THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

[lawl]

[quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"]* And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</P>


*</P>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</P>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</P>


[/quote]</P>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</P>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</P>[/quote]

You said they folded up their tent when they had a perfect season going. That is your original quote. The 2005 colts did not rest their starters until after they had lost to the chargers and were 13-1.

You're wrong any way you want to slice it.

[Morehead State]

[quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"] And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</P>


</P>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</P>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</P>


[/quote]</P>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</P>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</P>


[/quote]

regardless of what u were referring to, they most recently did it and made the superbowl so ur point has been countered
[/quote]</P>


Many more examples of teams that have no benefitted from breaking the normal routine of a season.</P>


Ask GB how resting their players, (creating a three week dry period) worked out for them against the Giants this year. And they were 15-1.</P>


</P>

[Morehead State]

[quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"] And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</P>


</P>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</P>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</P>


[/quote]</P>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</P>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</P>


[/quote] You said they folded up their tent when they had a perfect season going. That is your original quote. The 2005 colts did not rest their starters until after they had lost to the chargers and were 13-1. You're wrong any way you want to slice it.[/quote]</P>


Yes but they announced that they cared nothing about the undefeated season and would rest starters even if they had a perfect season going. that was the controversy that season.</P>


And don'tforget even in the season you referred to, they looked horrible against the Jets at home and had to come from behind to beat them.</P>


My point is that resting your starters tends to hurt teams more than help. Do you disagree?</P>

[lawl]

[quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"]* And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</P>


*</P>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</P>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</P>


[/quote]</P>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</P>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</P>


[/quote] You said they folded up their tent when they had a perfect season going. That is your original quote. The 2005 colts did not rest their starters until after they had lost to the chargers and were 13-1. You're wrong any way you want to slice it.[/quote]</P>


Yes but they announced that they cared nothing about the undefeated season and would rest starters even if they had a perfect season going.* that was the controversy that season.</P>


And don't*forget even in the season you referred to, they looked horrible against the Jets at home and had to come from behind to beat them.</P>


My point is that resting your starters tends to hurt teams more than help.* Do you disagree?</P>[/quote]

I only disagree because they is no way of knowing whether or not it was the rest that was a cause of the team losing.

[Morehead State]

[quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"] And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</P>


</P>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</P>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</P>


[/quote]</P>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</P>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</P>


[/quote] You said they folded up their tent when they had a perfect season going. That is your original quote. The 2005 colts did not rest their starters until after they had lost to the chargers and were 13-1. You're wrong any way you want to slice it.[/quote]</P>


Yes but they announced that they cared nothing about the undefeated season and would rest starters even if they had a perfect season going. that was the controversy that season.</P>


And don'tforget even in the season you referred to, they looked horrible against the Jets at home and had to come from behind to beat them.</P>


My point is that resting your starters tends to hurt teams more than help. Do you disagree?</P>


[/quote] I only disagree because they is no way of knowing whether or not it was the rest that was a cause of the team losing.[/quote]</P>


It makes players stale. It breaks routine. Just look at how bad teams play in the national championship game in coolege football. Yes you risk injury, but you have to be sharp to win. Taking several weeks off in football hurts players ability to win. </P>


There isn't any proof, but there is some strong evidence.</P>

[MattMeyerBud]

[quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"] And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</p>


</p>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</p>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</p>


[/quote]</p>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</p>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</p>


[/quote] You said they folded up their tent when they had a perfect season going. That is your original quote. The 2005 colts did not rest their starters until after they had lost to the chargers and were 13-1. You're wrong any way you want to slice it.[/quote]</p>


Yes but they announced that they cared nothing about the undefeated season and would rest starters even if they had a perfect season going. that was the controversy that season.</p>


And don'tforget even in the season you referred to, they looked horrible against the Jets at home and had to come from behind to beat them.</p>


My point is that resting your starters tends to hurt teams more than help. Do you disagree?</p>


[/quote] I only disagree because they is no way of knowing whether or not it was the rest that was a cause of the team losing.[/quote]</p>


It makes players stale. It breaks routine. Just look at how bad teams play in the national championship game in coolege football. Yes you risk injury, but you have to be sharp to win. Taking several weeks off in football hurts players ability to win. </p>


There isn't any proof, but there is some strong evidence.</p>[/quote]

regardless... not putting extra miles on a pitchers arm is completely different than anything u said.

And besides, theres nothing to debate - Mo pitched shut out baseball after that game

[MattMeyerBud]

[quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="lawl"]


[quote user="Morehead State"] And remember when the Colts folded up their tent when they had an undefeated season going, they got beat in the first game of the playoffs.[/quote]</p>


</p>


You couldnt be more wrong. The Colts went to the SB that year and lost to the Saints, who of course, had also rested their starters.</p>


"The Colts suffered their first loss to the New York Jets, 29–15, a game in which Caldwell made the controversial decision to rest his starters after the team took a slim lead rather than keep them in to play for a chance at a 16–0 season. Indianapolis finished the season at 14–2 following a loss to the Buffalo Bills, in which they rested their starters with the stated purpose of having their team healthy for the playoffs. The Colts locked up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. They defeated the Baltimore Ravens by the score of 20–3 on January 16, 2010. The Colts defeated the New York Jets 30–17 on January 24, 2010 in the 2009 AFC Championship Game."</p>


[/quote]</p>


I was referring to 2005 when they went 13-0 and stated openly that they would rest their players which is exactly what they did.</p>


They rested their players both weeks 16 and 17 and then got beat by the Steelers in their first playoff game.</p>


[/quote]

regardless of what u were referring to, they most recently did it and made the superbowl so ur point has been countered
[/quote]</p>


Many more examples of teams that have no benefitted from breaking the normal routine of a season.</p>


Ask GB how resting their players, (creating a three week dry period) worked out for them against the Giants this year. And they were 15-1.</p>


</p>[/quote]

i think that had more to do with a dominante defensive line eating up their offensive line

[lttaylor56]

[quote user="JPizzack"]

Closing time at the IBM branch! wooooo!!</P>


see ya fools later!</P>[/quote]There's a branch at Ibm? Cool.

[dezzzR]

Ross heading to the Jags.

[lttaylor56]

[quote user="dezzzR"]Ross heading to the Jags.
[/quote]Ouch! Terms of Deal+ 3 yrs 15.3 mil.