One more reason to love Len Dawson:

[T-post Tom]

When asked (on 810 this am) if he agreed with the Colts decision to sit their starters and miss out on the opportunity to have the first undefeated ("perfect") season during the 16 game regular season era.

"Are you kidding? ARE YOU KIDDING? As a competitor, you have a chance to go out and do something that's never been done?!? If I was in Peyton Mannings place, I would have run back out onto the field."

:clap: The fire still burns bright in Mr. Dawson.

[OnTheWarpath15]

There's not a current player/coach in the league that would disagree with that, IMO.

The difference is, Lenny has the balls to actually SAY IT, unlike current players/coaches who are afraid to upset the apple cart.

[Demonpenz]

great guy

[big nasty kcnut]

The fucking man.

[Demonpenz]

I will never forget we were having a lunchen at our school and it was buffet style, and we were running low on bacon, he chopped blocked the 5th student in line so his wife could come in and put the bacon in her purse for later. THAT'S HOW YOU COMPETE>

[BigChiefFan]

Who gives a shit? They are playing in the Super Bowl. I would say the move worked out just fine. Leave it to Chiefs fans to give a shit about the regular season.

[dirk digler]

Some of the Colts said yesterday at media day they were fucking pissed

[Bane]

Some of the Colts said yesterday at media day they were ****ing pissed

You could tell during that game they were pissed.:cuss:

[T-post Tom]

There's not a current player/coach in the league that would disagree with that, IMO.

The difference is, Lenny has the balls to actually SAY IT, unlike current players/coaches who are afraid to upset the apple cart.

The man is fearless. Probably the only man alive who'd take Chuck Norris on in a street fight. (And win.) :)

[Hootie]

I agree with Len Dawson...

Dumbest move of the season...I think Rick Reilly said as much in one of his columns or on his blog or something...and it really was.

BUT

Peyton Manning is way too classy to cause a distraction like that...going back into the game against his coaches will.

Still a gutless, spineless move by Caldwell if you ask me.

19-0 was so doable...

[T-post Tom]

Who gives a shit? They are playing in the Super Bowl. I would say the move worked out just fine. Leave it to Chiefs fans to give a shit about the regular season.


That sums up the Colts' FO perspective. And if that's what you identify with, more power to you. As a fan of football, I tend to side with the players' perspective. A competitor wants to be on the field.

[Rain Man]

Some of the Colts said yesterday at media day they were ****ing pissed


It's ridiculous. Their rookie head coach cost them a shot at being immortal. No one talks about teams that go 18-1. I'd be furious if I was a Colts player.

[T-post Tom]

It's ridiculous. Their rookie head coach cost them a shot at being immortal. No one talks about teams that go 18-1. I'd be furious if I was a Colts player.


Sarcasm meter screaming... And nobody ever talks about the 1972 Dolphins either. Right? And let's see, that was 38 years ago? I wonder if the remaining members ever toast each other with champagne... hmmmm...

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/11/05/sports/football/05fifthdown1/blogSpan.jpg

[OnTheWarpath15]

Some of the Colts said yesterday at media day they were fucking pissed

Really? Who?

And good for them. They should be pissed.

[dirk digler]

Really? Who?

And good for them. They should be pissed.

.

Most Colts players have been tight-lipped about club president Bill Polian's decision to bench front-line players down the regular season's stretch. While it would appear that Polian's tactic paid off considering where Indianapolis currently stands, center Jeff Saturday is still fuming.

He made his feelings public at Tuesday's Super Bowl Media Day.

"The truth is, (the decision) had nothing to do with us (players)," Saturday said. "There was nothing we could do about it. I can tell you every player wanted to play, every player tried to play, but that wasn't what our front office and our coach decided."

Colts right tackle Ryan Diem also called Polian's decision "a little disappointing," while free safety Antoine Bethea defended Indianapolis' higher-ups.

[ForeverChiefs58]

I agree with Len Dawson...

Dumbest move of the season...I think Rick Reilly said as much in one of his columns or on his blog or something...and it really was.

BUT

Peyton Manning is way too classy to cause a distraction like that...going back into the game against his coaches will.

Still a gutless, spineless move by Caldwell if you ask me.

19-0 was so doable...


I heard that his coach kept calling running plays against the Jets to run the clock, even though it was such a close game at that point. Peyton went against his coach and threw it instead, including his TD throw. Coach couldn't get mad because, afterall, he is Peyton fu@#& Manning for cying out loud!

[Nzoner]

It's ridiculous. Their rookie head coach cost them a shot at being immortal. No one talks about teams that go 18-1. I'd be furious if I was a Colts player.

Colts lost their last 2 regular season :)

[BigRichard]

Who gives a shit? They are playing in the Super Bowl. I would say the move worked out just fine. Leave it to Chiefs fans to give a shit about the regular season.

In ten years no one will know or give a shit who won the Superbowl in 2010. They would remember the Colts went undefeated if they had. Now the coach will be remembered for being dumbass and not letting them.

[Hammock Parties]

Pfft, I did that in Madden.

[Hootie]

I heard that his coach kept calling running plays against the Jets to run the clock, even though it was such a close game at that point. Peyton went against his coach and threw it instead, including his TD throw. Coach couldn't get mad because, afterall, he is Peyton fu@#& Manning for cying out loud!

Well Tony Dungy tried shelling up and punting on 4th and inches a few years back and Peyton Manning literally told him to fuck off and kept the offense on the field.

I mean...

Lets be honest.

We know who's running the show when push comes to shove.

[Hootie]

if Peyton Manning demanded the Colts trade their 1st round pick for a pack of Big League Chew and made a big enough fuss about it...it would happen.

[Nzoner]

Meh,it'll all be moot anyway after the Saints kick their ass :D


WHO DAT

[jjjayb]

Who gives a shit? They are playing in the Super Bowl. I would say the move worked out just fine. Leave it to Chiefs fans to give a shit about the regular season.

Somebody wins a superbowl EVERY year. How often does someone go undefeated and win the superbowl? How often does someone go undefeated and win the Championship in any sport?

In ten years you won't remember who won the superbowl this year, yet you WILL remember who won the 1972 Superbowl. Why? Because it was the undefeated Dolphins. If the Colts had gone undefeated and won the superbowl this year I guarantee you would still remember who won the superbowl this year 20 years from now.

[Dartgod]

Colts lost their last 2 regular season :)
I think he was referring to the 2007 New England Patriots.

[Nzoner]

I think he was referring to the 2007 New England Patriots.


:facepalm:

[Hootie]

Meh,it'll all be moot anyway after the Saints kick their ass :D


WHO DAT

38-21 Colts

[SLAG]

<------

[OnTheWarpath15]

.

Nice.

Much respect to Saturday for speaking out.

[jjjayb]

I think he was referring to the 2007 New England Patriots.

Or the The 1984 San Francisco 49ers and the 1985 Chicago Bears. Both were 18-1 and superbowl winners. I had to look both of them up, because again, who remembers the 18-1 team? If they were 19-0 I guarantee I would have remembered them.

[Nzoner]

38-21 Colts

I wish I could find a bookie willing to give a 17 point spread....

[milkman]

In ten years no one will know or give a shit who won the Superbowl in 2010. They would remember the Colts went undefeated if they had. Now the coach will be remembered for being dumbass and not letting them.

Okay.

Let me see if I understand this.

No one wil remember who won the SB in 2010, but they will remember the coach for making decisions that kept the Colts from going undefeated?

If the Colts win the SB, how do they remember the coach but forget the team?

[T-post Tom]

Or the The 1984 San Francisco 49ers and the 1985 Chicago Bears. Both were 18-1 and superbowl winners. I had to look both of them up, because again, who remembers the 18-1 team? If they were 19-0 I guarantee I would have remembered them.

It has to be said that the 85 Bears do get pub for having (arguably) the best defense of all time. Well .... and this too:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fJNC3dgreaU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fJNC3dgreaU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[T-post Tom]

Okay.

Let me see if I understand this.

No one wil remember who won the SB in 2010, but they will remember the coach for making decisions that kept the Colts from going undefeated?

If the Colts win the SB, how do they remember the coach but forget the team?

Maybe the team is remembered for the wrong reasons? :) Actually, I'm not sure the coach or the team will stand out over time unless you're a Colt's fan.

One thing is for sure: If the Colt's win (barring bizarre game day happenings), they won't be remembered like the 1972 Dolphins. But they might have been. Not hard to imagine Manning in 32 years (his nose and ears finally proportionate to his forehead) sipping champagne with Jeff Saturday & co on ESPN 54. Storyline: last undefeated NFL team loses... thus preserving 2009 Colts' "perfect season".

[KingPriest2]

When asked (on 810 this am) if he agreed with the Colts decision to sit their starters and miss out on being the first team to go 16-0:

"Are you kidding? ARE YOU KIDDING? As a competitor, you have a chance to go out and do something that's never been done?!? If I was in Peyton Mannings place, I would have run back out onto the field."

:clap: The fire still burns bright in Mr. Dawson.

Ah they would be the second team to go 16-0. Patriots 2 years ago

[Royal Fanatic]

Who gives a shit? They are playing in the Super Bowl. I would say the move worked out just fine. Leave it to Chiefs fans to give a shit about the regular season.
Quickly: tell us who won Super Bowl XXII. How about Super Bowl XXXI? No? What about Super Bowl IX?

Now, can you tell us which team had a perfect 17-0 season?

Some team wins the Super Bowl every freaking year. Very few teams have the chance for immortality. For that reason alone I'm rooting against the Dolts.

[T-post Tom]

Ah they would be the second team to go 16-0. Patriots 2 years ago

What we're really discussing is a perfect, undefeated season like the '72 Dolphins. Only this would be the first ever during the 16 game regular season era. The Pats didn't quite get there. I knew what I meant but didn't quite get it down clearly. :) Thanks for pointing that out. I edited the original post to clarify.

[Nzoner]

Quickly: tell us who won Super Bowl XXII. .

Redskins 42-10 over Denver

Doug Williams first black qb to start a SB,Timmy Smith rushed for over 200 yds and the most explosive quarter in SB history with 5 td's scored in less than 6 minutes in 2nd quarter....

I only remember all this so vividly because I was at the game :)

[FAX]

On his 75th birthday, Lenny Dawson killed an adult Kodiak bear by biting through the beast's jugular vein and was home in time for cocktails.

FAX

[RealSNR]

:clap: The fire still burns bright in Mr. Dawson.No, I'm pretty sure that's just his prostate.

But Lenny IS dead on correct in his assessment of the Colts' decision, yes.

[Sure-Oz]

Colts could've made history, being the 2nd undefeated team ever or the 2nd undefeated team to lose in the SB

[Sure-Oz]

I still love how len ran away from me and my gf when he opened the door for us at a denver hotel and we recognized him lol

[38yrsfan]

Class and character, Lenny for Prez!

[BigRichard]

Okay.

Let me see if I understand this.

No one wil remember who won the SB in 2010, but they will remember the coach for making decisions that kept the Colts from going undefeated?

If the Colts win the SB, how do they remember the coach but forget the team?

You missed the point. They will not be remembered for winning the Superbowl. I was just pointing out the coach is a dumbass not necessarily that he will be remembered for it years down the road. I know that is what I said but it was just to emphasize the fact that I believed that the coach was a dumbass for doing it.

[Sure-Oz]

When they were losing to the jets they shouldve put the starters in

[Hydrae]

On his 75th birthday, Lenny Dawson killed an adult Kodiak bear by biting through the beast's jugular vein and was home in time for cocktails.

FAX

He had to decapitate a bear? That's Awesome! (Chuck fans will get this)

[chiefzilla1501]

I agree with Len Dawson...

Dumbest move of the season...I think Rick Reilly said as much in one of his columns or on his blog or something...and it really was.

BUT

Peyton Manning is way too classy to cause a distraction like that...going back into the game against his coaches will.

Still a gutless, spineless move by Caldwell if you ask me.

19-0 was so doable...

Wes Welker tore his ACL in a meaningless game.

If the Patriots rested Welker, they might have won a few playoff games.

I think it's absolutely retarded to say it was a stupid move. The Colts are in the Super Bowl. Agree or disagree with the decision, dumb decisions don't put you in the Super Bowl.

And if I'm choosing between an undefeated season leading to a loss in the AFC Championship game vs. a less-than-perfect season leading to a Super Bowl berth, I'll pick the Super Bowl every day of the week.

I can't believe we're criticizing a Super Bowl coach for a regular season decision he made. In fact, the two teams to rest their starters, the Saints and the Colts, are in the Super Bowl.

[chiefzilla1501]

You missed the point. They will not be remembered for winning the Superbowl. I was just pointing out the coach is a dumbass not necessarily that he will be remembered for it years down the road. I know that is what I said but it was just to emphasize the fact that I believed that the coach was a dumbass for doing it.

The goal is to win the Super Bowl.

Period.

It's not to go in the record books.

The Colts are in the Super Bowl. What I do know is that resting the starters didn't hurt their Super Bowl chances.

I don't understand how anyone can call a coach a dumbass when he's in the biggest game of the year.

Because I can tell you one thing. People remember the Pats' 16-0 season. But they also remember them as being the team that couldn't close the deal. I would much rather be remembered for closing the deal than being perfect and then losing when it counted most.

[T-post Tom]

...I would much rather be remembered for closing the deal than being perfect and then losing when it counted most.

Even though you weren't addressing me specifically, some of us may be referring to different things. In the scope of a 21-0 season (my original point): "being perfect" and "losing when it counted the most" ARE mutually exclusive. "Being perfect" includes "closing the deal."

I think it's safe to say that: a perfect season (21-0; incl.SB win) > SB (w/o a perfect record) win in the grand scheme of things. This has already been proven by 1972 Dolphins.

As for the argument of protecting the players: every NFL player that I've heard or read in this regard said that not playing is a detriment. I'll take their word for that. That said, I wouldn't call their coach a dumbass. Actually, he's smarter than 30 other coaches from a scoreboard perspective. Also, I believe the front office made the decision, not the coach. But that's based only on speculation that I've heard from the NFL 'experts'.

And lastly, my original point was just as much about the attitude of highly successful competitors like Len Dawson and Peyton Manning. Men that WANT to be on the field because of their desire to compete, accomplish and win. Men with unwavering confidence in themselves and in their team. Men willing to risk a great accomplishment for a greater accomplishment.

[KingPriest2]

Wes Welker tore his ACL in a meaningless game.

If the Patriots rested Welker, they might have won a few playoff games.

I think it's absolutely retarded to say it was a stupid move. The Colts are in the Super Bowl. Agree or disagree with the decision, dumb decisions don't put you in the Super Bowl.

And if I'm choosing between an undefeated season leading to a loss in the AFC Championship game vs. a less-than-perfect season leading to a Super Bowl berth, I'll pick the Super Bowl every day of the week.

I can't believe we're criticizing a Super Bowl coach for a regular season decision he made. In fact, the two teams to rest their starters, the Saints and the Colts, are in the Super Bowl.

Dude injuries can happen to anyone at any given time People get hurt in games all the time So you cant use that agrument

[chiefzilla1501]

Dude injuries can happen to anyone at any given time People get hurt in games all the time So you cant use that agrument

What do you mean I can't use that argument? When your players sit, they don't get injured. That's why Wes Welker tore his ACL in a game he could have been sitting, while Reggie Wayne stayed healthy.

Unless you're suggesting that Drew Brees was at risk of getting a bench splinter when he sat against Carolina.

[jjjayb]

Wes Welker tore his ACL in a meaningless game.

If the Patriots rested Welker, they might have won a few playoff games.

I think it's absolutely retarded to say it was a stupid move. The Colts are in the Super Bowl. Agree or disagree with the decision, dumb decisions don't put you in the Super Bowl.

And if I'm choosing between an undefeated season leading to a loss in the AFC Championship game vs. a less-than-perfect season leading to a Super Bowl berth, I'll pick the Super Bowl every day of the week.

I can't believe we're criticizing a Super Bowl coach for a regular season decision he made. In fact, the two teams to rest their starters, the Saints and the Colts, are in the Super Bowl.

Before this year, all the other years the Colts rested their starters they made the superbowl ZERO times. The year they actually won the superbowl they didn't rest any starters. Maybe this time will be different for them. But seriously, again, I don't even remember which year they one the superbowl. Somebody wins it every year. Just never the Chiefs.

[chiefzilla1501]

Even though you weren't addressing me specifically, some of us may be referring to different things. In the scope of a 21-0 season (my original point): "being perfect" and "losing when it counted the most" ARE mutually exclusive. "Being perfect" includes "closing the deal."

I think it's safe to say that: a perfect season (21-0; incl.SB win) > SB (w/o a perfect record) win in the grand scheme of things. This has already been proven by 1972 Dolphins.

As for the argument of protecting the players: every NFL player that I've heard or read in this regard said that not playing is a detriment. I'll take their word for that. That said, I wouldn't call their coach a dumbass. Actually, he's smarter than 30 other coaches from a scoreboard perspective. Also, I believe the front office made the decision, not the coach. But that's based only on speculation that I've heard from the NFL 'experts'.

And lastly, my original point was just as much about the attitude of highly successful competitors like Len Dawson and Peyton Manning. Men that WANT to be on the field because of their desire to compete, accomplish and win. Men with unwavering confidence in themselves and in their team. Men willing to risk a great accomplishment for a greater accomplishment.

I'm mostly referring to those who call him a dumbass for sitting his players.

It was a very conservative play. And not one I would have made. But there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. And the theory that sitting is to a player's detriment is pretty hard to qualify when two of the teams that sat players are now in the Super Bowl. And I think the argument about sitting being a detriment were largely in the days when players were on the bench for an entire game at the end of the season. Now, coaches are letting players play out an entire first half before resting them.

Like I said, there is no guarantee the Colts or Saints would have made the Super Bowl had they not sat their players late in the season. We don't know if players would have played less fresh or if any key players would have gotten injured in that span. If the Saints did as much as lost Colston in a meaningless game, that's probably the difference between a close OT win against the Vikings and a loss.

So while we don't know what would have happened if the Colts/Saints kept playing their players, we know exactly what happened because they benched them. They made the Super Bowl. A conservative decision, but I don't get all the people on this thread that are suggesting it was a dumb one (not you).

[Bearcat]

Wow, this thread went full retard fast.

Who remembers Super Bowl XXII? Uh, perhaps the players who won the f***ing game, the players who lived their childhood dream, and all the fans associated with the two teams? JFC, we're actually discounting the Super Bowl?

And yeah, injuries can happen at any time, which is why you sit your players in a meaningless game. :facepalm:

Yeah, one reason you might remember the 17-0 season off the top of your head is because it happened two f***ing years ago... and had New England sat their starters against the Giants in the regular season, who knows what would have happened in the rematch. Oh, but I'm sure all the players look back on that season as a resounding success, because at least they went 16-0!!!

Oh, and let's forget the part about how the Colts could have been playing the Chargers in the playoffs had they beaten the Jets in the regular season, and the Chargers own the Colts.

Call it a lame move or whatever.... say it hurts the competitive nature of the game, etc; but don't discount being in the SB.

JFC, every QB discussion on this board comes down to rings, and now none of that matters.... I guess Tom Brady is better than Peyton Manning because of the 16-0 season and not because of the rings? If Manning won this year and another one in the next year or two, he'll still be in the shadow of Brady for that epic regular season that ended in a playoff loss.

[KcMizzou]

Wow, this thread went full retard fast.

Who remembers Super Bowl XXII? Uh, perhaps the players who won the f***ing game, the players who lived their childhood dream, and all the fans associated with the two teams? JFC, we're actually discounting the Super Bowl?

And yeah, injuries can happen at any time, which is why you sit your players in a meaningless game. :facepalm:

Yeah, one reason you might remember the 17-0 season off the top of your head is because it happened two f***ing years ago... and had New England sat their starters against the Giants in the regular season, who knows what would have happened in the rematch. Oh, but I'm sure all the players look back on that season as a resounding success, because at least they went 16-0!!!

Oh, and let's forget the part about how the Colts could have been playing the Chargers in the playoffs had they beaten the Jets in the regular season, and the Chargers own the Colts.

Call it a lame move or whatever.... say it hurts the competitive nature of the game, etc; but don't discount being in the SB.

JFC, every QB discussion on this board comes down to rings, and now none of that matters.... I guess Tom Brady is better than Peyton Manning because of the 16-0 season and not because of the rings? If Manning won this year and another one in the next year or two, he'll still be in the shadow of Brady for that epic regular season that ended in a playoff loss.LMAO

Deep breaths, buddy. Count to 10.

[Rain Man]

Of course a player could get hurt. But compare that to the certainty that they're going to be frustrated and annoyed. If they're good enough to be 14-0, I'm pretty sure they're going to be frustrated and annoyed. And the next time contract negotiations come up or some team crisis occurs, that frustration and annoyance will resurface. I think there's a cost that's not measured when a decision like that is made.

[KingPriest2]

What do you mean I can't use that argument? When your players sit, they don't get injured. That's why Wes Welker tore his ACL in a game he could have been sitting, while Reggie Wayne stayed healthy.

Unless you're suggesting that Drew Brees was at risk of getting a bench splinter when he sat against Carolina.

Doesnt matter players get hurt all the time cant use it

[milkman]

Before this year, all the other years the Colts rested their starters they made the superbowl ZERO times. The year they actually won the superbowl they didn't rest any starters. Maybe this time will be different for them. But seriously, again, I don't even remember which year they one the superbowl. Somebody wins it every year. Just never the Chiefs.

Really?

You don't remember, even though they played the Chiefs in the first round in one of the worst playoff games you'll ever be witness too?

[chiefzilla1501]

Doesnt matter players get hurt all the time cant use it

Tell me how a player gets hurt sitting on a bench.

Butt splinters?

[chiefzilla1501]

Of course a player could get hurt. But compare that to the certainty that they're going to be frustrated and annoyed. If they're good enough to be 14-0, I'm pretty sure they're going to be frustrated and annoyed. And the next time contract negotiations come up or some team crisis occurs, that frustration and annoyance will resurface. I think there's a cost that's not measured when a decision like that is made.

If a player is frustrated or annoyed because they didn't go undefeated but made the Super Bowl, then that's not the kind of player you want on your team anyway.

Your goal is to win the Super Bowl. That's 100 times more important than any kind of record. In the end, every time anyone in the future brings up the 16-0 Patriots, it will immediately be followed with a "yeah, but...."

[jjjayb]

Really?

You don't remember, even though they played the Chiefs in the first round in one of the worst playoff games you'll ever be witness too?

Repressed memory. For obvious reasons. :cuss:

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

We have great past. I want a great future.

[Rain Man]

If a player is frustrated or annoyed because they didn't go undefeated but made the Super Bowl, then that's not the kind of player you want on your team anyway.

Your goal is to win the Super Bowl. That's 100 times more important than any kind of record. In the end, every time anyone in the future brings up the 16-0 Patriots, it will immediately be followed with a "yeah, but...."


I want a player who wants to win the Super Bowl but also gets really, really mad if he gets benched for a game, no matter what the game is. I absolutely want a player who is frustrated that his team didn't go undefeated.