Rob Barber

We had a terrific USAthletic seminar this evening with Dr. Chris Carr of the St. Vincent Sports Performance Center.

More details on this later…

I wanted to touch base with you on a couple of items I discussed with the guys Saturday.

There’s been quite a debate in Indianapolis as to wether the Colts should rest of play their starters. The debate essentially comes down to this; it’s more important that front-line players are healthy (and therefore not play extensively and risk injury) verses the value of game repetitions (at the risk of injury) to impact players. It’s been a passionate discussion that in all candor, I’ve had some rather strong feelings about but have also tried to step out of the emotion (now that the decision has been made and the consequences rendered) and try to better understand the logic of these type of decisions. After all, there’s something to be learned.

So what’s the value of rest and what’s the value of playing in games?

The NFL is a bit of an anolomoly. On one hand, the nature of the game means that guys are hurt, some seriously, every week and that the team injury reports are long. On the other hand, it’s the NFL. It’s supposed to be the league of tough guys. We’ve heard the stories of guys playing with dislocated shoulders, sprained ankles and broken fingers (prior to this era). What’s more, they did it for a lot less money.

So how does an injury or the risk of an injury affect the player and team? Well, it depends on the type of injury and the affected player. If the injury is catastrophic or keeps them out of the game, then it matters who is injured. If it’s Peyton Manning – that’s a big problem. If it’s Hank Baskin, next man up.

So is practice safe and games dangerous? That also depends on the player. For Payton Manning. Yes. For Hank Baskin, No. So why is that? Payton is extremely protected in practice and, although his game protection is among the best in the league – there are no guarantees.

So although the discussion is a general one, in regards to the Colts, the question only applies to some of the starters.

Additional Factors and questions I have:

1. How is timing different from practice to games?
2. If there’s no or little difference, why have a preseason at all?
3. Doesn’t the game matter for the sake of the GAME?
4. How much rest is enough? Isn’t the bye week a rest reward?

I think everyone agrees with two points; your team is best with your best players available and healthy and two, if players have injuries that would benefit from rest, don’t play them.

Here are some responses;

1. Players improve or weaknesses are revealed when playing against the best competition you can as often as your body can. That keeps your skills their sharpest.

2. Routine can’t be dismissed.

I don’t think Mr. Polian or Coach Caldwell would say that practice is the same as the game but I would imagine they believe that the benefit isn’t worth the risk of injury. I don’t think I agree.

I once asked a friend who made a lot of money in the bond market how he managed risk, his response was quick and sharp “I don’t take risks”. I didn’t debate him but obviously he does take risks, he just managed them down to the point where he didn’t see them as a risk. That’s understandable. Everything we do is a risk but most of them were not worried about because the fall below that threshold – we don’t see them as a risk. That in spite of being able to get online and find examples of people getting hurt or failing at those very tasks that very day somewhere in the world. Just not to us.

Perhaps the biggest question related to player development is wether a game lay off for front line players will cause them to not be prepared. And to be fair, probably the only game of concern would be the first playoff game.

Other questions:

How is timing the second week of training camp? Why do we play preseason games?

Your practice team is composed of guys who can’t make one of the thirty two NFL teams and is in a different stratosphere from the stars. Does Charlie Johnson and Tony Ugoh get better going against Billy South or Jets Bills DE and OLB who are playing for their playoff lives or even their jobs verses guys who are extremely familiar, impliment a new scheme (as the scouts believe it to be) every week, have a lesser skill set and see hitting Peyton Manning as the wrong career move? Just because receivers can run routes and Manning can hit them doesn’t mean they’re “staying sharp”. Just because they can get everyone to the line and run the two minute drill doesn’t mean the game doesn’t matter. Just because Viniteri can kick a 45 yard field goal in practice doesn’t mean he won’t have an extra point blocked in a game. Just because the kick coverage teams don’t have any big run backs in practice doesn’t mean that they won’t in a game. Which presents two huge discrapancys; the speed and experience of a practice returner and whoever the Colts face is huge. Isn’t a game type of situation that led to a 106 yard return because the return team though it was going to be a touchback? How do you practice that?

Games have a unique way of revealing our brillance or incompetetance. Our amazing skill or lack there of. While much of practice is “doing what we do”, there is an element of assessment that comes from games that allows us to sharpen our focus. It can also remind us of what we do well and therefore to stay the course.

If one could compare Payton Manning to anyone but lets take Jamarcus Russel and look at the differences. Russell is taller, has a better arm, is faster and probably has better feet. However, there is no one this side of Jupiter that would prefer Russell over Manning. The difference starts with Payton’s brain. He’s smart and handles the pressure perhaps better than anyone who has played the game. It’s made his passing skills second to no one and perhaps the greatest quarterback of all time. However, if you were to compare say Jonny Unitus, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Tom Brady to Manning, the discussion gets a little more neuonced. At the highest levels, many times, these guys possessed the mastry of the mental game where many of there contemporaries did not. That said, I think that mastry is honed in game situations. Now take the Manning out of it, how much is compromised for the average Colt? Guys similar to the contemporaries of the QB’s above? Sure they’re professional but they might not have the personal focus, clarity and drive that a Manning has. For me, that’s a huge risk. These guys need routines and games. I just can’t believe that Piere Garcon and Austin Collie benefit from not taking game passes from Manning.

I can’t believe that the team mindset is the same with Curtis Painter taking snaps. I can’t believe that anyone would think it’s ok to accept the inevitable outcome. That’s a dangerous path to go down. Anyone who has played sports knows there are moments, regardless of how good or bad your skills are, that you get in the “zone”. Things click, you make good choices, you feel good, mentally you are sharp, you feel loose quick and confident. I don’t know anyone or any team that willingly steps out of the zone and thinks you can just get right back in. In the Colts situation, it especially they were tettering on the edge of the zone which seems to make it even more imparitive they keep sharpening the axe.

I don’t think you see Joseph Addi make some of the second effort runs he’s made in games – during practice. Dallas Clark as taken some absolute shots. Something tells me that doesn’t happen in practice but something also tells me both are a good thing. It makes him who he is. You can’t tell me Reggie Wayne has to work on a practice squad guy like he did again Dyal Revis. Does a practice squad tackle work Freeney and Mathis like Michal Ohr did? Did Tim Jennings and the Colts learn anything from giving up twenty three receptions to Anthony Jonhnson? Was Randy Moss more of a challenge than a practice squad guy for Jacob Lacy? Did he learn some things practice didn’t teach him?

Finally, guys get hurt but thats where the Colts have excelled. They obviously do a great job of developing players. Who would have thought that we could be here without Bob Sanders, Anthony Gonzolaz, Kelvin Hayden and Marlin Jackson? It’s part of the game and part of the risk in every sport. I don’t think it’s best to trade game

Let’s be honest, there’s a difference in short term and long term development and preparation. I think the Colts are the best there’s ever been at long term development. I do think that their organization philosophy should be evaluated in light in the lack of post season success, especially considering their overwhelming regular season success. It’s not just the losses either, it’s the way they’ve lost and they way others have won. It doesn’t seem to match up. We’ve lost the first game three times with home field advantage. So we got the situation the regular season success provided – home field advantage and lost the first game which says “something was different”. What was it? Our approach. Instead of the same Colts Football which led to the regular season dominance, we shifted gears and lost it in neutral if only for a second but it was enough to finish our season.

If it wasn’t the change in approach that has led to the post season let downs. Doesn’t someone somewhere have to ask “Then what was it?”

The “pattern” is to noticible to be dismissed as bad luck or something that “just happens”. It’s more than that and being the great football minds we are, I would like to know.

It also seems that it’s the best hot team that wins the Super Bowl. You can’t be one or the other. No one would argue that New England was a better team than New York in 2007 but New York was hot. There were a number of teams better than Pittsburg last year – that they beat in route to winning the Super Bowl. Again, they were hot. Isn’t hot a snyonym for mojo?

So what keeps teams hot? What keeps them playing well? What keeps the mojo?

In my years as a coach I’ve seen a lot of guys play well who felt bad and a lot of guys play poorly who felt good. I’m not sure rested matters a whole lot. Sometimes it even breeds complacency. We won the Revolutionary War not because we were better trained and armed or because we were more rested or felt better, we won it because we had no choice. We fought for everything and sometimes getting backed into a corner sharpens a skill we like in competition. We like street fighters. We like first punch throwers.

If risk can be viewed as an equalizer on a sliding scale. I guess this whole debate is not about if the marker should be adjusted for the final games, but just how much. And for me, like most Colts fans, they went past the point of return. The anger comes not just from the loss of the perfect season, but also from the reminder that we seem to be repeating a pattern that hasn’t gone well for us. And to your average Colt fan, we feel that attitude has cost us probably two Super Bowls and un necessarily put a great franchise at risk of becomeing the best of the second tier teams in league history when it may have been the best of the best. I

Isn’t insanity repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s a certain formular for failure so I still think the Colts will win the Super Bowl. I’m just a little miffed we decided to cool ourselves off.