CP_414

Lovie was a first-year head coach. Berrian, Tank and Vasher (and Tommie) were rookies. Ogun, Urlacher, Tillman and Grossman were hurt. Craig Krenzel was the starting QB. No Moose or Benson or Mark Anderson. I could keep going. It's just Woody being absurd for the sake of being absurd on TV. Par for the course on the 4-letter network.

An Illinois vs. Indiana matchup, three days before a bigger Illinois vs. Indiana matchup in another sport. :D Since the Bears/Colts advanced I think we have had a Bulls-Pacers game, IU-Illinois, Butler-UIC and Butler-Loyola. I think the winners were the Pacers, Illini, and Butler twice.

We're getting close! Dontrelle Willis sporting the Urlacher 54 on ESPN right now.

Hey, what are the chances he does it again? Pretty good.

I sure hope you are right. Ichiro in the top 2 of this lineup makes us a very very dangerous team. Through 6 seasons he has a .331/.376/.438 line. Last year he was 45 of 47 on steal attempts. He is a legit gold glove player every year with a cannon arm, and he plays almost every game. Soriano Ichiro Lee Aramis Murton/Floyd Barrett DeRosa Izturis Zambrano, Lilly, Hill, Prior/Miller, Marquis Wood, Dempster, Howry, Eyre, Ohman, Wuertz, Cotts Floyd/Murton, Ward, Blanco, Theriot, Cedeno That team would have the ability to win it all.

Well Wiscy does play great defense and arevery well coached. Ithink they would suprise many with how well they would do against those type teams. But... They lost to an "awful" team last night, right? :wink: To be fair, he did take the "awful" comment back. Anyone else really excited for this high school game on ESPN2 tonight? It will be fun to watch EJ, and to see what MJ's kids have got. MJ is expected to be in the house at North Central for the game.

I'm not sure Durant might not pass up Oden. You may have to "settle" for Oden at #2. Durant is just a freak.

This loss eliminated Skiles from contention to coach the East in the All-Star game.

An IU recruit did the same thing in high school, and got suspended for over a year for it. It will be interesting to see if something similar happens to Mayo. Just another example of the class Kelvin is bringing in. He made a mistake-can people not make one mistake? Here are some of his quotes from an e-mail sent this week to the Indiana beat writer: He sounds like a kid who's been through a lot in life-from all I've heard about him though, once they take him out of his environment it will be much easier for him. He made a mistake, but he seems to have a pretty good head on his shoulder, and has owned up to his mistake the whole time. If that's too much of quotes mod I'm sorry-it's not really a published article, but just a blog from the beat writer where he provides more quotes that he couldn't get in the paper. The link is below (believe me, there are some not intelligent IU fans on there, just a friendly warning): http://blogs.indystar.com/hoosiersinsider/ Eli Holdman was FINIALLY reinstated tonight. He should play high school ball Thursday. http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/sports/16590989.htm

Ced isn't getting in the police car is he?

I still fear the Cardinals will steal Barry Bonds on a 1-year deal.

Big game on ESPN 2, Thursday at 6 central. Time to see what all the fuss was about. Eric Gordon's North Central (Indianapolis) team will host Loyola (Chicago suburb). Loyola features MJ's kids Jeffery and Marcus. Gordon is coming off a 50 point game. It'll be fun to watch EJ play for the first time.

I know I'm late, but WOOOOOOOO HOOOOOO! Good job IU!

I assume you mean the IU-UW game. I know it is on in the Chicago area, but I heard WCIU and I also heard some PBS station, so I dunno where it is on. What about nationally? You would think #2 at #25 would be on nationally, but it's an ESPN+ local game. Hoosiers up a bucket 15-13 with about 7 min left in the first half. Awful shooting for the Hoosiers, lots of turnovers for the Badger offense.

I assume you mean the IU-UW game. I know it is on in the Chicago area, but I heard WCIU and I also heard some PBS station, so I dunno where it is on.

Alando Tucker made some comment about how he likes to play at IU because the fans all wear red like at the Kohl Center. So a few IU students tried to throw together a "White Out" in the last 3 days that is not being endorsed or aided by the Athletic Department. So when you turn on ESPN+ in 35 minutes, expect to see a poorly executied White-Out in Bloomington. Oh well, it'll be loud anyway. GO IU!

I'd just prefer a bunch of reffs that don't nose in and don't make many calls in general. IMO, let the boys play. You make the calls when you have to, you throw the holding penalties when you have to, etc. But please, for the most part, keep the flag in the pocket. All I know about Tony Corrente is that he loves Mike Holmgren. Holmgren is something like 12-1 in games where Corrente is the ref. You may remember the Packers-Seahawks MNF game this season in the snow. Corrente did that game. I am the furtherest thing from a Packer fan, but I'll admit they were hosed over and over again in that game.

Good. Now lock up Z. Long-term.

The Colts defense gave up 27-7 were to Asante Samuel. I'm actually proud of the Colts defense for that performance. The Patriots had unbelievable field position all night long, they converted 2 4th downs, had a TD scored by an offensive lineman, and of course are led by Tom Brady. Any defense is going to give up some points in that scenario. The Colts gave up 34. The Colts defense gave up 27.

It might rain.

How are you sacraficing the ability to score by running? They scored more in the first half (even without the INT return) than they did in the second half and they ran a lot more in the first half. Also it is an assumption that the Colts would have stuffed every running play, a huge assumption looking at the rushing stats for the game. Rex Grossman was having a horrible passing game against the Saints, but with the Bears up 18-14 he led a touchdown drive of all passes to put the Bears in control of the game. Up until that point he had very little success passing the ball against the Saints. If Ron Turner had decided to take the ball out of Rex's hands and run all the time could we have assumed Rex was not capable of leading that TD drive the way he did because he had some failures earlier in the game? They scored 14 in the first half (without the INT) and 13 in the second half, not that big a difference. Also, the first scoring drive was a result of the 35 yard Dillon run on 4th and 1. As CubColtPacer explained, the Colt defense adjusted differently than they do on any other play. The rest of the drive they ran 7 times for 22 yards (3.1 yards per carry) and passed 1 time for 18 yards. The second TD drive, they threw for 49 of the 72 yards they needed to score (the drive began on their 28). The plays were 4 passes for 49 and 6 runs for 23 (3.8 yards per carry). Rushing for 3 yards per carry is decent, but against an offense that scores at will and you have one of the best QBs in the game, you can't rely on the running game when it's obvious you have to score many more points. And the passing game was seeing very good success because the Colts were playing run most of the game. Plus, the rushes they had in the second half were less successful than the ones in the first half. 14 is greater than 13, so they were not sacraficing the ability to score in the 1st half when they ran. We are going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think a one-dimensional offense will work, and that is what the Pats ran in the second half. I believe you can score while running half the time, and by doing this offense you use more clock and leave less time for your opponent to score. My Grossman example of failures early in the game not dictating success or failure later in the game also stands true. Bottom line is this the Patriots were a much much better team in the first half when they used the running game, than they were when they abandoned it. I'll just agree to disagree with you on this one.

That reminds me of what they say about Indiana football every year. We have 10 defensive starters returning. Yeah, but we have 10 defensive starters returning. so, the defense wasnt any better the next year? UI is not going to be contending for a title anytime soon, thats not what i'm saying. experience only does so much. but if this team has enough talent to be .500 in the B10, then next year's fares to be at least better. i believe we have at least 1 impact freshman next year, which should be helpful. At Indiana, the football defense never gets better. I'm sure U of I will be a little better next year, for whatever that's worth. Now on to tonight's main attraction. #25 Indiana hosts #2 Wisconsin at 6 central. The latest line I have seen is an even money pick 'em. This game is NOT on national TV (ESPN+). The Hoosiers shoot well at home, and they'll need to hit their threes tonight as UW has a huge size advantage. If DJ stays out of foul trouble, and the threes fall at a reasonable rate, I think UW will pick up their first Big Ten loss of the season.

That reminds me of what they say about Indiana football every year. We have 10 defensive starters returning. Yeah, but we have 10 defensive starters returning.

you forgot to mention 3 things: 1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole. 2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such. 3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs. I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from). Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run. Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down): 1-10-Maroney for -3 2-5-Maroney for -1 2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason) 1-10-Maroney for -1 1-6-Dillon for -1 2-6-Maroney for -2 3-10-Evans for 4 Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball? This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that. If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so. The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success. The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play. Maybe Dillon breaks another 35 yarder, but that is not nearly as likely since the conditions of the 4th and 1 play were not likely to happen again (the Colts sent everybody up the middle on that play, while normally they would be pursuing to the outside on even a down like 3rd and 1). Here are the Patriots 2nd half possessions-yes, they could have ran the ball more, but I don't think that much more: 1st possession 1-10-Inc Pass 2-10-Faulk for 8 3-10-Pass complete, no gain More runs? 1 probably-if they ran on 1st down, they wouldn't have run on 2nd down, but they could have ran it on 3rd and 2. 2nd possession- 1-10-Maroney for -1 2-11-Pass for 17 yards 1-goal from 5-Dillon for -1 2-goal from 6-pass inc 3-goal from 6-pass, TD extra runs-0, I don't see anywhere where they should have ran and didn't. 3rd possession- 1-10-Pass for 4 2-6-Maroney for -2 3-8-Pass for 6, punt extra runs-0, the pass on 1st down was as good as a run, they tried running the ball on 2nd down, and that forced them into a 3rd and long 4th possession- 1-10-pass for 16 1-10-pass for 14 1-10-penalty for 5 1-15 (from the Colts 18)-pass inc 2-15-pass for 8 3-7-pass inc extra runs-0-I'm not sure where the Patriots were supposed to run here. The first two passes worked great, and 1-15 from the 18 yard line is not a great place to run, as it's even hard to run a draw from there being so close to the goal line. 5th possession- 1-10-pass for 25 1-10-pass inc 2-10-pass inc 3-10-run for 4 extra runs-1, they could have easily run on 1st or 2nd down-although if they had run on one of those downs, they probably wouldn't have run on 3rd down (because the 3rd down run was just to set up the field goal)-so it's 1, but a shaky 1. 6th possession- 1-15 (12 men in the huddle penalty)-pass for 7 2-8-pass for 4 3-4-pass inc runs-1 maybe? The Colts were gearing up to stop the run, as they needed to get the ball back without giving up a single first down-the Patriots were going for the knockout punch, as they usually do-that penalty at the start ruined any chance they had at running for the first down really. last drive they were forced to pass, as I'm sure you agree. Well, there you have it. I think the Patriots could have ran the ball 3 more times in the half, but I don't think that would have made much of a difference. You are assuming none of those extra runs could lead to more first downs and longer drives. That is not an assumption I would agree with. The thing is, it's not an assumption that they wouldn't have gained more, it was shown throughout the game that they couldn't run the ball consistently. Sure, it's possible that any run could possibly be broken for a long run, but banking on all of a sudden breaking a long run after having next to no success all day is very poor strategy. Plus, the Pats only had a 21-6 lead in the second half for one drive, a Colts touchdown drive. The first time the Patriots had the ball, they were up one score, 21-13. At halftime, I said the Patriots would have to score more to hope to win because 21 points rarely beats the Colt offense. When you simply pound the ball and run clock, you're sacrificing the ability to score. How are you sacraficing the ability to score by running? They scored more in the first half (even without the INT return) than they did in the second half and they ran a lot more in the first half. Also it is an assumption that the Colts would have stuffed every running play, a huge assumption looking at the rushing stats for the game. Rex Grossman was having a horrible passing game against the Saints, but with the Bears up 18-14 he led a touchdown drive of all passes to put the Bears in control of the game. Up until that point he had very little success passing the ball against the Saints. If Ron Turner had decided to take the ball out of Rex's hands and run all the time could we have assumed Rex was not capable of leading that TD drive the way he did because he had some failures earlier in the game?

Excellent Pics.