Quote:Well, the truth is the Colts success has been more attributable to luck (lowercase) than Luck the last two years.

 

http://www.ganggreennation.com/2014/1/19...kiest-team

<p style="margin-left:40px;"> 

<p style="margin-left:40px;">"Of course, such statistics are far from infallible, and history is not destiny.  As proof one need look no farther than the 2013 second luckiest team, the Indianapolis Colts, with 1.6 more wins than their Expected W-L would indicate.  Which team was the 2012 "luckiest" team?  The very same Colts, with a whopping 3.8 more wins than Expected W-L would indicate.  So the Colts at least bucked the odds two years in a row.  On the other hand, they also experienced a pronounced regression toward the Expected W-L number, as they shaved 2.2 wins off their "luck" in 2013."

 

Fools and trolls can deny it all they want, but that doesn't change the truth.

 

 

Quote:One more thing to add to this. After Wayne's injury, the Colts were 6-3. 5 of those wins were against Houston twice, Tennessee twice and The Jaguars once. The three losses were to St Louis by 30, to Arizona by 29 and to Cincinnati by 14.  They also lost in the playoffs to New England by 21.

 

Also good points.  I think a lot of Luck's perception comes from his regular season record.  If Luck played in a tougher division and a tougher schedule would his perception have been the same?  I remember more than one occasion thinking a questionable decision by Luck led to a big completion or touchdown or circus catch.  I can't necessarily say he was lucky, and the Colts did have a handful of solid wins against good teams, but I can see how things could have easily gone the other way.

---