WR position in a serious way.

  • christopher

    A losing season and a high draft pick are about 1/100th the equation of a successful franchise.

    The Browns have had 10 of 11 losing seasons, high draft picks and continuously sputter.

    The successful franchises draft talent no matter where they pick. For more information on successful drafting see: New England Patriots and Pittsburgh Steelers.

    Neither have had anywhere near the number one pick in a decade and have each had 3 superbowl appearances in that same decade.

  • Cleveland12

    Great article!
    Determination and effort wins every time.
    Talent and luck are fickle items.

  • jimkanicki

    @34. no it’s kind of a dumb article because it boils down a number of matrixed variables and boils it down to ‘anyone who recognizes there is a benefit to an improved draft position’ needs to be put in their place.

    i assume you (and craig) like taylor and little and the extra picks this year. you wouldnt have them have them if the browns beat the steelers in the last game last year. you would have drafted 13th, not 6th. just one game. seven slots. i say again: ONE GAME LOST = TAYLOR+LITTLE+another1stROUNDER; win that game you get nick fairley.

    there’s been a lot of ‘you gotta be patient’ and ‘you build through the draft’ on written here. if that’s what you think, but you were pulling for the browns to pull out that cardinals game on the same day carolina, wash, and miami gave you a three slot kiss…

    then youre a fan and that’s ok.

    but dont turn around and call out those who are actually consistently applying ‘patience’ and ‘draft’ principles as ‘draft-obsessed’ who need to be put in their place.

  • Shamrock

    ^^Amen. The problem, as pointed out by many, is the Browns drafts have been atrocious. They are getting better but largely because the previous regimes were just so bad.

  • Wheel

    To me, the jury is clearly out on Heckert. Joe Haden is fine. But trading up to get Montario Hardesty????? TJ Ward shows flashes, but was he worth a 2nd round pick. Lauvao has been unimpressive. Besides Colt McCoy, no one else from the 2010 draft is on Browns roster. Was Phil Taylor worth the trade down (and trade up)? Every time I see Julio Jones score a TD, I cringe. I love Sherard but Owen Maceric? Really? Every draft is crucial, but the 2011 will clearly be make or break for Heckert/Holmgrem. Here’s to hoping they make great picks.

  • Matt

    #10 and #16 I’ve been agreeing since the start of the season that if we “complete” the defense we’ll have a dominant side of the ball when we are ready to compete, and we (ugh) “can still lose games” (albeit, without purposely tanking) “to get a good draft pick”.

    I do also agree with jimkanicki that you can’t talk down to the people who want the high draft picks (no matter how) and preach patience in the same breath. It seems disingenuous.

    I think the defense is good enough, and it’s time to focus on the offense this time. I also think that Heckert is good enough to get a top wide receiver/running back in the second round. Which means whatever he takes (or trades) with the two first round picks should probably be something “safe” like OL.

  • jimkanicki

    @36/wheel, agree with your ‘jury’s out’ sentiment on heckert and must pile on with a seldom reported data point. the ‘trade up’ pick for taylor netted KC a decent OLB (justin houston) and then the next pick netted dallas the runner up for offensive rookie of the year (demarco murray). i think when you trade-up for a player, you are staking your talent eval cred on that player. eg, ozzie trades up for haloti ngota, heckert’s two trade ups raise some flags on his talent evaluation.

    @37/matt, thanks.

  • Scott

    The fact is that all fans who want high draft picks vs. Meaningless wins (myself among them) never expect the players to tank a game. That is just silly to think and doesn’t even play into our thinking at all. The second fact is that colts will be much better served with Luck making 160 starts for them over the next decade than a meaningless win in December 2011 of a lost season. Not sure what their records were when manning was drafted, but one more win that year and they might have leaf instead. Pretty substantial impact and price to pay for 1 win and instilling a winning attitude with the team.

  • jimkanicki

    @40 agreed players shouldnt tank. they have a job to do as individuals. tanking, though, is a can o worms that i’d like to open up here for a bit. (stick with me.) the premise is the tanking is done upstairs.

    when the starting left guard goes out for the year and is not replaced the GM is tanking the season. when baron davis is released outright, theyre tanking the season. the GMs on both teams will spin it that they want to develop young players, but they also know theyre turning an 8-8 team into 4-12 or a 25 win team into a 15 win team. they KNOW they’re reducing the team’s competitiveness.

    the browns and cavs want it reported that this represents ‘a youth movement’ and ‘building for the future. but teams CAN compete while build for the future. too often, it is presumed these are mutually exclusive.

    on the cavs: they couldve drafted dwilliams+kanter, keep davis. it’s a competitive team and developing youth. pick up a point guard next year. (you dont have to tell cavs fans that it’s a PG driven league, but we needed a top PG two years ago vs rondo.. not so much now.) they couldve dealt davis’ expiring contract at the deadline. but the story being spun is that irving’s development trumps winning games this year. i dont believe kyrie irving’s growth wouldve been significantly retarded by having davis around. i do think it’s safe to say we’re five to ten games worse without him.

    on the browns, i was insulted as fan by being told steinbach wasnt replaced because they want to develop pinkston (and via bloggers, protect cap). no team serious about winning would start the season with a rookie FIFTH ROUNDER at one guard and a so-so 3rd rounder with three games experience at the other. the same holds for OLB where the starter is known out and no moves are made to replace him. again, the front office has planned to be about four games worse.

    in both cases, the front offices are cynically putting forward teams who are less competitive than they could be. the only reason i can think of for doing this is to improve their draft positions. it shouldnt be surprising that fans start adopting a cynical viewpoint toward the teams.

  • Wheel

    And when the GM refuses to sign ANY free agents despite glaring holes in nearly every area, he his tanking the season.