|
Post by DPNormanReturns on Feb 26, 2014 20:42:54 GMT -5
In response to the original question, as a Colts fan who doesn't live in Indianapolis, I don't communicate too much with other Colts fans, but the few times I have, I have noticed that they have never blamed Manning (or, recently, Luck) for anything. Ever. If anything goes wrong it's always a running back screwing up his blocking assignment, the offensive line not protecting, a receiver running the wrong route, etc. I don't claim innocence from this at all, although I think I am better than most. It is these same fans who blindly argued (and hopefully have stopped by this point, although I kinda doubt it) that Peyton was a better career QB than Brady, or even in many cases the best ever, even though the roster around him was just as stacked as Brady's and he didn't have nearly the same success. They just go out of their way to find excuses when the QB doesn't play well, because they don't like to admit that Manning and Luck are not actually divine. Pats fans sometimes do the same with Brady (Tom Curran makes me cringe every time I see him), but I don't feel it's to the same extent in my experience.
|
|
|
Post by DPNormanReturns on Feb 26, 2014 20:55:37 GMT -5
Oh, yeah, and here's something about the Redskins' fanbase. After I went to the Redskins-Bears game this past season, I was listening to Al Galdi's radio show after the game and about two insane morons called in and tried to argue that Kirk Cousins should have been in the game instead of Griffin- and that game was arguably the best game of Griffin's entire pro career. Apparently that wasn't good enough for them. Ever since 2012, a rather disturbing portion of the fanbase began believing, based only on about a game-and-a-half worth of football that year, that Cousins was the real Redskins "franchise QB". But yeah, I know other team fanbases do that, too.
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on Feb 27, 2014 0:50:35 GMT -5
Someone said the Pats would go 18-1 back in 2007. They are pretty stupid
|
|