Poor Colts. Not only can't they win when they're supposed to. They can't even lose when they should:
With the Indianapolis Colts' improbable 19-16 victory over the Houston Texans on Thursday night, three teams are now tied with two victories on the season. The Colts (2-13) have been the favorite to end up with the first overall pick this season, starting out with 13 consecutive losses.
However, now that the Colts have gotten their second victory on the season, they now have the same amount of wins as the 2-12 Minnesota Vikings and St. Louis Rams.
[. . .]
So right now, the Colts still have the inside track to get the No. 1 overall pick as long as they lose to the Jacksonville Jaguars next weekend. Looking at the numbers, it's fair to say that St. Louis doesn't stand a chance if all end up with two wins. But how about Minnesota?
How pathetic is that, when you have to hope to lose another game just to salvage the season? What are the ethics involved, by the way? Football players are paid good money to play games the purpose of which is to win, and the fans who pay good money expect to see wins. But what if losing the game would improve the propsects of winning future games, which presumably would please fans more than losing one game now would upset them? Does that make throwing the game OK, or would you still consider it cheating?
