Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Sports)   "If there were sports jail, the Indianapolis Colts would be heading there for life, because they have supremely wasted the prime of Andrew Luck,"   ( cbssports.com) divider line
    More: Fail, luck, Colts, 2016, 2015, 2017, Andrew Luck, franchise quarterback, Leap year starting on Friday  
•       •       •

895 clicks; posted to Sports » on 03 Nov 2017 at 5:40 AM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-11-03 12:29:56 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


♫  Indy really blew its chance  ♫
 
2017-11-03 06:18:07 AM  
That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck
 
2017-11-03 06:46:02 AM  
Then Luck would have to go to jail with them as an accomplice.  He's the one that re-signed with them.
 
2017-11-03 07:01:27 AM  
Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-11-03 07:12:24 AM  

wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck


This

Karma is a biatch
 
2017-11-03 07:13:42 AM  
A live look at sports prison.
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-11-03 07:24:37 AM  
"Suck for Luck" sucked for Luck.
 
2017-11-03 07:38:08 AM  

johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]


If the colts belong in sports jail, then my lions belong in solitary for wasting the careers of both Barry and Megatron.  Furthermore, the only thing keeping Stafford from being a total waste like Luck is the lion's ability to squeak into the playoffs and Stafford's absurd toughness.
 
2017-11-03 08:03:49 AM  

wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck


Deliberately? Remember the year before the Colts were at one point 6-6 and in third place in the AFC South, even with Manning. I went to a couple and watched almost all of the games the 'tank' year. The Colts were actively trying to win, but were for the most part completely inept. Here's a recap from one of the only bright spots that season:

Either way you look at it, the Colts scored 21 unanswered points in the last 8:49 of the game.
Applaud Dan Orlovsky on this comeback. He led this Colts offense to more yards than New England 437-366. He outperformed Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, and the Colts led the time of possession 35:39-24:21.


Does that sounds like a team trying to lose? The problem with the Colts then (as it is now) is that there were several years of poor drafting finally coming home to roost, particularly on the defensive side. You don't survive long in the league if you aren't picking up new talent every year. A team loaded with talent can survive an all-star QB going down for a few weeks. A shiatty team carried by an all-star QB cannot. And the Colts are shiat.
 
2017-11-03 08:17:01 AM  
As a Lions fan coming into this thread, I should have realized that 9 posts would be more than enough to cover the points I wanted to make. +1s to Johnny and Anton
 
2017-11-03 08:30:39 AM  

AntonChigger: johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]

If the colts belong in sports jail, then my lions belong in solitary for wasting the careers of both Barry and Megatron.  Furthermore, the only thing keeping Stafford from being a total waste like Luck is the lion's ability to squeak into the playoffs and Stafford's absurd toughness.


I've said for years the Lions should be banned from ever drafting a Heisman winning RB again. Sims, Sanders, Rogers, all talents wasted and tossed aside. Any of them with a good line and a steady, workman-like qb could have made a team perennial contenders. And obviously Megatron and Stafford.
 
2017-11-03 09:00:07 AM  
Will Brinson is a fine football commentator but I'm a little surprised he's clinging to the notion that Andrew Luck is a truly special quarterback. He's more Eli-level than Peyton-level.
 
2017-11-03 09:10:41 AM  

Shaggy_C: wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck

Deliberately? Remember the year before the Colts were at one point 6-6 and in third place in the AFC South, even with Manning. I went to a couple and watched almost all of the games the 'tank' year. The Colts were actively trying to win, but were for the most part completely inept. Here's a recap from one of the only bright spots that season:

Either way you look at it, the Colts scored 21 unanswered points in the last 8:49 of the game.
Applaud Dan Orlovsky on this comeback. He led this Colts offense to more yards than New England 437-366. He outperformed Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, and the Colts led the time of possession 35:39-24:21.

Does that sounds like a team trying to lose? The problem with the Colts then (as it is now) is that there were several years of poor drafting finally coming home to roost, particularly on the defensive side. You don't survive long in the league if you aren't picking up new talent every year. A team loaded with talent can survive an all-star QB going down for a few weeks. A shiatty team carried by an all-star QB cannot. And the Colts are shiat.


If memory serves the lose for luck year had the defense decided to go to a 3-4 from a serviceable 4-3 without any change in personnel..... ya the d line was not up to snuff and the LB core just was not built to do that.
 
2017-11-03 09:31:31 AM  

Saiga410: If memory serves the lose for luck year had the defense decided to go to a 3-4 from a serviceable 4-3 without any change in personnel..... ya the d line was not up to snuff and the LB core just was not built to do that.


They were still a 4-3 during the 'suck' year; same personnel as ever, just a few additional injuries to some of the key LBs. The switch to 3-4 came the following year after all of the coaches had been fired and Chuckles the Clown took over.

I'm still not sold on the 3-4 as a defensive system. It seems like it's the kind of system that is really effective when you have really high-level players, but if you have just average guys out there you can look like complete garbage. The 4-3 can 'hide' some weak pieces better, particularly the CBs if you are zone-heavy.
 
2017-11-03 09:39:23 AM  
If losing was the plan why did they fire Caldwell at the end of the season? The suck for luck is such a lame theory that needs to be put to bed.
 
2017-11-03 10:37:48 AM  
Luck is injury prone. That is not on the Colts. If anyone supremely wasted Lucks prime it's Luck.
 
2017-11-03 10:39:41 AM  

John Buck 41: Luck is injury prone. That is not on the Colts. If anyone supremely wasted Lucks prime it's Luck.


It is on the Colts if they made no efforts to improve a shiatty offensve line that can't protect their qb.
 
2017-11-03 10:46:14 AM  

John Buck 41: Luck is injury prone. That is not on the Colts. If anyone supremely wasted Lucks prime it's Luck.


That is one thing Stafford  did well in Detroit; he got his season ending injuries out of the way early in his career.
 
2017-11-03 10:46:54 AM  

Fark Irony Police: A live look at sports prison.[img.fark.net image 783x491]


Sorry dude but that is "Sports Hell".
 
2017-11-03 10:53:55 AM  

Principal Clarinet: [img.fark.net image 618x413]

♫  Indy really blew its chance  ♫


When Manning was out, the year they drafted Luck, the players were involved with a lock out. Team doctors were not allowed to examine Manning. Manning had nerve damage and has said he couldn't throw the ball 10 feet, and no one knew if he ever would again. The Colts made the right decision drafting Luck. Hindsight is moronic.
 
2017-11-03 11:15:54 AM  
Andrew Luck is 28. If the last few years have shown anything, it's that quarterbacks are probably just entering their prime at that age. And that prime can last for 8-10 years.

If anything, the Colts are just starting to waste Andrew Luck's prime
 
2017-11-03 11:30:38 AM  
Robert Griffin III looks wide-eyed at the author of TFA, looks at the Redskins Coach Shanahan(s), looks back at the author of TFA, and shakes his head in disbelief.
 
2017-11-03 11:47:13 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


Knows that feel
/bro
 
2017-11-03 12:33:51 PM  

wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck


They did the same thing to get Manning and got a Superbowl win and Lucas oil stadium soon afterwards.

Anyhow if I was a clots fan Id be glad they arent crippling him by asking him to play on a bad wheel like the Redskins did with RG3. This year is already over for the clots. And probably the Texans. Im thinking the Jagwaggers will win that division using the Bears/Buccaneers formula for success.(when they had some) All defense and a quarterback who doesnt bring up stats at press conferences
 
2017-11-03 12:43:19 PM  
They could always draft Darnold.
 
2017-11-03 01:45:22 PM  

John Buck 41: Luck is injury prone. That is not on the Colts. If anyone supremely wasted Lucks prime it's Luck.


Ryan Grigson posts on Fark! Holy shiat.
 
2017-11-03 02:05:33 PM  
Two more things. The Colts have had no success putting together a consistently good offensive line. FOR YEARS. Also they have had the same training and medical staff for years and have one of , if not the highest rates of players missing games due to injury. They need to clean house from top to bottom. Now is a good time to do that as they are in a rebuild whether they want to say it or not.
 
2017-11-03 03:00:27 PM  
The owner of the team is happier getting wasted than winning; why wouldn't he expect that from his players?
 
2017-11-03 03:05:51 PM  

Summoner101: Then Luck would have to go to jail with them as an accomplice.  He's the one that re-signed with them.


It wasn't either that or get franchised to death.
 
2017-11-03 03:08:07 PM  

indybill23: Summoner101: Then Luck would have to go to jail with them as an accomplice.  He's the one that re-signed with them.

It wasn't either that or get franchised to death.


Or was
 
2017-11-03 03:09:02 PM  

johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]


i.kinja-img.comView Full Size
"I Don't know, you tell me"
 
2017-11-03 03:54:01 PM  
The Colts could have done better but GMs are not clairvoyant. It's a little unfair to say "the Colts ruined Luck" when even with the best O-Line in the world, one freak play can end your QB's career, that's just the way the NFL is.
 
2017-11-03 04:30:24 PM  

johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]


Yep, Wayne Fontes the football "genius" who used to pull Barry Sanders out of the backfield when they were inside the 5 yrd line.  Who also refused to provide the guy with a quality fullback as a lead blocker.

If Sanders had been used correctly, he would likely hold every single NFL rushing record.
 
2017-11-03 04:31:43 PM  

Lifeless: The owner of the team is happier getting wasted than winning; why wouldn't he expect that from his players?


Wrong. He has addiction issues but this is simplistic and just plain stupid.
 
2017-11-03 06:32:42 PM  

Saiga410: Shaggy_C: wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck

Deliberately? Remember the year before the Colts were at one point 6-6 and in third place in the AFC South, even with Manning. I went to a couple and watched almost all of the games the 'tank' year. The Colts were actively trying to win, but were for the most part completely inept. Here's a recap from one of the only bright spots that season:

Either way you look at it, the Colts scored 21 unanswered points in the last 8:49 of the game.
Applaud Dan Orlovsky on this comeback. He led this Colts offense to more yards than New England 437-366. He outperformed Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, and the Colts led the time of possession 35:39-24:21.

Does that sounds like a team trying to lose? The problem with the Colts then (as it is now) is that there were several years of poor drafting finally coming home to roost, particularly on the defensive side. You don't survive long in the league if you aren't picking up new talent every year. A team loaded with talent can survive an all-star QB going down for a few weeks. A shiatty team carried by an all-star QB cannot. And the Colts are shiat.

If memory serves the lose for luck year had the defense decided to go to a 3-4 from a serviceable 4-3 without any change in personnel..... ya the d line was not up to snuff and the LB core just was not built to do that.


You can't honestly tell me that the Colts tried to win games when their Day 1 starter was Curtis Painter. Hell, he started half of the season!
Then they had Dan Orlovsky and a washed up Kerry Collins.

That Suck for Luck Campaign was in full tank mode Week 1.
 
2017-11-03 09:27:43 PM  

BowtoMogul: If losing was the plan why did they fire Caldwell at the end of the season? The suck for luck is such a lame theory that needs to be put to bed.


Because he's not a good coach?

/looks at current coach
//never mind
 
2017-11-03 10:13:55 PM  

lawboy87: johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]

Yep, Wayne Fontes the football "genius" who used to pull Barry Sanders out of the backfield when they were inside the 5 yrd line.  Who also refused to provide the guy with a quality fullback as a lead blocker.

If Sanders had been used correctly, he would likely hold every single NFL rushing record.


Well, in Fontes's defense, Barry also holds the record for most negative-yardage plays. He took a lot of risks in the backfield.
 
2017-11-03 10:29:36 PM  

Riothamus: He took a lot of risks in the backfield.


That's why he was so good.
 
2017-11-03 10:33:26 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

Stand in line, kid.
 
2017-11-04 12:31:22 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Riothamus: He took a lot of risks in the backfield.

That's why he was so good.


Barry Sanders is why we watched football on Thanksgiving.
 
2017-11-04 03:30:55 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Riothamus: He took a lot of risks in the backfield.

That's why he was so good.


And he had the gracefulness, reflexes, and pure athleticism to make it worth the risk most of the time.

But sometimes you only need three yards and NFL coaches are generally risk-averse.
 
2017-11-04 04:46:19 AM  

SkeletorUpInHere: Saiga410: Shaggy_C: wooden_badger: That's what you get when you deliberately tank the season.

/Suck for Luck
/Suck with Luck

Deliberately? Remember the year before the Colts were at one point 6-6 and in third place in the AFC South, even with Manning. I went to a couple and watched almost all of the games the 'tank' year. The Colts were actively trying to win, but were for the most part completely inept. Here's a recap from one of the only bright spots that season:

Either way you look at it, the Colts scored 21 unanswered points in the last 8:49 of the game.
Applaud Dan Orlovsky on this comeback. He led this Colts offense to more yards than New England 437-366. He outperformed Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, and the Colts led the time of possession 35:39-24:21.

Does that sounds like a team trying to lose? The problem with the Colts then (as it is now) is that there were several years of poor drafting finally coming home to roost, particularly on the defensive side. You don't survive long in the league if you aren't picking up new talent every year. A team loaded with talent can survive an all-star QB going down for a few weeks. A shiatty team carried by an all-star QB cannot. And the Colts are shiat.

If memory serves the lose for luck year had the defense decided to go to a 3-4 from a serviceable 4-3 without any change in personnel..... ya the d line was not up to snuff and the LB core just was not built to do that.

You can't honestly tell me that the Colts tried to win games when their Day 1 starter was Curtis Painter. Hell, he started half of the season!
Then they had Dan Orlovsky and a washed up Kerry Collins.

That Suck for Luck Campaign was in full tank mode Week 1.


Kerry Collins was the day one starter; they paid him big money in the offseason when it was apparent Manning wasn't coming back. He ended up getting injured and that's when the putz Painter got thrust into the starting role (right about the time they lost 62-7 to the Saints.) They ended up pulling him and put in Orlovsky at the end of the season who won them two games and nearly a few more. If they were trying to tank, why make the change?
 
2017-11-04 07:52:13 AM  

Riothamus: lawboy87: johnnygew: Hey Guys, what's going on in this thread?[img.fark.net image 640x400]

Yep, Wayne Fontes the football "genius" who used to pull Barry Sanders out of the backfield when they were inside the 5 yrd line.  Who also refused to provide the guy with a quality fullback as a lead blocker.

If Sanders had been used correctly, he would likely hold every single NFL rushing record.

Well, in Fontes's defense, Barry also holds the record for most negative-yardage plays. He took a lot of risks in the backfield.


But when it pays off, it pays off big.  Wait, are we still talking football?
 
2017-11-04 11:35:39 AM  

FakeMeat: [img.fark.net image 355x236]

Knows that feel
/bro


No, Cam Newton is a waste of oxygen.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report