Oh cmon Teddy, that's a bunch of horse crap! Do you even believe some of the nonsense on this blog? Why would/should Dungy care about the browns making the playoffs. Any team who's playoff chances are in the hands of another team should not only miss the post season but their coach should be suspended for the following season

I got to disagree, yes for the Browns Indy shouldn't have done with that had done, but Indy had NOTHING to gain from that game. My theory is if you don't have anything to gain why care about other teams, should the Patriots care if certain teams get into the playoffs. Do you really think the Colts owed anything to the Browns, no of course not. The Browns had a chance to get into the playoffs by themselves, should Indy had sent Peyton to play against Cincinnati two weeks ago. That game they only scored 14 points in, are you kidding me they could have won, and we wouldn't be arguing about this. You shouldn't have to think the only way a team can get into the playoffs is by the Colts (WHO HAD NOTHING TO GAIN) playing hard, and risk losing one of their stars, but if they had played the whole game and lost Manning I am sure you would have been on here, saying HA HA silly Colts always have to prove you are the best.

As Ken says- the Brows blew it the week before vs Cincy. Win that game and they would have been in. Any time you lose control of your own playoff destiny I don't think you can (or should) question the motives of a team with nothing to gain that doesn't play their starters the whole game.

This is just a silly post. Why should the Colts care about the Browns? They could have sealed their own fate in Week 16. They can only blame themselves. Most playoff teams sat their starters the final week. The Steelers and Jaguars for example sat their QB's. The Jags also sat their top 2 running backs.

The Colts went through the motions, and if it mattered would have blown the Titans out of the water, but it didnt. The Titans dont have the firepower and will be one and done. The Colts had the #2 seed locked up WEEKS ago. Its noones fault but the Cleveland Browns. Like K. Goyette says above me, they lost to a really bad Bengals team in week 16. With the pressure on Anderson these last 2 weeks he couldnt deliver. The Colts didnt owe anything to anyone.

Ken-squared and DB,

I fully understand why the Colts did what they did (might have done it myself if I were in charge, too). Also fully understand the "Browns screwed up their own destiny" argument. (Then again, would we be singing a different tune had this been before the Patriots were dominant and THEY were the team always relying on someone else to make the playoffs?)

However, the point of this particular post was to point out that the NFL and the Colts were mighty concerned about the integrity of the league back when Spygate was a big deal. If you ask me (and now I'm asking you), isn't tanking a game with playoff implications a bigger blow to the integrity of a league than filming a coaches defensive signals? Isn't competition the essence of athletics, and isn't competition comprimised when you pull the stunt the Colts did? Couldn't they have at least burned all their time outs to force a Tennessee punt that maybe their backups could have returned for a TD or blocked? Doesn't Tom Coughlin have more integrity in his pinky nail than those sanctimonious jerks running the Colts?

I'll come up with the obvious answer... No- they aren't the same. The rulebook specifically states that you cannot film the other team during the game and, if memory serves, the Pats were sent a memo reminding them of this fact. Nowhere in the rules does it say you must play to win. Now- could they (and should they) have called a TO? I guess so but I don't think it would have mattered- the Titans would have simply punted the ball as quickly as possible- most likely out of bounds. Can't recall ever seeing Hentrich have one blocked... Ultimately breaking a rule (whether it's being broken by anyone else or whether it gives you a measurable advantage is not important) is a worse violation of the integrity of the game than something like this that is very much in the gray area between black and white.

Teddy- after all that talk of the Celts tanking the end of 06-07 to try to get a shot at Oden or Durant I am surprised you would equate the Colts' version of tanking to Spygate... Why was it okay for a lousy basketball team to try to lose games (whether they were trying to lose or not I don't know but some of the decision-making in that last couple of weeks left a lot to be desired) in order to end up with more ping-pong balls but it's some violation of the ethics of competition to play your backups pretty much all game and try not to get guys hurt?? Didn't the Celts' losses affect some teams' playoff positioning in some way?

The only folks that should feel shortchanged out of this are the Colts' ticket holders who ended up watching almost an entire game of Jim Sorgi...

You are quite correct DB. No argument at all...not trying to equate the legality of it to Spygate at all..simply trying to point out that integrity also involves playing to win.

I was very uncomfortable with the C's tanking it last year, as I am whenever any team does it. And as I've stated many times, I fully understand why teams do it, and might even do it myself if I were calling the shots.

I think you guys are missing my point. (hint: look under my hat...you'll see it!)

While one thing (Spygate) is illegal and another thing (tanking) is not, if we're talking about INTEGRITY and COMPETITION (which is the true essence of sports), which has a greater impact on the outcome of a football game...videotaping defensive signals or not playing to win? Had the Colts allowed the Titans to videotape their signals, or even let them into the huddle itself, they still would have had a better chance to win than the way they approached that final game.

You, if anyone, should appreciate that because your Eagles went balls to the wall when it might have been better for them to see if they have McNabb's replacement in Kolb. Instead, Andy Reid, like Coughlin, played the game to win, which is what you're supposed to do. In the process, they almost cost the Pats their perfect season and the Cowboys their home field advantage.

YOu might say you aren't saying they are the same, but you are. One the Patriots cheated, the Colts just didn't play 100%. Is it questionable not playing 100% sure, did they cheat the Browns, NO! They cheated the fans that were at the game and wanted to see, well a game. But in order for you to have anyone agree with it, drop the comparison, sportsmanship wise, they don't equal. It wasn't better to play Kolb, they want to get something for McNabb, and they need to showcase him, the Giants, well I have no idea what they were thinking about, probably a not in our house mentality, that team has been devastated with injuries, why risk it more.

I say, again, that I applaud that the Giants and Eagles both played hard all season and didn't "throw in the towel". Especially the Eagles (although they made my winter by playing the Pats tough and beating the Cowboys in Dallas) since they essentially had nothing to play for and, in fact, probably worsened their draft spot by 4 or 5 slots. (FWIW- I'll bet McNabb is back next year in Philly... He played much better and with much more mobility over the last few games. I think he gets one more year to get it done and, if not, they ship him off to Chicago or somewhere. Right now his value is not where it needs to be and I don't think they can win with Kolb at the helm without any experience in 2008. That injury pretty much kept Carson Palmer down for an entire calendar year so I think McNabb would be much better at the start of next year. If not the Boo-birds will be out in force at the Linc next year...).

Do I *WISH* that the Colts played all of their guys (and that all teams did for that matter) for 16 games? Sure. But that's not realistic. I think everyone watching that game pretty much knew what the Colts had planned so I don't know that it upsets the integrity of the league. Now if Dungy had said he'd play his guys for 4 quarters and then did what he did THAT would hurt the integrity of the game but I don't think anyone figured Manning or Wayne or Addai would be playing any more than they did. The other thing to consider... The Colts could potentially (and I am thinking the chance is about .0001%) end up playing that #6 seed and TENN *is* in their division. Also as a division team maybe they think the Titans can knock off the Chargers so that they wouldn't have to play them in the divisional playoffs whereas Cleveland with less playoff experience would essentially be fodder for the Chargers to beat up on??

I don't really believe any of those last theories but in a world of conspiracy theories who knows what is really going on behind the scenes??

Check out this article on MSNBC.com:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22487240/

Teddy, this isn't the first time this type of stuff has gone on. Check your football history. You will find many cases of teams resting starters in games with playoff implications. This case was more obvious because it was a national telecast and the very last game of the year. You might be shocked how often other teams do this in 4pm games that aren't on TV everywhere.

In the end Romeo and the Browns have nobody to blame but themselves. Not only did they lose the week before to give up control of their destiniy. Didn't Crennel blow a game in Pittsburgh by wasting a couple of timeouts he didn't have to?