ESPN NFL

I asked, you answered. Thanks for all the feedback to the recent post asking what myth tied to the Colts is outdated and demands revision.

Here's a sampling of what you had to say with some of my thoughts interspersed:

Will in Indianapolis: The biggest myth is that the Colts are "soft." The generally considered "tough" teams in the league are the Steelers, Ravens, Patriots, Titans, Jaguars, and Giants. If I'm forgetting any add them to the list. Here are the Colts' record against each of them in the past 3 years: Steelers: 1-0 Ravens: 3-0 Patriots: 3-1 Titans: 3-3 Jaguars: 4-2 Giants: 1-0 If you want to throw the Chargers in there, the Colts struggle, but the Chargers are considered more a "finesse" team like the Colts. Just because the Colts score a lot of points, they are considered soft. It is a misnomer that never seems to go away.

Steve: Hey, Paul, I appreciate your AFC South blog. Thanks for the hard work. I think a piece of Colt's mythology is that they are a "soft" team. This myth did come close to being a reality last season as the offensive line broke down and made the team one-dimensional... and we still won key games in the mid and late season. Maybe if we dropped those clean white uniforms in favor for something like the Ravens people would see how tough this team is and has been.
TJ in Ft. Myers: I'm tired of people constantly referring to the Colts as strictly a finesse team! That might have been true in 2004, but since, the Colts have shown themselves as a gritty team that can comeback and win in any kind of situation. Tell the wideouts that get tagged by Bob Sanders that the hit was just for show. Tell a QB that was just mashed between Freeny and Mathis that our defense is soft. Tell the confused defensive coordinator that Manning outwits while on the field that he's just a showcase piece with a good arm. My question, I suppose, after my rant, is do you think that the Colts are still just a finesse team full of showboaters?
ejbelair: that we're soft - can't take hits. i think that's ridiculous because we have THE hardest hitting player in all of football in bob sanders. i can feel it on my couch when he hits someone. and other than marvin running out of bounds last year, i feel our receivers - wayne, gonz, and clark take hits as good and as often as anyone. sure, peyton doesn't take many hits, but that's because we have a great o-line, and he is smart enough to throw it away rather than take sack after sack.

Paul Kuharsky: They are hardly just a finesse team. I agree with TJ as he considers the physical play of Sanders, Freeney and Mathis. Still, I can understand the perception a bit.

The Colts like to spread things out and throw it -- as they should with their quarterback. They favor smaller, quicker defenders at a lot of spots on defense, particularly linebacker. Their starting left tackle, Tony Ugoh, is considered by a lot of scouts to lack toughness.

So teams don't come out of games against the Colts feeling beaten up the way they might after playing the Steelers, Ravens, Patriots, Giants, Jaguars, Titans or Giants. But most of the time those opponents have been beaten on the scoreboard, which matters a lot more.

Mitch in Laguna Beach: I'm a long time Colt fan. Not a fan of the NFL's current MVP, or reigning rushing, passing, receiving leader, I bleed blue. I'm still most upset about Korkell Stewart's Phantom Touchdown against the Colts in the Conference Championship in comparison to the way each and every other Colts season of the past has ended. Which brings me to what I feel to be the biggest myth about the Colts. Since Peyton's second year, the Colts have made the playoffs all but one year. Of those nine years, all but one ended with a victory in the Super Bowl while the others usually finish with fans and the press agreeing the Colts defense was the teams glowing weakness. When looking at the Colts payroll there is a significant difference in the amount spent on the offense in comparison to the defense. In all but two of the eight seasons that of Peyton's that ended with a playoff loss, the opposing teams scored no more than 24 points, the 41-0 loss to the Jets, and the 28-24 loss to the Chargers in 2007 which ended with three incomplete passes from Manning on the Chargers 7 yard line. While I find Peyton to be simply the best player to ever play the game, I find that the majority of his playoff losses have been due to him being "out coached" by the other teams head coach of defensive coordinator. The Chargers, Steelers, and Pats all used a 3-4, look at the list of who has knocked us out of the playoffs in the Peyton era. Do you remember who was the QB at Tennessee the year after Peyton graduated? Do you remember the defense Florida used in Peyton's three college games versus them? Are you finding a trend? Polian has built the Colts in a manner which I feel Peyton should be capable of putting up 24+ points. Peyton definatly has the talent and capability of doing so week in and week out. I feel 10 games (3 Florida games and 7 playoff losses) have been all on Peyton s shoulders, not his defenses.

Tim in Indy: Myth - the Colts biggest weakness last season was run defense Reality - Colts were actually right about average in yards/carry over the course of the season (4.2 ypc allowed, 17th). Run offense was actually 32nd in yards/carry at a embarrassing 3.4 ypc. Many people focused on yards/game but that is a skewed stat for the Colts since throwing the ball exposes your QB to being mauled by Freeney and Mathis. TJK

Michael in Shreveport, LA: My basic Colt's mythology that I would like to see debunked is that the Colts defense is helpless without Bob Sanders. Yes, he is very good and does an outstanding job especially when he comes into the box, but Melvin Bullitt did a great job last year w/o him in there. I think that him coming back and helping during the Super Bowl year has made him bigger than he is.

55_BPaul: The myth that without Bob Sanders that the Colt's Defense is made of wet tissue. Bob Sanders is a great player, and he makes a difference when he's on the field. But.. the rest of the Colt's Safety's particularly Melvin Bullet are very capable players. Plus they get a lot of playing time with Bobzilla out as much as he is. The Colt's Defense has two outstanding DE's, a large stable of DB's, a full complement of Cover LB's. The weakness has been DT. The Colt's Defense has been at it's best with a big, athletic, 'Warren Sap'ish' Tackle in the middle. Corey Simon, Anthony McFarland, and Ed Johnson. I would postulate that those players are more pivotal to the Colts Defense than Bobzilla. This off-season the colts loaded up on bigger DT's to address that need as well as resigned Ed Johnson. Look out AFC the rich just got richer.

Paul Kuharsky: A healthy Sanders is a great player, but you're right, Michael and 55_BPaul, too much is made about how they will struggle without him. They found a very good player in Bullitt who still has upside. When Sanders is playing, th
ey may need to find ways to still use Bullitt. He'll be an interesting guy to watch, for sure.

Stan in Indy: The biggest myth about the Colts is that they've ever had a real above average offensive line or running game. It makes me laugh that I keep reading how bad Tony Ugoh is considering the Colts give up basically the same number of sacks per game in games he has started versus in games that Tarik Glenn started, and that the Colts keep winning 12 games a year with him at LT and Peyton wins an MVP. It just shows that Manning and his WRs will prosper, no matter what happens with the OL. As for the running game, even when they had EJames, Edge's yards per carry was average at best. When you have a great RB and a great passing game, and your RB still has an average yards per carry, that tells you that the blocking isn't very good. Both of these myths probably also speak to myths of Mudd and Moore being superhuman coaches considering that they were responsible for those areas. Not saying that they were bad, but clearly, Manning and his pass catchers are by far the key to this offense.

Kyle in Indianapolis: The biggest myth about the Colts I hate hearing is that they are an aging team. Peyton is coming off of an MVP year and is only 33. The rest of the team is extremely young. In fact, last season, I believe they were one of the top 5 youngest teams in the league.

maedhros925: The only Colts players over 30 are Manning, Saturday and Vinatieri. Manning and Saturday are both still capable of playing at a Pro-Bowl level, and while Saturday might be able to see the end from where he stands right now, Peyton likely has at least four or five quality years left in him. Vinatieri is an icon, but his performance at the position is honestly easily replaced.

Reggie Wayne and Raheem Brock are 30 right now. Just like Peyton, you have to think that Reggie has at least four or five years left. Marvin was still highly productive at age 34; it took an injury the next season to limit his production. Brock is a highly underrated player, and has been huge for us over the years, but he doesn't play a skill position.

After that, what skill positions do you think we're old at? Dallas Clark is 29, but Tony Gonzalez was still able to lead the league in everything from the position at 33. Anthony Gonzalez is ready to break out this year and he's just 24. Addai and Brown are 26 and 22. What's left?

Honestly, "the aging Indianapolis Colts" is clearly a myth. I'm guessing it was created when people saw the rapid decline of Marvin Harrison from HOFer in the prime of his career to possession receiver, combined with the fact that the Colts have been so good for so long that people just assume they have to be pretty old by now.

Paul Kuharsky: Great stuff maedhros925. Yes, Manning getting older and Jeff Saturday getting older and Marvin Harrison getting older and being let go are over-expanded into the Colts' getting old. They are not. And it was Ugoh and some young linemen and some young linebackers who underperformed last season. That was a big part of what hurt them, along with the injuries, early last year. The way they are built dictates they can't really be old overall. The key guys they've invested a lot of cap dollars in makes it so the back end of the roster will typically be loaded with very young players.

Seth in Denver, CO: I think the biggest myth surrounding the Colts in recent years has been the idea that part of the Colts' plan is to use smaller defensive tackles and, therefore, do not invest resources into upgrading at the position. This is not true. The Colts ventured into free agency in 2005, which they hardly ever do, to sign 320lbs tackle Corey Simon. Simon's less than stellar tenure with the Colts lasted two years, playing only one. He retired from the league in 2007. Just over a year later, the Colts traded a second-round pick for 300lbs tackle Anthony "Booger" McFarland, who performed well enough to help the Colts win the Super Bowl that year. The next year, however, McFarland spent the entire season on IR, was unable to recover fully from his injury and eventually released. In 2007, the Colts drafted Quinn Pitcock, a 300lb tackle out of Ohio State. In 2008, when most thought he would be vying for a starting position, Quinn Pitcock suddenly and surprisingly retired. Also, in 2007, the Colts signed 296lbs FA tackle Ed Johnson out of Penn St. He started all 16 games that season. The following season he was cut one day after being found in possession of drugs. And, finally, in this year's draft, the Colts selected 303lbs USC defensive tackle Fili Moala in the second round and 319lbs tackle Terrance Taylor out of Michigan. In addition, the Colts resigned tackle Ed Johnson. The Colts haven't ignored or changed philosophies concerning the defensive tackle position. They just haven't had any luck with the DT position.

Paul Kuharsky: I don't think the perception is that the Colts plan to be small at defensive tackle. It's that they wound up small at defensive tackle last year. Before this year they had not invested many high draft picks in big interior guys -- from 2003 through 2008 it was just Pitcock in the third round in 2007, Vincent Burns in the third in 2005. They are a build-through-the-draft team, so this shows it hasn't been viewed as a priority. They were unlucky with both Pitcock and Johnson, who is now back. When the Colts decided they needed more, they twice went out and got veteran help. They have also shown they can play well enough to win with smaller, athletic guys in there.

Nate in Indy: There are two big myths about the Colts that I think are worth mentioning: Myth 1: They won't miss Tony Dungy. No matter how good a football guy Jim Caldwell is, players and fans will miss Tony Dungy's even-keel approach to the game and his calmness when things don't go right. Myth 2: They can't win 12 games or the division this year with all the coaching changes. Even if Howard Mudd and Tom Moore move on as it seems they will, the Colts are still Bill Polian's team. They have too much veteran leadership, too much talent, too much cohesiveness, and the organization is run too well for the team to not be a threat to win every week. They may very well slip this season, but don't think they can't or won't maintain their success under Dungy.

jbaugues: That the Colts used to Pipe in noise at the RCA Dome. There was absolutely no proof of that anywhere. Some said on air there was a change in pitch a few years ago but CBS claimed they did that while broadcasting.

Analysts have said its the loudest they have ever heard so it must be pipe
d in but never provided proof of it.

I want someone to investigate and say for sure yes or no. Have the Colts ever piped in noise. It was loud at RCA Dome because it was a small venue not because of artificial noise.

Paul Kuharsky: The Titans once faced a similar accusation at what was then Adelphia Coliseum. There was no evidence against either team, which prompts me to put the complaints in the category of gamesmanship.

One final thought: This hits on some of the same themes, but should be visited along with this post. Our friend John Oehser blogged his top five Colts myths here.