Collusion in the NFL? (1 Viewer)

[02025]

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=2311

Kerry Collins, speaking on WFAN, said that the Titans kneeled down at the end of the Colts-Titans game because they knew the Colts wouldn't call a timeout.

Collins said that the Titans originally called a running play, but he was told over his headset that the Colts wouldn't call a timeout to potentially force Tennessee to punt with less than 20 seconds left. Pressed further, Collins said the Colts and Titans coaches had "an agreement," which is sure to raise collusion questions. With a Colts timeout, the Titans would have been forced to risk fumbling the ball with three runs. Clearly it would have been a long shot for the Colts to win at this point, but Browns fans won't enjoy hearing this one.

 

[norton17]

Would it have been better for Browns fans to see Tennessee punt and then Indy fair catch and take a knee?

 

[02025]

Would it have been better for Browns fans to see Tennessee punt and then Indy fair catch and take a knee?

The fact that there was a wink-wink, nod-nod going on between NFL coaches is ridiculous....

 

[bostonfred]

Why would Kerry Collins even say this?

 

[Avery]

Why would Kerry Collins even say this?

Drunk, maybe?

 

[Fallerjw]

Would it have been better for Browns fans to see Tennessee punt and then Indy fair catch and take a knee?

The fact that there was a wink-wink, nod-nod going on between NFL coaches is ridiculous....

It was clear that something was going on, because that game was a joke.

 

[FUBAR]

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=2311

Kerry Collins, speaking on WFAN, said that the Titans kneeled down at the end of the Colts-Titans game because they knew the Colts wouldn't call a timeout.

Collins said that the Titans originally called a running play, but he was told over his headset that the Colts wouldn't call a timeout to potentially force Tennessee to punt with less than 20 seconds left. Pressed further, Collins said the Colts and Titans coaches had "an agreement," which is sure to raise collusion questions. With a Colts timeout, the Titans would have been forced to risk fumbling the ball with three runs. Clearly it would have been a long shot for the Colts to win at this point, but Browns fans won't enjoy hearing this one.

Why would the Colts do anything else? Risk injuring a player for last minute heroics in a meaningless game? The "agreement" part isn't good, but when I read the title, I started to think maybe the Colts wanted the Titans to win the game.

 

[djcolts]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

 

[foxman]

Why would Kerry Collins even say this?

The word Idiot springs too mind.Him not you.

 

[Fallerjw]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

It was pretty much over before it started really. The Colts scored 1 TD. It was on a drive that, after penalties, started on the Titans 10 yard line.

 

[Itchy Amos]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

The simple fact here is that the game was not over. These teams are supposed to play the whole 60 minutes. Kickers miss kicks, kicks get blocked, holders fumble snaps. Given the circumstances, the Titans would conceivably win 99.9% of the time, but that does not make this ok.The bigger question is when did Tennessee know that Indy wasnt going to exhaust every opportunity to win the game. I would like to think that this is a totally innocent circumstance, but given what has already taken place this year across all of professional sports, maybe I shouldnt be so quick to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

[02025]

a 41-yarder isn't a chip shot....and opens the possibilities of a FG block. Also a miss would have given the Colts the ball at the 31 with 25 seconds or so...enough time for a couple of plays.

There is a big difference between not playing your starters for fear of injuries and waving the white flag too early. Dungy can't let his second stringers try to beat the titans? They are no more likely to get injured playing an additional 4 plays than they would have been the entire game.

And yes I know, the chances the Colts winning - even trying their best - would have been an unbelievable long shot...

 

[trogg78]

I WILL NEVER WATCH FOOTBALL AGAIN! (excet the Browns....GO BROWNS..WOOF...WOOF) I can't believe this is going on. This is no different than what the NFL is letting BB get away with. What a dispicable bunch of losers.

at browns fan.

-Who Dey.

 

[LILB811]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

The simple fact here is that the game was not over. These teams are supposed to play the whole 60 minutes. Kickers miss kicks, kicks get blocked, holders fumble snaps. Given the circumstances, the Titans would conceivably win 99.9% of the time, but that does not make this ok.The bigger question is when did Tennessee know that Indy wasnt going to exhaust every opportunity to win the game. I would like to think that this is a totally innocent circumstance, but given what has already taken place this year across all of professional sports, maybe I shouldnt be so quick to give the benefit of the doubt.

Westbrook owner

 

[tick dog]

Why would Kerry Collins even say this?

Drunk, maybe?

Nah, he was sober -- no racial slurs.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

True, the game was over but come on Collins......why even stir the pot. What a D*** A**!

 

[Routilla]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

 

[Fallerjw]

I WILL NEVER WATCH FOOTBALL AGAIN! (excet the Browns....GO BROWNS..WOOF...WOOF) I can't believe this is going on. This is no different than what the NFL is letting BB get away with. What a dispicable bunch of losers. at browns fan.-Who Dey.

 

[PatsWillWin]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

 

[Itchy Amos]

The last drive started from the Indy 24 yard line. Why would they punt after 3 carries, anyway? They would have kicked the FG (Bironas hit a 54 yarder earlier in the year, and has been the AFC's best kicker this year, he wasn't going to miss), which would have made it a 9 point lead with 20 seconds left. The game was OVER, folks.

The simple fact here is that the game was not over. These teams are supposed to play the whole 60 minutes. Kickers miss kicks, kicks get blocked, holders fumble snaps. Given the circumstances, the Titans would conceivably win 99.9% of the time, but that does not make this ok.The bigger question is when did Tennessee know that Indy wasnt going to exhaust every opportunity to win the game. I would like to think that this is a totally innocent circumstance, but given what has already taken place this year across all of professional sports, maybe I shouldnt be so quick to give the benefit of the doubt.

Westbrook owner

I only wish that I had enough common sense to draft him. I went with the "high powered" denver running game instead.I am not sure if you are joking, but it is worth mentioning that Westbrook kneeling at the one yard line was a great football play and seemingly increased his teams chances of winning (at the expense of personal statistical glory). Giving up with time left on the clock is definately not comparable.

 

[Routilla]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

 

[Bobcat10]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

 

[rick6668]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

 

[Routilla]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

 

[rick6668]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

 

[Routilla]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

I would have Peyton Manning playing in the Super Bowl, not Jim Sorgi.

 

[rick6668]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

I would have Peyton Manning playing in the Super Bowl, not Jim Sorgi.

Great, but you wouldn't use your timeouts... thanks

 

[Itchy Amos]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all. If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

 

[Routilla]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

I would have Peyton Manning playing in the Super Bowl, not Jim Sorgi.

Great, but you wouldn't use your timeouts... thanks

I wouldn't need my TOs with Manning and the 1st teamers in there. You guys need to remember that IND had nothing to gain out of this game or PM and the rest of the starters would have been playing. Your welcome.

 

[Routilla]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

 

[rick6668]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.

3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.

It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.

2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.

3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).

4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

I would have Peyton Manning playing in the Super Bowl, not Jim Sorgi.

Great, but you wouldn't use your timeouts... thanks

I wouldn't need my TOs with Manning and the 1st teamers in there. You guys need to remember that IND had nothing to gain out of this game or PM and the rest of the starters would have been playing. Your welcome.

Why didn't they just forfeit before the game then?My Welcome?

 

[3nOut]

Why would the Colts do anything else? Risk injuring a player for last minute heroics in a meaningless game?

The "agreement" part isn't good, but when I read the title, I started to think maybe the Colts wanted the Titans to win the game.

It may have been meaningless for the Colts but not for the NFL. In fact, it was one of only a few meaningful games this past week that had playoff implications. I have been somewhat of a fan of the Colts since they were losers in Baltimore. I would have hoped that Indy would have at least put in half an effort for the integrity of the league. The Titans lucked out and backed into the playoffs with what ended up basically a "coin toss". It was pure luck that the schedule had TEN facing Indy the last week of the season notearlier when the Colts would have given an effort. They could have faced someone else who had nothing to pay for and may have lost, like Denver. TEN didn't play very well and could barely beat the Colts second and third stringers. This game was an embarassment.

 

[rick6668]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

I thought you said the game was over?So Indy should have used their timeout?

 

[mad sweeney]

I doubt K. Collins is in the circle that would have privy to such information even if it was true.

So he's making it up?

1-10-IND24 (1:54) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 25 for -1 yards.2-11-IND25 (1:15) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 26 for -1 yards.3-12-IND26 38) K.Collins kneels, dead ball declared at IND 27 for -1 yards.It's called game over. IND only had 1 TO and TEN was kneeling the ball on each down, not attempting to score by any means.

So you're saying if the TO was used after 1st down, the clock would have still run out after the 3rd down play?

I'm saying TEN was kneeling the ball with no intention of trying to score again. Apparently IND accepted this as a good sportsmanship move and realized the game was over. Also, perhaps the previous possession was considered IND's last real chance at scoring.1-10-IND25 (2:56) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short middle to D.Aromashodu. Penalty on IND-C.Thorpe, Illegal Formation, declined.2-10-IND25 (2:45) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete short right to D.Aromashodu.3-10-IND25 (2:41) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass short right to C.Thorpe to IND 24 for -1 yards (V.Fuller).4-11-IND24 (2:01) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete deep left to D.Aromashodu (C.Lowry).

So are you saying that if your team is down by 6 in the Superbowl and the other team has the ball with less than 2 minutes left and they just down the ball you shouldn't use your timeouts to stop the clock and try to win, but instead accept this as a good sportsmanship move and realize the game is over?

I would have Peyton Manning playing in the Super Bowl, not Jim Sorgi.

Great, but you wouldn't use your timeouts... thanks

This was very much not the Super Bowl. Would it have been "cooler" to Cleveland fans to exhaust every option to win? Sure, but the Colts aren't under any obligation to exhaust every option to win. If they were, they would've kept Manning and Addai and the rest of the starters win. If they're playing scrubs, they are obviously no longer interested in winning, why does a policy decision like this fall under any other category? If Indy wanted to win, they would've tried. The simple fact that 70% of their salary cap was on the sidelines is a bigger indication they didn't care to win than not calling a desperation TO.Fisher and Dungy are two of the classiest coaches in the league. Accusing them of collusion is just wrong. And I could care less about either team and quite frankly really wanted to e the Browns in the playoffs.

 

[Routilla]

Great, but you wouldn't use your timeouts... thanks

I wouldn't need my TOs with Manning and the 1st teamers in there. You guys need to remember that IND had nothing to gain out of this game or PM and the rest of the starters would have been playing. Your welcome.

Why didn't they just forfeit before the game then?My Welcome?

I was being courteous.I don't think you can forfeit games in the NFL. If so there would only be about 2 pre-season games.

 

[rick6668]

Why would the Colts do anything else? Risk injuring a player for last minute heroics in a meaningless game?

The "agreement" part isn't good, but when I read the title, I started to think maybe the Colts wanted the Titans to win the game.

It may have been meaningless for the Colts but not for the NFL. In fact, it was one of only a few meaningful games this past week that had playoff implications. I have been somewhat of a fan of the Colts since they were losers in Baltimore. I would have hoped that Indy would have at least put in half an effort for the integrity of the league. The Titans lucked out and backed into the playoffs with what ended up basically a "coin toss". It was pure luck that the schedule had TEN facing Indy the last week of the season notearlier when the Colts would have given an effort. They could have faced someone else who had nothing to pay for and may have lost, like Denver. TEN didn't play very well and could barely beat the Colts second and third stringers. This game was an embarassment.

The Colts should have tried to win the game and not given up. If they were down by 9 points, I have no problem with what they did.

 

[FUBAR]

Why didn't they just forfeit before the game then?

If they could of, they would of.

 

[Itchy Amos]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

Yes, I get that. So if Indy had stopped Tennessee from getting a first down, that would have left somewhere around 30 seconds for a 4th down field goal attempt. We have seen comebacks in less time than this.I fully understand that this game meant nothing to Indy. This is especially clear given that they didnt even try to win the game. Lets ask some Browns fans what they think of Dungy's "good sportsmanship".

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Did you hear what Dungy said to Fisher during the handshake? Dungy was all "the Chargers don't want to play you guys, and Fisher was all yah I know. Dungy clearly wanted the Titans to bring their pysical play and beat up on the Chargers (assuming that the Chargers win) so they would not be 100% facing the Colts the following week.

 

[Routilla]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

I thought you said the game was over?So Indy should have used their timeout?

I was replying to Itchy's post, simply stating that had IND called a TO after 1st down(from Itchy's post) it would have forced TEN to do something besides kneel down. They still may have taken a knee but I would think a few running plays and a FG would have been the result.

 

[hitman2]

It was a very friendly handshake.

Someone should try to watch the tape and read their lips.

I'm pretty sure it was

Thanks a lot Tony

You owe me one Jeff

I'm not a Browns fan (don't dislike them either), but I am a fan of competitive football and the entire game didn't smell right.

I agree with others in here that you play the full 60 minutes. Anything can happen, any given Sunday (or Monday or Thursday or Saturday).

PS - I love conspiracy theories also

 

[PatsWillWin]

Fisher and Dungy are two of the classiest coaches in the league. Accusing them of collusion is just wrong.

Take it up with Kerry Collins.

 

[rick6668]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

I thought you said the game was over?So Indy should have used their timeout?

I was replying to Itchy's post, simply stating that had IND called a TO after 1st down(from Itchy's post) it would have forced TEN to do something besides kneel down. They still may have taken a knee but I would think a few running plays and a FG would have been the result.

There was no reason for Tenessee to think they could just kneel down for 3 plays and run out the clock. The reason they did so was because they were told the colts were not going to stop the clock.In fact, I think it's better for the Colts not to use their timeout until after they ran their 3rd down play.

In the spirit of the game, they should have used their last timeout and forced the Titans to kick the FG.

 

[Routilla]

The problem with all of this is that if Indy had called a timeout after first down, they would have a chance (however small) to win the game. The possiblity existed for Indy to get the ball back, down by six points with enough time for a couple of plays. This is far from good sportsmanship. Taking a knee when up by more than one score could be called good sportsmanship because the potential to lose does not exist at that point. This isnt the same at all.

If Dungy felt that he had no chance of winning with Sorgi on a potential last second drive, then why is Sorgi his backup quarterback?

You would have seen running plays, perhaps a pass on 3rd down before a FG attempt had IND called a TO after 1st down. Remember TEN had to win to make the play-offs.

Yes, I get that. So if Indy had stopped Tennessee from getting a first down, that would have left somewhere around 30 seconds for a 4th down field goal attempt. We have seen comebacks in less time than this.I fully understand that this game meant nothing to Indy. This is especially clear given that they didnt even try to win the game. Lets ask some Browns fans what they think of Dungy's "good sportsmanship".

I'm sure they have a mild case of the red ###. However, if they had won more games in the regular season they would not have needed help.Edited to note that needing help to make the playoffs should be viewed as unenviable. As a Dallas fan there have been years when we were on the bubble and I always felt they were not good enough to advance or they would have won more games.

 

[mad sweeney]

Why would the Colts do anything else? Risk injuring a player for last minute heroics in a meaningless game?

The "agreement" part isn't good, but when I read the title, I started to think maybe the Colts wanted the Titans to win the game.

It may have been meaningless for the Colts but not for the NFL. In fact, it was one of only a few meaningful games this past week that had playoff implications. I have been somewhat of a fan of the Colts since they were losers in Baltimore. I would have hoped that Indy would have at least put in half an effort for the integrity of the league. The Titans lucked out and backed into the playoffs with what ended up basically a "coin toss". It was pure luck that the schedule had TEN facing Indy the last week of the season notearlier when the Colts would have given an effort. They could have faced someone else who had nothing to pay for and may have lost, like Denver. TEN didn't play very well and could barely beat the Colts second and third stringers. This game was an embarassment.

The Colts should have tried to win the game and not given up. If they were down by 9 points, I have no problem with what they did.

The Giants have 3 players (at least 2 starters) who are very iffy to play this weekend because they played in a game that was only meaningful to the NFL and the Pats. If any of those 3 don't play then it was a stupid move by Coughlin to treat that meaningless game like it had meaning. Meaningless games are meaningless games, if the Browns wanted in they should've won one more game.

 

[The Pitbull]

I’m not a Colts hater or anything like that (far from it). But I do think that Tony Dungy gets wayyyyy too much slack from the media when it comes to stuff like this. I thought it was garbage when it happened, and quite frankly (even though I should have been) I was NOT one bit surprised when none of the mainstream media outlets said a word about it after the game.

The fact that Bill Polian and Jeff Fisher both sit on the competition committee, and the teams are in the same division, makes this stink even more. Indy should not have pocketed that T.O. There is no legitimate excuse for it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Lets ask some Browns fans what they think of Dungy's "good sportsmanship".

Browns fans should be more concerned with their team who was unable to make the playoffs despite being in COMPLETE CONTROL of their own destiny for every week of the season except the last.

 

[redman]

Why would Kerry Collins even say this?

Of course, this was a guy who thought it was fresh to refer to a teammate using a racial slur, so . . .

 

[rick6668]

Why would the Colts do anything else? Risk injuring a player for last minute heroics in a meaningless game?

The "agreement" part isn't good, but when I read the title, I started to think maybe the Colts wanted the Titans to win the game.

It may have been meaningless for the Colts but not for the NFL. In fact, it was one of only a few meaningful games this past week that had playoff implications. I have been somewhat of a fan of the Colts since they were losers in Baltimore. I would have hoped that Indy would have at least put in half an effort for the integrity of the league. The Titans lucked out and backed into the playoffs with what ended up basically a "coin toss". It was pure luck that the schedule had TEN facing Indy the last week of the season notearlier when the Colts would have given an effort. They could have faced someone else who had nothing to pay for and may have lost, like Denver. TEN didn't play very well and could barely beat the Colts second and third stringers. This game was an embarassment.

The Colts should have tried to win the game and not given up. If they were down by 9 points, I have no problem with what they did.

The Giants have 3 players (at least 2 starters) who are very iffy to play this weekend because they played in a game that was only meaningful to the NFL and the Pats. If any of those 3 don't play then it was a stupid move by Coughlin to treat that meaningless game like it had meaning. Meaningless games are meaningless games, if the Browns wanted in they should've won one more game.

I have no problem with teams resting their starters. I have a problem with a Coach quitting when the outcome of the game is still up for grasps. I had the same problem with the Bears game a few weeks ago.

 

[PatsWillWin]

the point here is not what happened to the Browns.

the point here is not how much of a chance the Colts would have had to win.

the point here is not the reasons the Colts had to care about winning/losing.

the point here is the fact that two teams had a "communication" during the game and came to an understanding that one team would act in a particular way.

i'm sorry, but that's very disturbing.