Two days later: I’ll be the lone voice — it didn’t look like the Colts wanted to win on Sunday

December 13, 2011 | Drew Forrester

Two days later: I’ll be the lone voice — it didn’t look like the Colts wanted to win on Sunday

(continued) in Baltimore on Sunday.  Sleepwalk for 3 quarters.  Nearly four, actually.  And then pile up some yards right at the end to close out the scoring at 24-10.

Along the way, players who have been either Pro Bowlers or close-to-Pro-Bowlers floundered around like they were playing the Hall of Fame Game in Canton on a hot, steamy August Sunday afternoon.

I don’t think I heard Reggie Wayne’s name called over the press box P.A. system until 1:30 remained in the game.  And with good reason.  I watched him all afternoon.  He half-assed routes, rarely waved his arm to notify Orlovsky he was open and generally exerted the same amount of energy as a bean-bag chair.  Pierre Garcon was the QB’s favorite target, but more times than not the ball was swatted away or easily defended because Garcon was not willing to put up a fight.  I think I heard Austin Collie’s name twice…and both times it was after an incompletion.  Dallas Clark caught a pass and then went missing.  I assumed David Copperfield showed up and made him disappear as some sort of halftime promotion for CBS.  The running backs forgot about the primary aspect of being called a “RUNNING” back.  They strolled around like they were a 45 record stuck on 33 speed.

My tweet from the @WNST twitter account with about 10 minutes to play summed it all up, in about 70 characters or so:

THE COLTS REALLY SHOULDN’T MAKE IT LOOK THIS OBVIOUS.

I don’t know if “it” is happening or not, but I’m shocked no one else is talking about it.  This team in Indianapolis, with gobs of highly-skilled offensive players…is 0-13.

The “it” above, of course, references losing on purpose.

Something’s not right, that’s for sure.  Either this is a team shrouded in the black-cloud-of-bad-luck — or they’ve caught 13 straight teams on THEIR week — or they’re not really putting forth the required effort for some weird reason.

What other explanation could you offer?

If you have one, please step to the bench and present your evidence.

I’ve presented mine.

We’ve seen the Lions go 0-16, but they went 0-16 because they didn’t have any good football players.

The Colts have lots of good players and, frankly, a few VERY good players on their active roster.

And it took me seeing them in person to convince myself of something I’ve been suspecting since that Sunday night 8 weeks ago when the Saints beat them 62-7 in New Orleans.

The Colts aren’t interested in winning.  Or, at the very least, somehow, someway, an important part of the team’s engine — those offensive players I’ve observed and highlighted — aren’t interested in playing hard enough or good enough to put their team in position to win.  Why is that happening, if, in fact, it IS happening?  I don’t know.  But something doesn’t look right.

I think the league should at least investigate the situation there. Unless, of course, the NFL is OK with one team intentionally not trying to win.  If that’s the case, any game involving Indianapolis has as much authenticity as a WWE match on Monday Night Raw.

And that’s it, really.

I can’t imagine for one minute the NFL hasn’t looked at the events that have transpired in “the friendly heart of the Midwest” this season and wondered whether or not the Colts are playing these games on the up-and-up.

I’d like to know for sure, though.

On both accounts.

 

Comments on Facebook

7 Comments For This Post

  1. unitastoberry Says:

    Jimmy is just a chip off the old block! Hopefully this kid Luck turns out to be the next Heath Shuler when they draft him number one.

  2. eric Says:

    You do understand that tanking does not benefit the players right? It benefits the organization and the fans but everything the players do is on film and affects their ability to get jobs and paychecks in the future. If the Colts players have quit it’s because it’s hard to get motivated playing on a winless team it is NOT to get the #1 pick. Alot of the players who quit on Sunday will not be in Indy in 2012.

  3. eric Says:

    Again, the organization may be tanking for a pick but the players are not. And the fact that Collie,Wayne,Garcon and other regulars played tells me the organization is not going out of it’s way to tank by playing all backups.

  4. David S Says:

    I think the Colts have dug themselves a hole so deep, there is no motivation or desire to fight, scratch and claw for a victory each week.
    It just looks like they are “mailing it in” when in reality, there is nothing there for them to play for. Lets give the Ravens some credit……they beat up on them and THAT had something to do with the Colts looking so lack luster.

  5. over40Don Says:

    Maybe the reason you are the “lone voice” is because your assertion is preposterous? Billick had nothing to add to warrent your theory this a.m.. The Colts offense stinks and the Ravens defense is superb. That’s all ANY person should take from the game. Of course that’s just my opinion and probably most anybody elses.

  6. The "Armchair QB" Says:

    Obviously, from their praise of the Colts last week, the Ravens players don’t agree with your assessment. And, frankly, it didn’t look that way to me, either. As someone has previously noted, success in the college ranks doesn’t always translate to success in the NFL – just ask….Ryan Leaf!

  7. matt Says:

    i must agree, they have nothing better to play for than pride, and they have none of that.

    either the colts trade their 1st pick and draft robert griffin III and keep peyton manning or,

    the colts draft luck and trade manning to the titans, redskins, or vikings.

Leave a Reply