Self Editor

Forum: foot
Page 5004
Subject: Pats run up the score

Posted by: artforthehall - [309203017] Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 19:28

I haven't been to the board for sometime and I thought I would find a post about this.

I am a biased Skins fan, but the pats ran up the score. He should have just kicked the field goal, Gibbs would have because he has class. The Pats don't care who they piss off, but it will come back and bite them at some point. And I will predict it happens against the Jets, when the Pats are up by 50 and they are still passing. Brady will still be in the game because they are trying to set a scoring record and td pass. Jets will send everyone and take a unsportsman like penalty, but Brady will have to pay. If the Pats continue to run up the score, Brady is going to receive some cheap shots.
I understand it is the defenses job to stop the offense, but just kick the FG or run plays in a row. Maybe the Pats wanted to send a message to the colts with the score. Just don't complain when someone takes a shot at Brady because it will happen.

Tree
ID: 47943018
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 20:08

or maybe pull Brady out. what's he doing throwing passes in a 35-0 game.

it will be a double whammy when Brady gets wrecked, because by keeping him in, the Pats didn't give his back up solid playing time.

KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 149141616
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 20:25

The Pats pulled Brady out in the game against Miami and Cassel promptly threw an INT that was returned for a TD...

1-10-NE 30 (11:28) New QB #16 - Cassel, M. 38-K.Eckel right tackle to NE 32 for 2 yards (54-Z.Thomas).

2-8-NE 32 (10:48) (Shotgun) 16-M.Cassel pass incomplete short middle to 83-W.Welker.

3-8-NE 32 (10:40) (Shotgun) 16-M.Cassel pass short middle intended for 83-W.Welker INTERCEPTED by 99-J.Taylor at NE 36. 99-J.Taylor for 36 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

WiddleAvi
ID: 25102616
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 20:28

Keeping the starters in and running up the score is one thing but I have no problem with a coach putting in backups and having them run up the score. Let the backups get a change to play for real and see how they perform in case you need them at some point in the season.

Boxman
ID: 571114225
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 20:33

OK. You're a Skins fan and your screen name is "artforthehall". Take two shots of Jagermeister and call me in the morning. Get over it.

I watched that game from start to finish and I didn't have a problem with what the Pats did. The scrubs came in later in the game and scored. Maybe if the Skins were good compared to the Pats their second string doesn't beat the pants off your first string.

Better luck next week. ;)

The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 21:28

I know what you mean, AFTH. I used to yell at Earl Anthony when he'd throw a strike in the 10th frame when he was up 40 pins.

Repeat it with me: There's no such thing as running up the score in pro sports. That being said, I would have been quite happy to have seen Tom Brady planted firmly on his back when they left him in the game.

Electroman
ID: 73332719
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 22:03

Thank Eric Mangini. He tried to tarnish the reputation of Belichick and the Pats. Now, I believe, they are on a mission to show that they are far superior. They woke up a giant.

Last I checked, there is no mercy rule in the NFL. And if someone does throw a cheap shot, it is worse than what people think the Pats are doing. It would show no class, respect etc. They want the big contracts, STOP THEM. Otherwise, go find another job. It is sour grapes by those that are getting beat.

Tree
ID: 47943018
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 22:17

Last I checked, there is no mercy rule in the NFL.

no, of course there's not. but it's kind of an understood that if you're whomping someone, you don't pile on.

And if someone does throw a cheap shot, it is worse than what people think the Pats are doing. It would show no class, respect etc.

then, by your definition, it would be the same as what the Pats are doing, because they're showing no class and no respect.

Slizz
ID: 429482317
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 22:21

Belichick is the man. He, and the patriots want to give a big FU to whoever comes their way...and b/c they were chastised for something that just about every team or head coach has done before, its their way of politely doing everything within the rules to win.

Belichick might look like the a-hole when a defensive lineman takes a cheap shot at Brady's knees in garbage time when he should be on the bench!

Perm Dude
ID: 2992308
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 22:30

It reflects their lack of class, IMO. So we really can't expect anything less out of the Pats.

wiggs
ID: 569183020
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 22:49

I have been following this closely because I was pissed off when they scored the 48th point against the cowboys. I was convinced that it was almost Dallas' fault for calling the timeout.

Next week they are up by 28 points bring in Cassel, continue to pass, and get picked and returned for a TD. Bellichek responded in the press conference with if they intercept another pass and return it for a td we are only up by 2 scores. What a joke.

Then this week they are up 38 points with 9 minutes to go, not only are they still piling it on, but they are going for it on 4th down.

I have been listening to this on the radio alot lately and they are saying it is the Defenses job to stop the offense. Then someone else called in and asks about brady getting lit up after an interception and the hosts say "that is unsportsmanlike to cheap shot the QB"
My thoughts are isnt it the Defenses job to hit the QB whenever they have the chance?

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Tue, Oct 30, 2007, 23:43

I agree with several of you but esp. widdle in [3].

I think Coach B is a turd and if he gets up on the Colts he will really try to run it up as he wants the world to bow to him as the most dominating coach and team in the world.

With that said, I really don't care that much, but it's sorta like an unwritten rule. Dungy and Manning wouldn't have been passing there that late and up that much. It's like baseball when you don't steal bases when you have a huge lead. But you're still going to swing hard. It's not like you're going to go up there and strike out--but then again typiclaly the subs are in there too.

Alex
ID: 8718115
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 07:24

I agree and disagree with parts of each post. My thoughts:

1. Bellichick is a jerk, but for other reasons.
2. I kind of like when teams run up the score.
3. As a practical matter, leaving Brady in is stupid in case he gets hurt.
4. Intentionally injuring Brady would be far worse than running up the score.

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 07:31

It occurred to me to take a look at Manning's 49 touchdown 2004 season. The Colts didn't have a great defense that year and there weren't a lot of blowouts, but there were some - four consecutive games, weeks 10 thru 13, the Colts won 49-14 vs Hou, 41-10 @ Chi, 41-9 @ Det and 51-24 @ Ten. Through those 4 games, the Colts offense scored a total of 10 4th quarter points (a TD on a 10 yard pass play and a FG), all coming in the game @ Ten.

I guess Boxman, Slizz and anyone else who doesn't have any sportsmanship issues with this year's Pats running up the score must think Dungy and Manning were pretty stupid for not padding Manning's stats at the end of those blowout games.

Boxman
ID: 211139621
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 07:49

I guess Boxman, Slizz and anyone else who doesn't have any sportsmanship issues with this year's Pats running up the score must think Dungy and Manning were pretty stupid for not padding Manning's stats at the end of those blowout games.

My Lord do you have issues. Picking fights for what purpose?

You know what, it's not really worth explaining positions to you because you're never wrong (just ask yourself), so I'm just going to leave it at this one point. One of the games that Indy ran up the score on was against my beloved Bears and you don't hear me b!tching.

I hope the Pats put up 100 against the Colts or the Colts put up 100 against the Pats, either way. Let the best team win.

Tree
ID: 3533298
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 08:59

One of the games that Indy ran up the score on was against my beloved Bears and you don't hear me b!tching.

well, that's because you'd have nothing to bitch about.

the Colts were up 24-3 with a minute left before halftime, and the ball well inside the 5-yard line. instead of going for another TD, they kicked the FG.

from that point on, the Colts scored only 14 more points, and NONE in the 4th quarter.

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:08

4. Intentionally injuring Brady would be far worse than running up the score.

But its going to happen. If the Patriots continue to embarrass teams by piling it on and passing like crazy til the very end... some idiot lineman (ala Albert Haynesworth) on a crappy team, with nothing to lose, who feels "disrespected" as they say etc is going to knock Brady the f out. Cheap shot, late hit, take out his knees - whatever.

barilko6
ID: 58920316
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:08

I agree that there is a bit of a "Screw You All" mentality relating to the fact that the Pats got nailed for the video infractions that pretty much every team was a part of.

That being said, I also agree that there is no such thing as feeling bad for running up the score. When I played sports in school (and in rec leagues now), I didn't need to be patronized by the other team by having them let up and not give me their best. No need for me to start whining and crying out loud that the other team is trying too hard and hurting my feelings.

I do agree that the Pats should be putting in their backups though, to ensure they aren't rusty in case someone does get injured, but that is Coach B's call.

artforthehall
ID: 309203017
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:14

I agree if someone takes a cheap shot at Brady, it is classless, but it will happen if they continue to run up the score.
It is the defense's job to stop the offense, but when the defense is already embarrassed and you continue to embarrass them, that is classes less. Of course their is not a mercy rule, but in my opinion showing some class is better than being a jerk.
The Pats are an awesome team and are fun to watch, they have been a classy organization until the spygate issue and now they are just wanting to prove they are a better than everyone else.
Maybe the Pats were still pissed that the skins stopped their unbeaten streak a couple of years ago.
I look forward to the game this week and the Pats could run the table for the year, but don't be surprised when someone takes a shot at Brady. It doesn't have to be a cheap shot, but he is going to start getting hit a lot more if they keep running it up.

wiggs
ID: 6825712
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:18

I am not even saying a cheap shot on brady. I am talking more about an interception and going back the other way. I am sure alot of those defensive players are looking to just blast him any chance they get. Where as if they take that knee up 38 points maybe they dont go looking for him.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:25

Picking fights for what purpose?

Is it bad form to point out who's opinions it was that elicited my response? Or was it my implication that you think it's 'stupid' to imply that the Pats are displaying poor sportsmanship? Really, how is post 13 picking a fight according to the author of post 4?

I'm inclined to suggest you get over it.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:41

I guess I am in the minority here, but I will preface my post with I can't stand the Patiots, Belicheck, or Brady. I am a Steelers fan and I dislike the Patriots more than our standard division rivals (Ravens and Browns).

With that said, I have no problem with what the Pats are doing. This is pro sports, not an under 10 pop warner league where we should worry about "feelings" and "unwritten rules". In my previous life (in my teens), I had a coach who said these words of wisdom: "It's not our fault if we are much better than them. Don't let people be angry with you if you keep scoring." After that little speech, I never questioned the issue of running up the score again. The Patriots are blowing out people, and we should be pissed at them? It's not their fault they are much better than their opponents.

On the 2nd issue, I wouldn't be surprised if Brady takes a cheap shot at some point. These are grown men being embarrassed and as we see every week, emotions get the best of players sometimes. If Brady gets hurt while trying to run up the score, that is a risk Belichek is taking right now.

I also can't compare (as many of you are doing) giving Brady a cheap shot and running up the score. Why not? Because one is an illegal play and the other is legal. In terms of class, I'd venture a guess that the less classy thing to do is the illegal one. I'm not saying it won't happen, though...

I guess, my overall thought is, if I was coaching the Pats, I would take Brady out...not because I didn't want to score any more points and wanted to do the "classy" thing, but because I don't want to lose him to an injury.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 09:48

I didn't get through all the posts before I put the above, but I guess I should of just said "I agree with Barilko's post 17 in its entirety"...it would of saved me some time.

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 10:07

What about a lineman that takes a shot at Brady similar to what Ty Warren did earlier this year?

I don't have a problem with a Pro team running up the score, the reason most teams don't is that pay back can be a bitch. Is it really worth it?

The irony that I see is that Patriot's fans (on other sites) were up in arms and mocking Manning for running up his totals in his 49 TD season.

Slizz
ID: 21733916
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 10:10

I guess Boxman, Slizz and anyone else who doesn't have any sportsmanship issues with this year's Pats running up the score must think Dungy and Manning were pretty stupid for not padding Manning's stats at the end of those blowout games.

Figures, he calls out the two bears fans on the board.

re: 16, I wholeheartedly agree with GO. Those who know me well, know I like fighting fire with fire. The ball started to move the minute Tangini (Tannenbaum & Mangini) blew the whistle on Belichick for something that just about everyone does.

Belichick decided to push the envelope further, this time, by doing everything within the rules as a way of playing with a chip on their shoulders. Cheaters?!?! Cheat this! We dont need no stinkin cheating to beat the ish out of you!!! Then the Patriots tell you what they're going to do, and just shove it down your throat and obliterate everything in their path.

This time, if someone was doing that to me (running up the score by going deep with the MVP frontrunner QB in still), as an ex-safety, I'd love to blow up brady if I was given the opportunity. Its esentially showing he has ZERO respect for me, my team, or my head coach (in the skins case, one of the all time classy coaches, Joe Gibbs). I wouldnt take a cheap shot at the knees like a Albert Haynesworth or a Colts defensive lineman (their HC has a knack for that like Kubiak has a knack for cut-blocking). But i'd make sure he would feel it.

As for those saying the Skins are guilty of running up the score on the 49ers a season or two ago, your wrong.

"Specifically, the Redskins rattled the Rams, 51-7, during a 1983 playoff game, and they fricasseed the 49ers by the score of 52-17 little more than two years ago.

But there's a difference. A big difference. In both of those games, the 'Skins apparently called off the dogs well before the fourth quarter. For example, the Redskins led the Rams 38-7 at halftime in the 1983, and scored only six points in the third quarter on two field goals and seven in the fourth quarter on an interception return for a touchdown. In 2005, the Redskins didn't throw a single pass after the 3:30 mark in the third quarter, and Clinton Portis didn't get another carry."~from pft.com

Bottom line, this is Belichicks way of saying F-U to everyone who thinks he won b/c of cheating and the core of team is buying into it, thus making everyone else buy into it.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 10:11

Good post, leggestand. For me (and I think for most), its not so much an issue of right or wrong as much as one of simple sportsmanship.

My HS sports experience regarding this sort of thing was different from yours. I didn't play football so perhaps its fair to say the analogy is invalid from the start. But our wrestling coach regularly preached sportsmanship and respect for your opponent.

One year in a tournament we watched a wrestler from another school mow through every opponent in each round, almost all 1st period pins. In one of the semifinal rounds after another quick pin the kid jumped up and (in a quick motion he probably had practiced) mimed as if he pulled two guns out of pretent holsters, twirled the imaginary guns on his index fingers, shot his opponent with the pretend revolvers, blew on his fingertips as if blowing the smoke from a pair of gun barrels and then reholstered his imaginary guns.

Coach turned to us and as sriously as he'd ever said anything he told us that if he ever sees any of us pull anything like that we are off the team. He was really pissed and so were a lot of spectators.

Like the Pats, that kid didn't break any rules (though I think the ref could have penalized his school if he wanted) but just as there is something to be said for being a good winner, there is something to be said for people who disregard grace in victory. I know that if I were a Pats fan, I wouldn't like it.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 10:54

MITh - My HS sports experience regarding this sort of thing was different from yours. I didn't play football so perhaps its fair to say the analogy is invalid from the start.

Actually, I think any sports analogy on this is applicable. FWIW, my experience wasn't in football, it was in soccer. I was lucky enough to play on some really good teams growing up, and lopsided scores of 7+-0 happened frequently. This didn't stop in college either, as I got to the feel the other end when we lost to Rhode Island 7-0 in the conference championship with a NCAA tourney berth on the line. We weren't angry about getting the score run up on us, we were more pissed that we just got annihilated, especially considering that we had beaten them two weeks before.

As for you gun-toting wrestler analogy, I totally agree with you, but I would stress that my thoughts on "running up the score" and "showboating" are different, as I don't see "running up the score" falling in the sportsmanship category, and as you said, many people do. Other words of wisdom from my youth coaches were: "Act like you've been there before." This directly applied to showboating and celebration. In fact, one of my idols growing up was Barry Sanders, and one of the reasons was that every time he did something good, he acted, IMO, ideally.

I mean, I guess a question to ask is: Who is angry at the Patriots? (1) The fans or (2) the players that are getting blown out?

I haven't heard much complaining by the players, so, I have to feel it's a fan issue, which means its really a non-issue.

Tree
ID: 3533298
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:04

two columns from cnnsi.com...

Don Banks
No Mercy
Patriots pour it on, don't care what other teams think
We can argue the pros and cons of their no-holds-barred approach. We can moralize or philosophize about the message it sends or the long-term wisdom of employing such a strategy. But there can be no debate about whether the New England Patriots are running up the score on their out-classed opponents this season.

The answer is, of course they are. Y-E-S. You bet your hand-held video camera they are. For an organization that covets its secrecy in matters great and small, that much is as easy to decipher as that gaudy 52 spot the Patriots hung on the scoreboard against Washington on Sunday. Or the 49-point effort that New England put forth the previous week at Miami. Or the 48-point display at Dallas the week before that.

The point is -- and this can't be overstated -- the Patriots don't care. They're doing it. They know it. Their opponents know it. And the hard, cold truth is that no one has been in position to stop it.

Dr. Z...
Patriots risk backlash on field
Coaches won't admit it, but late scores infuriating
In 1991 I was covering Atlanta-Washington in the playoffs. I talked to the Falcons' defensive end, Tim Green, and he said, "Ask Glanville about Joe Gibbs throwing the out and up in the fourth quarter when they were ahead, 42-17. He's been using that as a motivational tool all week."

The Redskins' out and up went for 64 yards and a touchdown to Art Monk in that November meeting and moved the score to 49-17. It ended up 56-17. So when I talked to Falcons coach Jerry Glanville that evening in his hotel suite I asked him about it. His eyes narrowed.

"That's just football," he said. Then he flashed rage.

"You came in here to stir things up, didn't you, didn't you?" he said. I told him I heard he'd been bothered by it.

"Get the hell out of here," he said, and next thing I knew my notebook and I were out in the hall.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:09

In professional sports, there is no such thing as "running up the score". Those guys have jobs to do, win, period. I'm not a Pats fan and I'm not sure not a fan of coach B, but I'll not diss the Pats for doing what they are paid to do.

I'm reminded of a Minn-Phi game back in 84 or 85. 4th qtr, Phi was up like 28-7. I shut off the game in disgust with my Vikes. That night watching the sports on the news, Minn won that game, scoring some 31 points or so in the 4th qtr. Strange things happen, and virtually no lead is "secure" in professional sports. We've all seen baseball teams with 9 run innings, football teams, score 20 points in under 10 minutes, etc etc etc. Sh*t happens and I can safely say that if I'm coaching, I dont treat any lead as secure, until the game is over.

Would I have pulled Brady to guard against injury? Most likely yes. But I'd still expect the O to move the ball and the D to stop the other team.

Slizz
ID: 21733916
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:13

Don Banks hit the nail on the head:

The point is -- and this can't be overstated -- the Patriots don't care. They're doing it. They know it. Their opponents know it. And the hard, cold truth is that no one has been in position to stop it.

Seasons past, the Pats would just milk the clock and run the ball...but I think the combo of the talent he has on the team at the skill positions + the fact the media, fans and a portion of the NFL have doubted his ability to coach...this is his way of reminding everyone otherwise.

I dont care about running up the score with a backup QB or scrubs in. If you cant stop 2nd stringers, you deserve to get your butt kicked. As for doing that with Brady in...thats another story and that would infuriate me too.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:16

Of course there is such a thing as "running up the score." The question is how much (if any) a professional team should get criticized for it.

The fact that other teams typically do not do it speaks to a level of professionalism of those teams. The Pats, on the other hand, are classless jerks led by a "rules don't apply to me" idiot.

What we're speaking of here is ethical behavior. Trying to answer ethical questions with rules-oriented responses is answering the wrong question.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:19

OK PD...at what point, exactly when, is a lead so great, that the coach should instruct his players to quit trying to score?

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:28

PD - Ethics is a question of point of view.

Your POV is: Don't run up the score if the game is well in hand.

But what about barilko's ethics proposal in 17: Don't patronize your opponents by not trying your best.

Barilko's is the opposite to your ethics issue, yet is just as applicable. And looking at those two sides, I think barilko's is the bigger crime from the athletes point of view. Just thinking about it pisses me off. I would hate to be on the field getting waxed knowing that the other team wasn't even trying anymore. I'd just rather them keep scoring.

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:28

I think we are all in agreement that its sheer stupidity for Belicheck to be leaving Brady out there in the 4th quarter up by 30 points or whatever. Watch him get hurt and Belicheck's ego be the thing that gets in the way of their march to another Super Bowl.

On a side note, regarding the fervor with which the Patriots were playing... Did everyone watch then end of this game? I think thats an important aspect of it. Watching their last drive, you would have thought they were running a two minute drill - with the QB diving headfirst and before that had Welker catching that TD and spiking it emphatically like it was the game winner in OT or something.

I think the manner in which they were doing this speaks volumes as well. Something you don't neccessarily get from reading it in the paper or hearing PTI discuss it. I mean if you are running the ball up the middle and they don't bother to tackle you its one thing... but the way they were playing I was waiting for them to start calling flea-flickers, HB passes and double reverses.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:36

GO: I'm not so sure that the second and third stringers won't try their best. And I don't believe for a minute that the athletes who are getting their ass kicked are saying, ala George Bush: "Bring it on!"

In a blowout hoops game, are the losing players feeling patronized because the other team puts in their bench players when they are up by so much? More than likely, the losing team starts filling in a few of their bench players as well, to take away from the game something other than an ass whooping.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:37

On a side note, using Welkers TD as an example, how many of these players have exactly what incentive clauses in their contracts? Isnt it entirely possible, that Welkers TD catch kicked in an incentive clause that could pay him an extra $250,00 or even more? You dont think having been trqaded from a team that is 0-fer, to a team that undefeated AND kicking in such an incentive, would get your adrenaline flowing in a HUGE way?

Welker was an after thought in Miami. In NE, he's an integral part of one of the most prolific Offenses around. Why wouldnt he be absolutely thrilled? Frankly, I'd be sore disappointed in him, if he werent.

Lets see...the PATS have their job to do, and WASH had its job to do. The PATS did theirs better, FAR better, and this ticks you off.....why exactly?

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:38

Sarge
coach should instruct his players to quit trying to score?

When you dominate a team for 3 or 3 1/2 quarters, keeping the ball on the ground, keeping the clock running and mixing in more of your backup players is the conservative approach that most teams are happy to take.

It reduces the liklihood of turnovers, limits the opponent's time of possession and opportunity to score, allows the luxury of giving your 2nd stringers an opportunity to play and protects your starters from injury.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:40

Exactly, MITH. Running the ball and controlling the clock does exactly what the Pats should be doing, according to sarge, et al: Winning the game.

Make a note, sarge: I'm not "ticked off." I'm simply pointing out that the Pats are jerks from the top down. Does that tick you off?

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:41

I'd tyend to disagree, that poutting in a 2nd or 3rd string RB would reduce the odds of a turn-over, vs leaving your starter in. I would also tend to believe that putting the 2nd/3rd string QB, would tend to increase the odds of a flubbed center-QB exchange vs using the starter, who takes almost all of the 1st team snaps all week in practice. If anything, subbing your bench players, would I think lead to MORE turnovers on your part, not fewer.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:46

Are you saying that the Pats second and third-string players can't handle snaps or hand-offs?

Or are you saying that Brady throwing the ball has a lower chance of a turnover than handoffs to a second string player?

Or that Brady is prevented from going in again if, somehow, the ball is turned over when the Pats are up three scores and the game outcome suddenly becomes doubtful?

If a second-string QB or RB can't get into a blowout game they don't deserve to be in the NFL.

artforthehall
ID: 309203017
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:50

Week 15 will be great the Pats play the Jets.

My take once again. A team can run up the score, but just quit passing and run the ball.

We all agree someone will take a shot at Brady at some point when this is happening. Most likely a cheapshot will be my bet(no Class), but it could very well be within the rules as well.

With the examples of Gibbs running up the score in the past, it has happened no question. The more I have thought about it, I think Billy was trying to send a message to the colts and the rest of the league. Should be a great game Sunday.

I'll share my football story, HS football we were getting beat and they other team was just running out the clock. QB was going to take a knee, but he just stood there for a couple of extra seconds to try and run a couple of more seconds of the clock and our middle LB made it through and drilled him just as he was putting his knee down. It was a cheapshot, but no penalty because it was still within the rules. Of course the other team did not like this and there benches cleared, while the rest of the team was threatened not to step foot on the field or we were off of the team. It was my favorite game tape to watch. My good buddy was getting pounded by three guys. Sorry I had to go back to the HS days for a second.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:50

I said before, that I'd have pulled Brady to preclude injury. I was simply refuting the allegation that the personnel change and strategy change, would decrease the odds of a T-O. I'd maintain, that the odds would increase. Perhaps insufficiently for it to be a real problem, but that they would go up all the same.

Boxman
ID: 337352111
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:51

Another factor too is the environment on the field. I don't know if this happened but let's use it as a hypothetical.

Sean Taylor on the Skins is a notorious punk and he spits into other players faces. Let's say a guy like Sean Taylor or the Skins D talks a lot of smack.

Is it running up the score in that case or shutting up the competition?

barilko6
ID: 1949205
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:15

I think Leggestand and I are on the same page completely, as I have agreed with all he has had to say too!

I think its also valid to note that much of the Pats running game has been banged up and hurt and not running them out there in the 3rd and 4th quarter of a blowout might actually be giving them time to rest up.

Sarge's point about bonuses coming into play is a good one too, and its easy for us to sit on the sidelines and complain about this and that, but we all know we would work our tails off at our own jobs to make sure we hit certain bonuses. I can't concern myself about the ineptitude of a co-worker when it comes down to making a bonus for myself.

That being said, I still agree that Cassell should be getting more playing time, and that Belicheck is walking a dangerous line by leaving Brady out there every game.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:16

Is it running up the score in that case or shutting up the competition?

I can't imagine a Pats' offensive lineman or TE running back to coach Bill on the sideline and whining that Taylor just spit in his face and called his momma a bad name - and Coach Bill responding by running up the score even more in a blowout game.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:20

whining?????? C'mon MITH.

WR to Coach B on the sidelines...

Their corner says we've been "lucky" so far and that he's about to put the "clamop down" on us. What do oyu think Coach?

Now, what would YOU do, as the coach? (I know me...I'm goin deep, against that corner, on the very next play.)

KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 15023167
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:25

Maybe New England kept playing at 100% because that's what Washington was doing. After all, Washington was down 31-0 in the second half before they ever touched the ball. What was their play selection after that? 19 passes and just 5 rushes.

Compare Washington's full-game play selection to previous games...

v. NWE: 36 pass, 16 rush (pass diff: +20)
v. ARI: 18 pass, 28 rush (-10)
v. GNB: 37 pass, 29 rush (+8)
v. DET: 29 pass, 35 rush (-6)
v. NYG: 34 pass, 27 rush (+7)
v. PHI: 29 pass, 33 rush (-4)
v. MIA: 21 pass, 41 rush (-20)

So, we have their lowest rushing attempts all season (by 11 attempts!) and their second highest passing attempts all season (missing first by 1).

I would love (LOVE!) for someone to try to make a valid argument that Washington didn't completely abandon their normal game plan of a balanced offense, leaning towards establishing the run, in order to try to win the game against New England.

And if Washington is going to become a pass-happy team that's trying to make a comeback, then I have no problem with New England acting like an older brother and smacking the 'Skins on the back of the head and saying, "Hey, cut it out already!"

I agree with leggestand [26]. I think this is a bigger issue with fans than it is with players. The players clearly want to play 100% for 100% of the game.

You can go back and look at New England's previous games and see a similar pattern of the opposition abandoning the run and attempting to make a comeback via the pass.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:29

what would YOU do, as the coach?

I think I'm sticking to the strategy and gameplan that I worked my ass off all week at putting together. And if I'm the best prepared coach in the NFL, I'm certainly and not allowing myself to be goaded into irrational changes because some WR who is getting his ass kicked out there has a chip on his shoulder. If Bilicheck were so easily motived by his whimsical emotions he would be much more prone to strategic errors and his Patriots would be much more beatable.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:32

Oh c'mon MITH. A professional athlete gets challenged like that....bingo, you go right at them. Thats why damn near every coach, goes deep on the new CB when the starter comes out for a play or two. You immediately test that player.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 12:55

Sarge, there is trash talk in just about every series of every NFL game. Somehow, despite this fact, the overwhelming majority of blowout games end with the victor employing the 4th quarter strategy described in post 36.

barilko6
ID: 1949205
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:00

Has anyone ever seen one of these types of threads actually convince one side or the other to change their minds on the issue? lol

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:04

Yep. I've changed my mind. I think Coach B needs to forfeit the remainder of the season, in recompense for his shameful behavior in allowing his NFL Offense to score TDs against a defenseless opponent.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:04

Of course not. All you can do is stick to facts, show people when their opinions and claims aren't supported by facts and history and hold people to their stated opinions and point to hypocrisy whenever it arises.

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:05

This has not been a very good thread, to be honest. The most obvious cause of Bilicheck's running up the score, he is in debt and has his whole salary on the "over" each week, has been completely ignored ;)

I think some people here can't grasp the idea of sportsmanship, which is a question of ethics, as correctly pointed out by PD. The term, "running up the score" means pulling some stunt that is meant to embarrass the other team. In baseball, it means stealing bases when you are up by ten runs or trying to bunt for a base hit in the ninth when you are up by a dozen. Baseball has a strict honor code, no showboating, no showing up the pitcher, no running up the score. Violate it and someone gets beaned.

Does that mean that when you are up by ten runs you are required to "not give your best"? No, everyone still tries to get on base, tries to get a base hit. Laying down a suicide squeeze when you lead by 12 is simply wrong.

Football has much less honor, however, running up the score is still dishonorable.

Leggestand: "Don't patronize your opponents by not trying your best." You are mistaken. If a football team is up by 40 points in the fourth quarter, it is honorable to run the ball to run the clock down, whether you use your starter or your thrid stringer. It is dishonorable to: run the Statue of Liberty, fumblerooskie, halfback pass, or go for it on fourth down. You could also argue that continuing to throw the ball in a manner that saves the clock is a form of running up the score. In baseball, someone gets beaned. I think many people here are right to imagine that Brady's knee ligaments are in peril if they continue to act dishonorably. People have been the victim of cheap shots for a lot less.

Sarge: This has not been your best thread. Your, "The Vikings came back in the fourth quarter after being down... no lead is safe."

First, some Vikings fan you are! You missed one of their best performances! Watch to the end. Furthermore, you should know by now that the Vikes are God's chosen team! Opponents, be weary, the Vikings can come back from any deficit, never let up :)

Boxman, your argument is so f'ing pathetic, it made me laugh. "Sean Taylor is a punk, he started it!" Yeah, very compelling.

Seriously, Sarge, do you not understand the notion of sportsmanship?

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:05

Peter Schrager, Fox's Wednesday Buffet

2. My hometown league has a rich 10-year tradition, filled with great history and wonderful rivalries. The message board is our lifeblood. Though the league's team owners' whereabouts currently span the world, the message board has kept us together. No message post in the league's history was as bizarre as one on Sunday night. After falling to a team led by Tom Brady, there was a 500-word diatribe on ethics, sportsmanship, and the "right" way to play the game. Yes, this was coming from a FANTASY FOOTBALL OWNER. "Tom Brady's in with five minutes left, in the shotgun, throwing passes on fourth down. Is there no respect any more? That's Joe Gibbs on the other sideline, not some chump. The Redskins were embarrassed this weekend, but it's Belichick that should be ashamed. And though my fantasy team is probably secondary here -- I can't but feel a little insulted by it all too."

Yes, "probably" second. lol...

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:06

And of course you can take some solice at the use of weak sarcasm in lieu of a response with a relevent point.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:10

Thanks, SZ, for the best post in this thread.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:15

Of course SZ, I understand the concept of spsportsmanship. I also, understand the concept of pissed-off at the world and an "Oh yeah? Well take THIS and stick it where the sun dont shine!" mentality whwich Coach B no doubt enjoys at the moment.

Did he and NE deserve the criticism earlier this year over the taping incident? Of course they did.

Dont you imagine that whole thing, grated on Coach B like few things possisbly could have? I do.

IMHO, it makes no difference what anyoone has dodne in the past, would have done there, or will do in the future. Coach B is now, IMO, oout to prove, beyond question, that his squad and his coaching skills are superior to any others out there. No mercy is asked, and none will be given.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:23

oout to prove, beyond question, that his squad and his coaching skills are superior to any others out there.

Yeah well if some pissed off Lineman decides he's had enough and rips apart Brady's knee, Coach B will have proved exactly the opposite. If he keeps it up, it'll happen. I just hope it doesn't happen against my Jets. You know Bill will do everything in his power to win that one by 100 points.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:27

You want to talk about unsportsman like??? What could be more so, then deliberately doing what you suggest "will happen"?

I dont like Coach B, and I'm not a NE fan, but I'll not begrudge ANY professional athlete/team, doing its absolute best (worst?) to an opponent. These are all grown men, professionals at what they do, and out to do one thing...win.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:31

Of course a late or cheap or illegal or otherwise deliberately injuring a player is unsportsmanlike - even more so than what the Pats are doing.

Here's a news flash for people who somehow haven't figured it out on their own: unsportsmanlike conduct leads to more unsportsmanlike conduct. If you go around relentlessly poking people, eventually someone's going to overreact.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:38

I think some people here can't grasp the idea of sportsmanship, which is a question of ethics, as correctly pointed out by PD.

SZ, as I said before, sportsmanship being about ethics is true, but unfortunately ethics are not concrete and in this case can be seen from two sides. Therefore, ethics are not useful in judging right or wrong in this case.

Here's a question: Why is what Belichek and the Patriots are doing ethically wrong?

What I've gathered so far from these posts, the only answers I've seen with an argument are:

1. It's unneccessarily embarrasing the other team. I disagree. It's embarrassing to be down 35-0, and the difference in "embarrassment" in that score and the final score 52-7 is pretty insignificant. Do you think these players are saying, "Well, it was really closer than 52-7, but they had to go and run the score up. I'd say 35-0 is a more accurate depection of the game." Please. The only real thing players care about is the outcome of the game...was it a win or a loss. I don't think any ethics "code" has been broken here.

2. Someone on the Patriots can and will get hurt...most likely Brady. I think 99% of the people in here agree with that, including myself. That's a risk the Pats are running, though, but it is also not answer on the "ethics" question.

Any other answers to the question posed above?

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:42

I have to agree with leg here. No ethics were violated. Now, most coaches will be opposed to their own team running up the score. Why? To avoid embarassing the other team? No. To avoid giving the other team "bulletin board motivational" tools, THAT is why. To avoid the opposing coach, posting on the team bulletin board in the locker room, the "box scores" of this game when the two teams next meet on the field. To avoid giving the opposition, a deep seated desire to beat the snot out of you. Here's my own little newsflash...Coach B doesnt CARE, if you have a deep seated desire to beat the snot out of him. He doesnt think you can get it done. Besides which, itsa pretty much a given that once you're one of one or two unbeaten teams, EVERYONE wants to knock you off your perch.

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 13:58

Sarge: I have to agree with leg here. No ethics were violated.

No, sarge, you don't not understand sportsmanship, nor does Leggestand.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:02

SZ - I have a pretty good feeling that I have made it further than you ever have in sports and can speak better to "experiencing" sportsmanship than you could ever dream...but, hey that's just a hunch.

But, I can now add this to the answer to my question in 61:

3. Leggestand doesn't know sportsmanship. Worthless.

Any other answers?

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:05

We said "ethics", not sportsmanship. The two are similar, but not the same.

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:08

I think we all agree that Belicheck is doing this as a way to say F you league. Is that in the spirit of the game? If not, wouldn't that be against the definition of sportsmanship?

On a more practical side, why are you risking your most important players when the game has been decided? Why encourage the wrath of the Football Gods?

At what point in the game did NE onside kick? I read that Vrabel recovered an onside kick. Or did Washington attempt the onside kick?

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:09

Legge: By focusing on the score, you miss the ethical violation here. The Pats very well could have finished at 52-7 while having their third stringers in. If so, there would no unsportsmanlike action here. But all the other things (going for it on 4th down, keeping Brady in and continuing to pass the ball, etc) are what constituted the unsportsmanlike conduct by the coach.

As for Coach B, I agree with sarge #62 that he doesn't care, but disagree with sarge #57 that he cares a lot, to the point of running up the score to show how good he is.

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:11

SZ - I have a pretty good feeling that I have made it further than you ever have in sports

Oh, that's funny. So tell us, Legge, up there in "Big Time Sports Land", what's it like to be on the field when a bunch of over inflated egos decide to embarrass another team? Let's all gather around the hearth to hear these important life lessons that can only be learned from being on the field.

Oh, do tell us, Legge, how you "experienced" sportsmanship in ways that I can only dream. How could I ever repay you for these amazing lessons I am about to receive?

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:23

How many of these, constitute "unsportsmanlike"?;

Most lopsided victories in playoff games. (Baseball)

(I'm looking for a similar compilation for the NFL.)

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:31

So, PD, are you willing to say that if the scored ended up 52-7 and the Pats scored a late TD with their backups and conservative playcalling, we wouldn't be having this discussion? IMO, we still would be, and that makes this argument primarily based on score. We are really talking about the Pats whole season here, and I only put the Redskins score because its the most recent. The final score is really what gets looked at when talking about running up the score.

I'd like to stop harping on the "Brady staying in" aspect as well, because I think we are all in agreement at least partially. I think Brady should be out because of the injury risk, and you think he should be out for the unsportsmanlike issue. Generally, we are saying the same thing...Brady should be out, and a byproduct of that would be less running up of the score.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:32

Again SZ - worthless. All I am saying is I know sportsmanship and have first hand knowledge of sportsmanship and for you to accuse me of not knowing something I have first hand knowledge about is pretty ignorant...

But feel free to twist it again, that's what you do.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:40

Wk 1
Indy 41
NO 10

Pitts 34
Cle 7

wk2

Pitts 26
Buff 3

wk3

Philly 56
Det 21

wk4

Dall 35
StL 7

wk5

Wash 34
Det 3

SD 41
Den 3

wk7

Sea 33
StL 6

wk8

SD 35
Hou 10

NO 31
SF 10

where are the cries of unsportsmanlike in those games? I mean, if we are going to define it as "embarassing the other team"...those games would have to fit as well.

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:43

point being..lets call this what it is:

NE replacing ZDallas as "most hated" team in the NFL. This entiore conversation, IMHO, isnt so much about sportsmanship or thelack of it, but just another excuse to bash B and the Pats.

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:43

If the Pats had been running the ball with their back-ups and scored three more times, no we wouldn't have been having this conversation. Other than to joke about how pathetic Washington was. Keeping your first line players in, passing the ball and going for it on 4th down are what I'm calling unsportsmanlike.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:45

Wash 34
Det 3

From Sarge's scores, the above is a very interesting one, and can be classified as running up the score. In this game, Carlos Rogers intercepted a Kitna pass with 45 seconds left and returned it 61 yards for a TD (not 5 yards, not 10 yards, but 61 yards). The game was over with that interception (and it can be argued it was over before that at 27-3 and less than 5 minutes to play), and yet he returned it for a TD to make the score 34-3.

I guess my point is that it's a very fine line that is tread when talking about running up scores and I am still looking for a reason for why it is such a big issue?

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:45

As to the 4th down question....I didnt see the game, but what was the field position? 35 yd line which would make it a 52 yd FG attempt ar a likely net of 15 yds on a punt? In that case, I'd go for it too.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:47

Sarge 73 - I agree with that, and I hate the Pats and Coach B with the best of them. Unfortuntaley, this isn't one of the times where I find him doing anything unsportsmanlike.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:57

I watched the game. Brady was throwing bombs and passing to the end zone several times.

Those other games were decided long before the end of the 4th Qtr.

The Coach is just classless. He refused to even shake hands with anyone from the Colts after he got beat last year.

I think it's jsut a compilation of everything that has people peeved. But unlike him, Gibbs showed a lot of class saying he wasn't upset at all. He could have taken a shot and would have been well within his rights, but he didn't.

artforthehall
ID: 309203017
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 14:59

sarge I think it might have been within the 10 yd line, they could have kicked a FG easily.

This play is the one that really bothered me. Brady shouldn't be in the game and they should be running the ball even if it is a 4th stringer, just my opinion. Carlos rogers should have run out of bounds, it would have been the classy thing to do, but a defender doesn't get too many chances to make it to endzone. I am still putting my money on the Jets game where this comes to head, unless Freeney gets to Brady this week.

SZ-great comments and relating it to baseball, I thought the same thing. Coach B just has an axe to grind with everybody at this point and he doesn't care who he pisses off.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:01

#70: That is exactly what I'm saying. The score is only the first part of the equation. It is what you do when the game has been decided that constitutes running up the score or not.

Analyses which concentrate on the score only misses the point.

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:09

I watched the game. Brady was throwing bombs and passing to the end zone several times.

Those other games were decided long before the end of the 4th Qtr.

Exactly... so you guys are trying to say thats NOT bad sportsmanship?

And the defense picking one off and going the other way is a little different. The same way nobody would be complaining if they ran the ball up the gut and right into the end zone. You don't quit playing the game - but you also don't need to run a 2 minute drill when you are up by 40 points with 5 minutes to go.

Sarge and leggestand are defending that? You gotta be kidding me. Maybe SZ should send you some of the good stuff from Seattle (for medicinal purposes of course) cause he's thinking more clearly than you guys.

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:14

ill preface by saying im a Pats fan...

but these guys are professional athletes and paid to be. They can take getting there asses kicked. I doubt they are any more embarrassed because of an extra touch down. Pissed off maybe but then stop them or use that as motivation or something.

On putting in the backups so players don't get hurt...this isn't really about sportsmanship but more about coaching strategy so it really is a totally different topic

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:14

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:14

PD, if that's your thoughts, then there's not much to change it. Unfortunately, IMO, the only thing that will be remembered is the score and I tend to think that if this discussion lasts long, it will be the final score that becomes the main talking point.

But, I can reiterate that this is a very fine line when you start picking in choosing plays, as I posted 75 how a Redskin (of all players in regards to this discussion) ran up the score by returning an INT for a TD 61 yards when the game was over. I mean, we could probablystart a thread on "unsportsmanlike" plays from each weekend and end up with numerous posts.

And all it takes is that one time when you think the game is over, for everything to go wrong...see Buffalo vs Houston in the playoffs in the 90's. Heck, see Tennessee vs Houston this year. It was 32-7 starting the 4th quarter and Tennessee found themselves down 36-35 with 10 seconds to play.

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:21

In the Pats case, the score became that way because they kept the starters in, legg.

And if you saw the game, there was nothing like a miraculous comeback in the workings. In fact, by running the ball and doing a control offense, the Pats accomplish the same thing without the risk of an interception or broken play.

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:26

Sarge and leggestand are defending that?

GO, you must of had some of SZ's stuff, because it's made you delusional. I am not defending anything, I just don't see anything wrong with it. Defending would mean I think he did the right thing, which I have never said, I just don't think they he did anything wrong, which is what all you are saying.

But, I think I am going the way of Beezer, Boxman, Electroman, barilko, KKB, dpr, and Sarge and checking myself out of this conversation. (I know it's hard to believe, that there are 8 people who agreed with "Leggestand and Sarge"...in actuality, this issue has pretty much a 50/50 split here, GO, as your "side" includes 6 others, with PD, Tree, SZ, Frick, art, and MITH). Basically, it's not as clear cut as you would have me believe.

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:28

o and after the redskins scored didn't they do an onside kick. If we are conceding the game as over why should the redskins still be trying but not the Patriots. Also don't they have the same risk of injury? (well maybe maybe Brady has increased chances if people are seeking vengeance but aren't we promoting that teams take out starters all the time not just after they have pissed people off?)

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:29

Who says the Pats aren't "trying" when they run the ball, up by multiple touchdowns in the 4th? They have the game won.

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:40

is tat how they are supposed to try in the first? clearly when they try that includes passing. I don;t mean trying on a given play but overall.

Also maybe its not that important but with bradys stats this year passing is that much more risky than running (2 picks and 70%+ completions).. They can still run the clock and not turn the ball over

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:44

is tat how they are supposed to try in the first?

Uh, no. "Running up the score" implies that there is already a score. The question is whether its height is a sportsmanlike act or not.

boikin
ID: 59831214
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 15:56

I am not sure what the big deal is if you think they are running the score up on you do what every good sportsman does cheap hit someone. You break brady's leg late in game when they are up 40 on you they will think twice about leaving there starters in. I am suprised it has not happened allready. i have been part of teams that have lost and won by allot and trust me you can tell if they running the score up on you not. there is never a question of if they are.

angryChair
ID: 100501014
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 16:10

I agree with the orginal post...eventually some one or a few
lineman will make Brady pay for his coach's choice to run up the
score, and to keep TB in the game.

It's no different than pitcher's seeking revenge with a baseball
(lil' chin music) as a reminder to another pitcher or player that "a
little respect" (aka sportsmanship) is needed. That these are
two "teams" and you will look out for eachother.

I do HOPE that when it does occur that TB is not seriously hurt
though----that would be pathetic, as well.

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 16:30

For the record:

Week 8: Pats enter the 4th quarter up 45-0 with the ball at their own 13 yd line. In 8 plays (5 passing plays - all from the shotgun) they move down the field where they find themselves 4 and 1 on the Washington 7. Brady QB sneak for the 1st down. Touchdown 2 plays later.

Week 7: Cassel was intercepted from their own 32 yd line for a TD, Pats get the ball back on their own 41 after the return, leading 42-21 with 10:30 to play. Brady returns to the game and the score on 5 plays (3 passes - all shotguns including a bomb) on a drive that took up all of 2:19.

Week 6: Pats intercept the ball at the Dallas 20 up 41-27 with 3:45 left in the game. Pats touchdown on 7 plays (2 passes, 1 from the shotgun).

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 16:40

I got week 8 wrong:

Pats enter the 4th quarter up 38-0 with the ball at their own 13 yd line. In 8 plays (5 passing plays - all from the shotgun) they move down the field where they find themselves 4 and 1 on the Washington 7. Brady QB sneak for the 1st down. Touchdown 2 plays later. 45-0 Pats.

Washington then fails to convert in 4 downs and the Pats take over at the WAS 45 with 8:30 left to play. They score with the backup QB on 6 plays (3 passes, 2 from the shotgun) including pass on 4th and 2 from the WAS 37 with 7:16 left to play, running the score to 52-0

Tree
ID: 3533298
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:18

where are the cries of unsportsmanlike in those games? I mean, if we are going to define it as "embarassing the other team"...those games would have to fit as well.

how so? did you do anything other than look at the scores?!?!?!?

in the Washington game, NE had a 38 point lead going into the 4th quarter, and kept their starters in.

in the Miami game, NE had a 35 point lead going into the 4th quarter, and kept their starters in.

in the Buffalo game, NE had a 24 point lead going into the 4th quarter, and kept their starters in. oh, and kept throwing bombs downfield too.

in the SD game, NE had a 24 point lead going into the 4th quarter, and kept their starters in.

now, all the games you mentioned as "running up the score":

Wk 1
Indy 41
NO 10
Indy had a 14 point lead going into the 4th quarter. they turned it on to win the game, because at 14 points, it's still anyone's game.

Pitts 34
Cle 7
Pitts scored their final TD midway through the third quarter. after that, they did not throw one pass.

wk2

Pitts 26
Buff 3
Pitt scored their first (and only TD) in the 4th quarter. that's not exactly running up the score.

wk3

Philly 56
Det 21
it was a 21 point lead going into the 4th quarter. the last two tds were scored by Hunt and Buckhalter. Westbrook didn't touch the ball after the midway point in the 3rd quarter, and McNabb didn't complete a pass in the 4th quarter.

wk4

Dall 35
StL 7
It was 14-7 at halftime. Dallas scored 3 TDs in the 3rd, then none in the 4th. After Dallas' last TD in the 3rd quarter, Romo threw 2 more passes - both on third down.

wk5

Wash 34
Det 3
it was 16-3 after the third. Washington's final points were a FG and an INT returned for a TD.

SD 41
Den 3
Rivers threw ZERO passes in the 4th, amd Turner was in the entire final quarter.

wk7

Sea 33
StL 6
It was a 17 point game going into the 4th. Seattle's final TD came on a 14 yard drive after an INT.

wk8

SD 35
Hou 10
SD scored ZERO points after halftime. Two of their 5 TDs were defensive scores. and SD had the ball all of 23 minutes the entire game!!!!!

NO 31
SF 10
21 points is hardly "running up the score". New Orleans scored on the first drive of the 4th quarter to make it 21 points, and then, on their next (and last drive) of the game:
A. Stecker rushed up the middle for 8 yard gain
A. Stecker rushed to the left for 6 yard gain
A. Stecker rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
P. Thomas rushed up the middle for 1 yard gain
A. Stecker rushed up the middle for 5 yard gain
A. Stecker rushed up the middle for 3 yard loss

absolutely NONE of your examples come even close to running up the score. it looks like you are VERY desperate to prove you're not wrong, when, at least by the examples you've used, you're very wrong.

Toral
ID: 575542418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:21

This has been a fascinating thread. I don't really have anything original to contribute, except, that I keep thinking of Turkey Joe Jones.

The Colts game is a challenge for the Pats, and if the Pats win that I think they will go back up to a rating of 100% in respect.

But if the Pats had had a weak schedule, and kept acting as they have been acting, I tend to think some DL or LB, probably one who is old and intending to retire anyway, would do a Turkey Joe Jones and pick Brady up and play with him as if his head was the head of a vacuum cleaner, before slamming him to the ground, neck-may-be-permanent-lifetime-injury-first.

That would of course start off a massive brawl with many suspensions. And the losing/embarrassed team has nothing to lose in such a fight. "You wanna go with me in a way that gets us both suspended for a season? Means nothing to me."

Chris Collinsworth made the same point in a much nicer way on the Rome show. "Now if you're going to pass, there's nothing wrong with us blitzing you all out. And it's not a matter of trying to hurt Brady or anything like that, but if we blitz everybody we're going to make sure that Brady's going to be going to the ground. And he might get the pass off and get another TD before he gets taken down. But we're already behind by 42 points, we don't care if you score another TD."

Toral

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:27

re post 95: Actually Tree, you make my point for me. After the fact, unless one digs, all you see are the scores. THAT, is all that matters. Who won and who lost?

Slizz
ID: 429482317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:28

amen to collinsworth.

Tree
ID: 3533298
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:46

After the fact, unless one digs, all you see are the scores. THAT, is all that matters. Who won and who lost?

you have GOT to be kidding.

the scores matter in wins and losses. how a team plays and what they do matters in running up the score.

100

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 17:49

and at the end of the day, all that matters in professional sports, is who won.

Tell me w/o looking it up...who finished 2nd in the past 2 Indy 500 races.

What horse finished 2nd in the past 2 Kentucky Derby races.

Who finaished 2nd in the past 2 AL MLB playoffs?

101

Slizz
ID: 429482317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 18:13

sarge, i cant answer the first two of your questions off the top of my head...but the Anaheim Angels finished second in the AL in 2005 from the infamous Pierzynski strikeout/dead ball, and Oakland was swept by Detroit in 2006. Who can forget 2004 when the wheels fell off the Yankee wagon?

After skimming through this entire thread, I will refer to post 26. I think we can just refer to the Redskins getting P.O.'d as players and the Belichick haters are the ones getting ticked off. As far as I'm concerned, let him play roulette...sooner or later hes going to get what is coming to him.

All i know is that I'm very curious to see what Colts defensive line coach, John Teerlinck (notorious for preaching cheap knee shots), has his troops do.

Either way, it makes for entertaining football...

102

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 18:28

And there ya go. Of 6 questions posed, 2 were answered. (I'm assuming they are correct. lol) That makes for 33%. I'm satisfied, that it proves the point...all that matters, is who got the "W".

103

Great One
ID: 201155199
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 20:16

Tree - nice work with the detail of the scoring.
So sarge - great research and some outstanding examples of running up the score and how we should have raised hell of those.
You are right, these coaches should be equally scorned for...

Pitts scored their final TD midway through the third quarter. after that, they did not throw one pass.

Rivers threw ZERO passes in the 4th, amd Turner was in the entire final quarter.

the last two tds were scored by Hunt and Buckhalter. Westbrook didn't touch the ball after the midway point in the 3rd quarter, and McNabb didn't complete a pass in the 4th quarter.

That is called class, respect for the game and being sportsmanlike.
Not throwing bombs into the end zone out of the shotgun formation up by 40 points halway through the 4th.
We thank you for helping us find some games to show the RIGHT way to play out a blowout affair.

104

Great One
ID: 201155199
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 20:20

And who finished 3rd in the PBA Champions tour at their championship in Dayton OH? Who the hell cares?!
I bet the folks here couldn't name the last 2 WINNERS of the Kentucky Derby and Indy 500. Your point is completely irrelevant.

Fans may only care about the wins and losses, but the players obviously care about a lot more than that.
Nothing worse than a sore winner. And thats what the Patriots have become.

105

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 20:32

they can kick my ass for millions....ill get over it

106

Tree
ID: 89423118
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 20:51

and at the end of the day, all that matters in professional sports, is who won.

again, you're wrong. at the end of the day, all that matters in professional sports is getting paid. if winning was all that mattered, there wouldn't be any need to pay any players.

by definition, a professional athlete is all about the benjamins...

Of 6 questions posed, 2 were answered. (I'm assuming they are correct. lol) That makes for 33%. I'm satisfied, that it proves the point...all that matters, is who got the "W".

Sarge - i wouldn't know who WON the Kentucky Derby or the Indy 500, much less who took second.

so, you tell me, without looking it up, who won each of the following over the last two years:

the Class A South Atlantic League?
the Arena Football League?
the Continental Basketball Association?
the Coney Island July 4th Hot Dog eating contest?

take your pompous hand off your own shoulder, because you're not as clever as you think.

i like how you failed to address the facts i showed you regarding games you felt had scores that had been run up. instead of looking at the details and saying "ok, those were bad examples," you completely changed your arguments.

congrats. you've proven nothing, except how smug and wrong you are in this discussion.

107

Great One
ID: 201155199
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 21:11

Tree, I just said that! lol...

108

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 21:43

Perhaps what Belichick should do is pull the defensive starters in the 4th qtr. This might allow the point gap to close, and justify leaving Brady, Moss, Welker and the rest of the offense in the game. Last thing any pro football player needs is to have his feelings hurt. There isn't enough money in the world to heal a bruised ego.

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned that total points scored are actually part of the NFL tie breaker system.

Teams that are not happy with the way Belichick is playing the game need to nut up, and knock the Pats dicks into the ground and quit whinning like whipped puppies.

109

Astade
ID: 5935164
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 21:45

Tree, post #95 was excellent. Thank you for breaking that down.

As others have mentioned, the Patriots lack sportsmanship and to me that is a reflection of their leader (read: coach).

On a side note, I will say that every week the Pats play I do enjoy watching their exploits on offense.

110

Tree
ID: 89423118
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 22:21

and knock the Pats dicks into the ground and quit whinning like whipped puppies.

i think most people here expect that to happen. you're actually advocating it.

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned that total points scored are actually part of the NFL tie breaker system.

um, no.

total points are not part of any tiebreaking system in the NFL, unless i'm mistaken. it's net points, an the Pats are so far ahead in this category in the AFC, it's not even funny. they have 204. the next closest is Indy with 122. The Pitt with 93. and then no other AFC team has more than 43. in fact, more than half of the teams in the AFC have NEGATIVE net points. it's even worse in the NFC, where only 6 teams have positive net points, and none higher than Dallas' 69.

and, while net points are part of the tiebreaking system, they aren't even looked at until each of the following are:
1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).
2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.
3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games.
4. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
5. Strength of victory.
6. Strength of schedule

has it even ever come down to net points?

111

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 22:29

Good points, tree. It seems to me that many pro-Pats arguments are really looking hard for an advantage to the Pats for what they are doing, and some of the arguments seem like real stretches to me.

112

The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:09

Wow, I'm surprised to see that this thread went over 100 posts. Like old times at this site, eh? :)

What's fascinating to me about all this is how sports-dependent all of this is. Nobody tells Pete Sampras to start double-faulting when he's up 6-0 5-0, I never saw Walter Ray Williams Jr. throw a straight ball (or a gutter ball) in the 10th frame of a blowout game, and Tiger never gets asked "Why'd you show up everyone else by making birdie on 18 when you're up 5 shots?" Why is it different for individual sports than teams sports? If legge's beating me by 50 points in RIFC heading into a Monday night game, should he bench his starting QB and start someone on a bye instead to avoid being classless?

Maybe it's because of my years of auto racing following, but I've never really gotten the whole "unwritten rules" thing. In NASCAR, teams are expected to push the limits of the rulebook to get a competitive advantage, and back in the old days races were routinely won by several laps - no laying down there. This discussion seems to fall firmly into that camp.

Oh, and I'd just like to point out that leggestand, barilko and I always seem to end up on the same side of these things. It probably does not say much for them that this is the case. :)

113

Perm Dude
ID: 8934317
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:21

In NASCAR there are some unwritten rules. Like moving to the side of the track when you are down several laps to let the leaders pass. And no passing when the caution flag comes out.

But I think you are right that there is a different standard for individual sports than team sports. But (that said) no one is saying that the Pats should start doing the football equivalent of a double fault (since that scores points for the opponent). And I think that, even for individual sports with a different set of unwritten rules, the players almost always ease up a bit when the the outcome is no longer in doubt.

114

Toral
ID: 575542418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:27

Why is it different for individual sports than teams sports?

Do you really need to ask that question? Have you never played on a team, in a team sport? Have you never understood the concept of being on a team? Do you realize that working together and defending one another are part of being in a team?
That a team in the end lives and dies together?

If I didn't know you were serious, I would charcterize your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs as "trolling".

You never understood that there were unwritten rules in a team sport, whatever it is?

Uh, huh.

Troll.

Toral

115

WiddleAvi
ID: 25102616
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:28

Here is the question...is your primary goal to win the game or to see how many points you can win by. If your goal is to win the game then you should be running the ball every down except possibly 3rd and long. That way the clock keeps ticking leaving less time for the other team to catch up.

Secondly I don't think anyone would have a problem if the backups were in. At least you can say the reason your are passing is to give your backups some real game time in case at some point later in season they need to play for real.

It's common sense to any football fan that if you have a 14+ point lead in the 4th you want to run the ball as much as possible to bleed the clock.

116

dpr
ID: 1733917
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:31

114 Toral

not sure i get what you are saying. Obviously teams are united but how does that relate to it being acceptable to not let up on an individual but on a team your are expected too?

117

Toral
ID: 575542418
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:35

If your goal is to win the game then you should be running the ball every down except possibly 3rd and long.

I wouldn't be that strict. You want to keep the chains moving. Keep making first downs. A short pass, a sideline pass, a dumpoff pass that makes a first down is completely acceptable. And on a really classy team, the receiver will stay in bounds if possible after catching the sideline pass.

And if the defence puts 8 in the box or adopts any defence that assumes that you are not going to pass long and ignores the possibility of a long pass, then a long pass is acceptable.

The rules of sportsmanship affect both sides.

Toral

118

The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:46

Good points, PD. Although the rules have changed regarding yellow flags (field is frozen so no advantage to passing), moving out of the way of the leaders is indeed an unwritten rule that invites rage when violated. I'm all right with other folks thinking what the Pats are doing is classless - I'm just not particularly bothered by it myself and I find the difference interesting.

Toral, you're better than that. PD gave an intelligent response to my question. Care to add to that or do we just get more personal attacks?

119

The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:50

Obviously I started my post before 117 was posted. That's a good list that I think most folks would agree with. Obviously what's considered sportsmanlike and what isn't changes over time - how likely is it that if the Pats win all their games that this changes what is considered sportsmanlike? Or is it too over the top to make that even remotely possible?

120

holt
ID: 129202215
Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 23:53

I hate the Pats, but Brady is my QB in RIFC. I appreciated that he was still fighting for my team's victory even well after his game with the Skins was wrapped up. Does Manning take care of his fantasy owners like this? Hell no. Thanks again Tom, and keep those points coming.

121

Toral
ID: 575542418
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 00:11

Uh, there was no "personal attack". I don't know you personally. All I know about you is that you are a respected poster here. Would be rather foolish of me to launch a "personal attack" in such a situation.

I critcized what you wrote, not you personally.

But if you accept pd's response as "intelligent", I should be able to meet that standard.

If I'm smoked in an individual sport, that's all clear. I lost, I got beat, the other guy was better or I screwed up. I have to deal with it and it's my task to deal with it. Maybe I can play him again and beat him; maybe I need to go dowm to a lower level of competition.

A team has to work together. If one offensive lineman is weaker than the rest on pass protection, schemes are designed to cover that, to have another lineman do secondary protection there. If there's a weak corner, the schemes will be designed to deal with that. If the QB is a fine passer but immobile, the scheme will have OLs hold their blocks right up to the point of a penalty.

That is, a team works together. Running up the score by beating a poor Colts corner is a direct insult to Peyton Manning.

During an ordinary game, all these team stengths and weakness basically even up. After someone was put up 59 points on you, there's no way for anyone to defend or avenge your fallen teammates.

I believe professional bowlers and tennis players would and do feel exactly the same emotions when put in team compettions.

Toral

122

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 10:38

Unsportsmanlike Conduct; is defined by rule in the NFL. To me, regardless of your opinion, if it isnt against the rules, if it helps your team to win, if it helps your team secure its place in football history...then its what you SHOULD be doing.

When I played in pool leagues, they were many instances where I should have taken a "safety". Made a legal shot, but not even tried to sink a ball. Sorry, I cant play that way. Regardless of the lay of the table, there is ALWAYS a shot, and I ALWAYS took it. SOmetimes I made them and looked like a friggin wizard with the stick. Other times I blew it, and lost the game because of it. But I ALWAYS tried to keep the stick in my hand. I dont see this as being any different.

123

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 12:54

Has anyone else noticed that throughout this thread, Sarge seems engaged in a different conversation than everyone else? The NFL didn't invent the word, 'unsportsmanlike'. Nor do they and their game play rule own exclusive rights to it. We are discussing behavior that is unsportsmanlike, not the NFL rule. The rule doesn't define the word. Language doesn't work that way. And as had been said numerous times no one here claims the Pats have broken any rules.

Also, Sarge, your list in post 72 makes no strong argument for your side of this debate. If you'd paid the slightest attention to what people are writing, the issue isn't that the Pats blow out teams, its that they continue their high-powered assault well into the 4th quarter and long after the game's outcome has been decided and after most teams will usually pull their starters and run the clock down. As has been said numerous times, if you score late in the 4th on an long drive that took 10 running plays and 5 min off the clock, its a nuch different than than continuing to throw Tom Brady bombs down the field.

124

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:02

And my point is simply this...Its the freakin job of the "O", to put points on the board. Period. I'll not fault a team, for doing their jobs.

125

angryChair
ID: 100501014
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:07

NFL Rumors

Cowher: Brady could be target of cheap shot
Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 4:13 pm EDT

As the New England Patriots pour it on opponents, fans have to
be wondering about it and Tuesday former Pittsburgh Steelers
coach Bill Cowher said it: If the Patriots keep running up the
score, will someone like Tom Brady be the victim of a retaliatory
hit?
The subject of the Pats' late-game tactics is causing a lot of
buzz around the NFL, particularly after Sunday's 52-7 victory
over the Washington Redskins. On a CBS conference call with
reporters Tuesday. Cowher noted the Patriots could be playing a
dangerous game.
"At some point if this continues, someone's going to take a
cheap shot,'' Cowher said. "Is that worth subjecting your players
to if it comes to that?''
Source: Boston Herald

126

Tree
ID: 3533298
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:16

Has anyone else noticed that throughout this thread, Sarge seems engaged in a different conversation than everyone else?

yea, you're not the only one who noticed that, and post 122 completely clinched it.

And my point is simply this...Its the freakin job of the "O", to put points on the board. Period. I'll not fault a team, for doing their jobs.

that is some damned flawed logic there.

i do like how you've abandoned all your supporting points you had earlier once they were blown out of the water.

127

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:31

Its the freakin job of the "O", to put points on the board.

Well its the O's job to do what their coach tells them, whether that is to get closer to the end zone and score or to set the team up for a punt or to run down the clock or to take a knee.

I'll not fault a team, for doing their jobs.

I don't think anyone here is. The criticism, when expressed in specificity, is aimed at the coach, who is dragging out the game after the outcome has already been determined by scoring unnecessary points after his team has already secured a blowout victory.

No one faults the Pats for being up 38-0 entering the 4th quarter last Sunday. Keeping Brady in and having him throw bombs to Moss on that possession raises an eyebrow. On the next possession, now up 45-0 with 7 min left in the game and going for it on 4th and 2 from the Washington 37 is nothing short of rubbing their faces in it. I'd bet anything that the last 50 times an NFL coach looked at 4th and short from midfield while up 45 points halfway thru the 4th quarter, they all punted. I guess you think they were stupid.

128

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:43

Uhh, I don't know how often a coach calls a play to set up a punt but you know what I mean.

129

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 13:49

127 goes to what I said yesterday. Its become vogue to hate the Pats and Coach B in particular. NE has rewplaced Dallas as the team most fun to root against, and they are making it easy for that attitude to prevail. I'll agree that Coach B could do things differently. BUt I also said yesterday, and I maintain it, that B has to have some of the "you showed me no mercy, I'm showing you none" mentality.

130

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 14:36

Sarge
B has to have some of the "you showed me no mercy, I'm showing you none" mentality.

Its his job to beat his opponnent. Once that opponent is beaten and the game has been decided its in his best interest to keep the football on the ground and running down the clock.

You got caught up in a semantic argument yesterday when discussing this. You cannot deny that handing off to your 2nd string rb better prevents a turnover than a 40 yard pass, it keeps the clock running and guarantees that none of your starting skill players gets hurt. And it also doesn't make them targets for every disgruntled defensive player left on the schedule.

I can only buy into an egotistical reason for why a coach would take the risk of sacrificing all those benefits for points that are entirely unnecessary to secure a victory.

Reading his quotes in the paper, being familiar with some of his other actions and watching many of his post game handshakes with opponents does nothing at all to challenge the notion that its all about his ego. And when you take unnecessary risks in showing up your opponent to feed your ego, potentially to the detriment of the team, that is very much unsportsmanlike. And shows a lack of respect for the league.

And that makes sense. Belichick has a chip on his shoulder and its not unreasonable to assume it's largely because of the bad press and the heavy fine levied against him and the Pats this year and possibly also that the league found no fault with the Jets in the Deon Branch controversy (does anyone know if any evidence exists that the Jets made him an offer?).

131

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 14:42

I'd like to see what the spread will be for Jets at Patriots in Week 15. That game will be insane. A lot of hate there on both sides.

132

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 14:48

I neither doubt, nor have I ever said, that Coach B is not one egotistical S.O.B. Nor, do I doubt that things could have been handled differently throughout ANY game. However, given the nature of the animosity toward "B", I dont hold it against him either, when he "thumbs his nose" at any and every one. Nor, do I hold it against his team, when they do what their coach says to do.

In my eyes, what Coach B is saying is: "We are THE best there is. Try and stop us. Hell, try and slow us down. You can't."

And then he is defying every team in the league, to prove him wrong. I for one, in a competitive world, see nothing at all inherently "wrong" with that.

133

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 14:53

As for your contention re T-Os:

IF you leave your starting QB in, and go to your 2nd string RB...you may be statistically correct. But I think if you swap both your QB AND your RB, then you increase statistically, the odds of either a bad exchange between QB and C and/or between QB-RB sufficiently, that the odds of a T-O would actually increase. As for an INT...how many has Brady thrown on the year?

2 picks, on 267 attempts. Those are pretty favorable odds in my book.

134

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:01

Seems to me that the backup QB and backup RB would be the ones that practice together all week and that would be a "safer" combination. Just like the backup QB who comes in and keeps hitting the 4th WR cause its who he practices with and is comfortable with.

And while 267/2 is a good ratio, I am pretty sure its an even BETTER ratio for a QB turning around and handing the ball to a RB.

135

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:03

Pats have 4 fumbles, 3 lost YTD...2 INTs. I like the odds of Brady to Moss, Brady to Welker, etc etc

136

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:05

"We are THE best there is. Try and stop us. Hell, try and slow us down. You can't."

Proving that by unnecesarily piling on even at risk to your own team is the meaning of unsportsmanlike.

137

dpr
ID: 1733917
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:07

are two of those fumbles brady's on passing plays tho? still have no problem with what the pat are doing but that doesnt really help your argument

138

Tree
ID: 3533298
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:39

In my eyes, what Coach B is saying is: "We are THE best there is. Try and stop us. Hell, try and slow us down. You can't."

oh, i assure you they can be stopped, and it may be at the expense of Tom Brady's season. in fact, it wouldn't shock me to see Dwight Freeney put a hurtin' on him this weekend.

Its become vogue to hate the Pats and Coach B in particular.

if you'd read most of this thread besides your own posts, i don't think you'd see anyone here saying that. you would have seen solid, factual evidence to refute the points you presented, but, still, you continue to ignore that evidence.

139

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:44

No Tree, I refuse to accept opinoion as factual evidence. It is your (and common btw) OPINION, that such is unsportsmanlike. I am of the position, that if it doesnt violate the rules, and you win, then screw everyones opinion. THAT, is the nature of a competitive environment. THAT, is the nature of the very environment in which I work...daily. Highly competitive (though not athletically) and I see nothing wrong, nothing at all inherently "wrong"...with absolutely burying your competition.

140

Perm Dude
ID: 57102716
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:48

So your ethics, then, are bound completely by the rules of the game? There is no "unsportsmanlike" action? Just interested in your parameters here. What about, say, NASCAR, when a driver that has been lapped stays to the left? Is that OK? Or is your opinion of sportsmanlike actions limited to those in the lead?

141

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:53

are two of those fumbles brady's on passing plays tho? still have no problem with what the pat are doing but that doesnt really help your argument
I think dpr's comment is hilarious lol...

142

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 15:57

1) I couldnt possibly care less for NASCAR. Cant recall the last time I watched a race. I have no opinion there. BUt if I were to thik on it a bit, I'd say if my car is faster than youres and this is a race, then I shouldnt be counting on you to "let" me pass. I should earn it.

2) I have never gauged my conduct, by the opinion of "others". Nor do I plan on starting any time soon. I look in the mirror, and only my face is looking back. Thus, it is my moral compass and not yours (figurative), which guides my actions/choices/decisions. And frankly, I feelpipty for the individual who lives their life differently.

3) Is there even such a thing as unsportsmanlike conduct? Of course there is. Deliberate "cheap shots" would rank right up at the top of the list. But in a professional arena, if you arent big enough to take an ass-whooping, then dont come out and try and lay one on someone else. So far, YTD, NE has opened a H-U-G-E can of whoop-ass. It may come back to bite them in their own backsides, and it may not. Only time will tell.

4) Is what Coach B is doing..."smart"? No it isnt. But not because its "unsportsmanllike". Its stupid, because it exposes Brady to injury in a game that is already in hand, and we see every week, players game/month/season/career end, on one play. Its stupid, in that it gives every opposing coach in the league "bulletin board" material, to use as a motivator for their own squads when facing NE. The fact that I find it stupid however, does not by definition make it "unsportsmanlike". The fact that Coach B, isnt following the traditional thinking, doesnt by definition make it "unsportsmanlike". It DOES make it unpopular. But I dont see Coach B much giving a sh*t if he's popular or not.

143

Perm Dude
ID: 57102716
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 16:04

I don't think the opinion of the Coach was ever at issue here, sarge.

Nevertheless, I think you've spelled out enough to demonstrate your believe that behavior is bound only by the rules, and the perceive retribution of within-the-rules-only actions. Fair enough.

144

barilko6
ID: 1949205
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 16:12

On kind of a related topic, and in no means to compare the two incidents...just something to discuss I guess, but

Do you think that the Jets were ethical for ratting out the Patriots in regards to the videogate incident, when in effect, the Jets and every other team in the league were guilty of the same crime?

145

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 16:37

from another forum re this topic:

Getting beat that bad in football is no different that a baseball team (TX Rangers) beating the Orioles 30-3. Nobody in baseball cried about that when it happened this season......

......The hits and runs given up were the most in Orioles history and it was also their worst defeat in club history.

"You just have to have a short memory and let it go," Orioles manager Dave Trembley said.

link

146

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 16:46

Here's another theory that was just put forth on another forum:

What if Coach B deliberately did this, to fuel the "us vs them" mind set and keep his guys 100% on their toes. Which could well be the result, if e-v-e-r-y-o-n-e else is "out to get us", we got only each other left. SO lets lean on each other, lets count on each other, and lets get each other another title.

A not so far out concept really.

147

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 16:54

sums it all up:

I agree, they are "pros"....so it is not unsportsmanlike. Seems to me that if the skins would have tackled them, then they wouldn't have scored as much.....DUH.

As an aside; I find it interesting that on a professional forum, populated by others who like myself earn their incomes solely from highly competitive commission sales, not a single person finds fault with what NE did vs Wash. Each, holds Wash accountable for their own defeat.

148

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 17:28

Do you think that the Jets were ethical for ratting out the Patriots in regards to the videogate incident, when in effect, the Jets and every other team in the league were guilty of the same crime?

Do you have a source of any type that can confirm that statement. From what I read, a couple of teams had done it in the past, but when the announcement came out from the NFL prior to the season they stopped. Only NE continued, and as Belichek said so elequently in his press conference, they didn't technically, in his opinion, break the rules.

149

Perm Dude
ID: 57102716
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 17:59

sarge, you really need to stop responding to arguments that aren't being made. No one is "crying" over what happened. Some of us believe that it was unsportsmanlike.

Maybe you just can't live with that difference. But don't continue to argue against points not being made.

150

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:03

Apparently PD, I'm typing in a foreign language...

I do not agree that it was unsportsmanlike. I disagree, with your definition, or even the application of the word, when referring to a professional competition wherein the score is being kept, and then to complain about how one team kept trying to score. THATS THEIR JOB.

That the NE "O", was far more skilled at thier job that day, than was the Wash "D", is not grounds IMO, to fault the NE "O".

151

Tree
ID: 151049115
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:06

No Tree, I refuse to accept opinoion as factual evidence. It is your (and common btw) OPINION, that such is unsportsmanlike.

ugh. if that wasn't proof you didn't read anything else in this thread...

i pointed out exactly why your examples of "running up the score" simply weren't, based on unwritten rules established during nearly a century of football tradition. Yet, you choose to ignore those examples, and you choose to ignore traditional in some misguided attempt to prove yourself right, no matter how wrong you might be.

you can't even keep an argument straight, you're so desperately grasping at straws.

Getting beat that bad in football is no different that a baseball team (TX Rangers) beating the Orioles 30-3. Nobody in baseball cried about that when it happened this season......

this is such a wrong-headed argument.

never mind the fact that in baseball - a game played without a clock - any comeback is theoretically possible because you're not bound by the constraints of time - you're talking about a last place team in Texas playing a bunch of rookies and players struggling to stay in the game of baseball.

the Rangers had five guys bat in that game who were hitting less than .250 on the season. 14 of the RBIs (nearly half of the team's total) and 9 of the runs (nearly 1/3 of the team's total) were scored by the 8 and 9 hitters alone. guys like Vazquez, Murphy, Botts, Saltamacchia, Cruz are guys trying to make it in baseball - on their last chances, or trying to show they belong in the Biggs. the rangers already had their scrubs in, because most of that team were, relatively speaking, scrubs.

you have missed the entire argument so completely, i'm wondering if english is even your first language.

this is not a Brady to Moss or Welker or Stallworth going for it on fourth down, or scoring a touchdown in what oughta be garbage time.

do you do anything besides look at a score? do you do ANY research on anything??

152

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:10

...based on unwritten rules established during nearly a century of football tradition...

There...thats why you have no "evidence". None. Zip. Zilch. You have, opinion. Plain and simple. There exists no objective means to identify the scoring as "unsportsmanlike". Or were you outraged when the Rangers scored 30 runs on Baltimore this past season? As someone asked above...Were you outraged with Tiger Woods, when he birdies 18 on Sunday afternoon, with a 7 stroke lead?

The offense in the NFL, has one job to do...put points on the board. Period. Thats what NE did. Period.

153

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:13

barilko
when in effect, the Jets and every other team in the league were guilty of the same crime?

Yeah I've never seen that claim made by a reliable source. I've heard Jimmy Johnson and other coaches and players say they've done it and I seem to remember another coach or player suggest that maybe 1/3 of the teams were doing it.

But I've also read that Mangini made a point last year to spread the word that they were out to catch Belichick at it. Following the league edict regarding the issue before the start of this season, I don't know that any teams were still taping opponents signs.

Belichick ignoring the warning Mangini sent out was part of the ongoing tit-for-tat between the two teams, especially in week 1 after the league edict had come down. The Jets catching them and ratting them out continued it.

154

WiddleAvi
ID: 25102616
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:22

Sarge......No one is saying the Pats should stop scoring or purposly do bad. A simular argument for you tiger scenerio would be should Tiger play aggresive to get a Eagle but that opens a chance to hit one in the water or should he play safe. As far as your Baseball game. Again no one is saying stop trying to score but should the Rangers attempt a suicide squeeze up 30-3 in the 9th ? No one is saying the Pats should stop scoring but they should have had their backups in or with their starters they should have just been running the ball and keep the clock moving. I would have no problem is they ran the ball every down and could not be stopped or if the backups were in getting real game time.

155

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:28

Why? What diff would it make? In a professional athletic competition, the final score is what matters. It matters not, who led at the end of 3 minutes, 7 minutes, 23 minutes or 49 minutes. Only who led at 60 minutes. It matters not, whether a TD came from the O or from the D. From the QB, the RB, the WR, the TE or the Tackle. Its still 6 points.

Now I agree, that with such a lead, there are solid arguments for pulling key players (as I have already stated I would). But it isnt for sportsmanship! Its to preclude their injury. Thats it. To preserve their health, for later in the season if not next week. It has NOTHING to do with sportsmanship, and thus leaving them in, cannot violate sportsmanship.

I asked earlier...who knows the specifics of the incentive clauses for these guys? How much bonus money does Brady get, if he sets the PaTD record for a year? If he accumulates XYZ yards through the air? Of the WRs for X number of receptions, X yards, X TDs? I'll be damned if I fault some guy for chasing a $300,000 bonus for all he's worth, and will fault the living hell out of him if he DOESNT.

156

Great One
ID: 201155199
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:33

Pretty sure they aren't on the verge of hitting bonuses in Week 8, no sarge? And if they did just cross it, don't think they'd be all that excited considering they have 9 more weeks in the season to accomplish these tasks, no?

So by your definition, its not bad sportstmanship if a team up by 10 runs in baseball starts stealing bases and doing suicide squeeze's etc in the 9th inning? Thats what you are saying.

157

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:41

Right. Their job, is to score,

158

Great One
ID: 201155199
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 18:42

Fair enough, I think presents an even more clear picture of your feelings on the subject.

159

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 19:06

10 Truths: Whole truth about Pats-Colts
Jason Whitlock

What follows in this week's NFL Truths is everything you need to know about the Patriots-Colts showdown.

10. Bill Belichick's search-and-destroy, score-at-will approach to this season has turned Sunday's Patriots-Colts game into a battle of good vs. evil, and that's too bad.
The Patriots and their prolific offense should be a feel-good story. Randy Moss is fun again and proving that he's the most powerful force to hit a football field since Jim Brown. Tom Brady, my favorite quarterback not named John Elway, is proving he's Peyton Manning's statistical equal.

Despite hailing from Indianapolis, I've always preferred the Patriots and Brady over the Colts and Manning. For years I resented the Colts because they were poorly run when my homeboy Jeff George quarterbacked the team. And I wasn't much of a Manning fan because — especially in comparison to Brady — Manning was soft in the pocket.

Well, that has all started to change over the past two years. Manning toughened in the pocket. And Indy coach Tony Dungy is so honorable, strong and friendly it's nearly impossible to root against the Colts.

Now this season Belichick has been embroiled in two controversies — spygate and pointgate. The NFL busted him filming defensive signals, and it appears Belichick has responded by trying to embarrass every NFL opponent, including an NFL legend, Joe Gibbs. Ahead 38-0 in the fourth quarter, the Patriots tacked on 14 more points against Gibbs' Redskins by converting fourth-down plays and leaving Brady out on the field to throw one more TD pass.

Tony Dungy would not do these things. And neither should Belichick.

Understand this: I don't think it's unethical for NFL teams to "run up" the score.

Belichick should reconsider his approach because it's unfair to the legacy of his players and the perception of his franchise. The Patriots are not the Oakland Raiders. The Patriots are not the bad guys.

The Patriots are Tedy Bruschi, the guy who overcame a stroke and resumed a terrific career. The Patriots are the squad that always put the team ahead of individuals. The Patriots are the organization that turned Corey Dillon (and maybe Randy Moss) into a champion and great teammate. The Patriots are the team that convinced Junior Seau to quit free-lancing and stay in his gap.

Belichick is not Tony Dungy, but we should feel as good about the Patriots as we do the Colts. We don't right now. On PTI this week, Mike Wilbon verbalized the sentiments of a lot of hardcore football people this week:

If Belichick wants to score points in the fourth quarter of routs, someone needs to put Brady, Moss and Wes Welker on blast.

Football is a horrifically violent sport. If you can't beat 'em, you might as well beat somebody. Belichick's approach is putting a target on the back (and head) of players who don't deserve it.

Robert Kraft and Roger Goodell need to intervene. Brady and Moss are important to the entire league. The reputation of the Patriots is important to the entire league. Brady, Moss and the Patriots should not be hated. They should be admired and loved. They're the best the league has to offer.

With the entire football world watching this Sunday, Belichick would be wise to express regret about New England's actions last week and in the first half of the season. He can do it in his postgame press conference. He doesn't have to acknowledge doing anything wrong. He can simply say he regrets doing anything that takes positive attention away from his players and anything that creates the impression he doesn't have great respect for his coaching peers, especially a man as accomplished as Joe Gibbs.

9. OK, having said all of that, let me explain the hypocrisy of all the crying about the Patriots' never-let-off-the-gas offense.

We don't whine when defenses refuse to back down.

You ever see a defensive coordinator throw his starters back out on the field in an effort to preserve a shutout? Happens all the time, and no one sheds a tear.

Yep, if a defense goes to great lengths to protect its statistical ranking or set some sort of record, no one cares. It's obvious Belichick and the Patriots want to go down in history as an all-time great offense. That would be quite an accomplishment for a head coach who made his bones as a defensive guru.

The Patriots are also taking a team run at history. This could be the greatest team of all time. Even if the Patriots slip and lose a game, they could still be regarded as superior to the '72 Dolphins and the '85 Bears.

8. Let me elaborate on my point about Randy Moss being the most powerful football force since Jim Brown.

In the last 50 years of football, there have been five players whose physical gifts have stood head and shoulders above their peers to the point that their mere presence changed the game. It's kind of like being the Wilt Chamberlain or Shaquille O'Neal of football.

OK, Jim Brown is at the top of the list. The cliche "man among boys" was invented to describe Jim Brown on an athletic field. Also on the list are Reggie White, Deion Sanders and John Elway. You can now add Randy Moss to the list. All he needs is a championship to cement his place in the game.

Brown couldn't be tackled, White couldn't be blocked, Sanders couldn't be escaped, Elway couldn't be stopped and Moss can't be covered.

Lawrence Taylor, Jerry Rice and Walter Payton are not on this list. They weren't as physically imposing as Brown, White, Sanders, Elway and Moss. Taylor, Rice and Payton dominated with their passion and will to succeed.

Brown, White, Sanders, Elway and Moss were/are just better than everyone else.

7. It is absolutely criminal that this game isn't on NBC's Sunday Night Football.

Seriously, this game deserves to be called by Al Michaels and John Madden, and the whole nation should have a chance to watch it in primetime. I'm going to miss the first quarter because I'll still be in the Chiefs' locker room conducting postgame interviews after the Green Bay-Kansas City game.

6. This is not a shot at Peyton Manning, but I'm still not sold on Manning in big games.

Listen, I used to have little respect for Manning because of his "happy feet" in the pocket. Nothing is more irritating for an offensive lineman than a QB who won't stand in the pocket and deliver the ball under duress.

But I promise you I am now a Manning supporter. He's matured as a pocket passer, and I greatly respect him as a leader. However, I still question his nerves in big games. For his career, he's thrown 18 TDs and 15 INTs in 13 playoff games. During Indy's Super Bowl run, Manning tossed three TDs and seven picks.

In playoff games against New England and Belichick, Manning has two TDs and six INTs.

Sunday's contest will feel like the playoffs. It will be very interesting to see how Manning handles the pressure. Hey, I'm rooting for him. The Patriots are the Mike Tyson bully. Let's see whether the Colts are Michael Spinks or Evander Holyfield.

5. Anything deep to Moss in the first quarter is going to provoke a mouth shot/personal foul from an Indy safety, preferably Bob Sanders.

Belichick has shown Indy how to stop a pass-happy, finesse offense. You have to get very physical with the receivers. Ty Law and New England's corners used to molest Marvin Harrison at the line of scrimmage.

Indy doesn't have the corners to employ New England's strategy. The Colts can sit back in Cover 2 and let Sanders chin check.

4. With just one Pro Bowl appearance between them, Tedy Bruschi and Mike Vrabel will both get serious Hall of Fame consideration if the Patriots win one more Super Bowl. And they deserve it.

Mike Vrabel and Tedy Bruschi deserve Hall fo Fame consideration for their part in the Patriots success. (Jim McIsaac / Getty Images)

Right now, Richard Seymour and departed Patriots Ty Law and Willie McGinest are the New England defenders most likely headed for Canton.

But you cannot write the history of the New England dynasty without including major chapters on Bruschi and Vrabel. They have been mainstays on the Patriots defense. Bruschi overcame a stroke. Vrabel has caught 10 TD passes from Brady. More than that, they've been great defenders in Belichick's 3-4 scheme.

Vrabel is likely to get his first Pro Bowl nod this year, thanks to his eight sacks and four forced fumbles. It's easy to put up big stats when your team is always playing with a two-touchdown lead.

Anyway, until this year, the Patriots had won titles with defense. How can a dynasty built on great defense only place two or three defenders in the Hall of Fame? Hell, most of the Steel Curtain is in the Hall. Half of Belichick's defenders need to go, too.

3. Yes, it's Patriots-Colts week, but I still have to campaign for Jeff George to re-enter the league.

Why are the Vikings sending Adrian Peterson out on the field without a quarterback to threaten the safeties? It's a joke. George's arm is just as live as Brett Favre's. Look, I'm not equating George to Favre. I'm saying that an old quarterback can still be effective in the right situation.

With Adrian Peterson, a solid defense and playing in the NFC, the Vikings could make a little noise with an experienced quarterback. Brad Childress can call Jeff George at 317-371-XXXX.

2. There was absolutely nothing brilliant or strategic about Georgia coach Mark Richt's celebration instructions to his team in the Georgia-Florida game. It was stupid, and the SEC should reprimand and fine him for it.

The game was an embarrassment for both coaches and programs. There were nine personal-foul penalties, and no one seems smart enough to figure out that Georgia's TD antics played a role in creating the environment that produced nine personal fouls.

The excessive celebration could've easily provoked an on-field fight. Had Urban Meyer's squad been as stupid as Richt's, Florida's bench could've cleared. Georgia gained no emotional advantage from the stunt.

160

Tree
ID: 151049115
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 19:29

Right. Their job, is to score,

actually, as MITH pointed out, their job is to listen to their coach.

and, as GO pointed out, we now have a better understanding on your (lack of) ethics and sportsmanship.

161

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 19:33

at the risk of being repetitive:

9. OK, having said all of that, let me explain the hypocrisy of all the crying about the Patriots' never-let-off-the-gas offense.

We don't whine when defenses refuse to back down.

You ever see a defensive coordinator throw his starters back out on the field in an effort to preserve a shutout? Happens all the time, and no one sheds a tear.

Yep, if a defense goes to great lengths to protect its statistical ranking or set some sort of record, no one cares. It's obvious Belichick and the Patriots want to go down in history as an all-time great offense. That would be quite an accomplishment for a head coach who made his bones as a defensive guru.

The Patriots are also taking a team run at history. This could be the greatest team of all time. Even if the Patriots slip and lose a game, they could still be regarded as superior to the '72 Dolphins and the '85 Bears.

If you never bitched about the Balt D, leading 17-0 with 1:36 to play, 3rd and 11 and they blitz....then you have no moral high ground upon which to stand here either.

It isnt a "lack" of anything Tree. Its an acute understanding of competition. You play to win. If you're not playing to win, then get your tired ass off the field. Cause you got no business being there.

162

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 19:57

Some of the greatest college coaches of all time made a living and reputiation by running up the score against inferior opponents. Guys like Bear Bryant, Bo Schembechler, Woody Hayes, John Mckay, Barry Switzer, Tom Osborne, Bobby Bowden, Daryl Royal and on and on....

Nothing like being a Michigan fan and going to the Big House to watch Michigan route Northwestern 72-7! Geesh get over it...Pro Football players are well paid tough guys who can handle the emotional damage dished out by a 52-7 ass kicking.

Only the weenie fans are having a problem handling it. I'm not a Belichick fan but I sure as hell would be if he were coaching my Detroit Lions. Belichick is the re-encarnation of Vince Lombardi.... "Winning isn't everything it's the only thing". "Show me a good loser, and i'll show you a loser".

163

Great One
ID: 201155199
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 20:00

Different in college where those scores are factored into rankings.

164

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 20:16

Should there be a cap put on point differential during the game? Say a team gets up by 35, should there be a rule where the losing team gets to select several players to be removed from the winning teams roster, and replaced with players of less ability?

Geeesh teams in pro football get beat by wide margins all the time. Look what Philly did to Detroit earlier this year 56-21. Like i said get over it weenie fans. By the way Kitna threw for 454yds in that game and never whimpered one bit. He took his lumps and has bounced back just fine with very little emotional damage;).

165

sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 20:18

Different in college where those scores are factored into rankings.

Sooooo, its "OK" to pile it on in the realm of academics but not in the realm of the real world where it friggin counts?!?!?!?!!?!?!? Bass-ackwards.

TY TF, for proving that SOMEBODY gddmnwell gets it.

166

sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 20:35

Is it "poor sportsmanship", when the coach down 41-0 with 6 seconds to play, 3rd and goal at the 1, kicks a FG to prevent the shut-out?

If so...why?

If not...why?

Was it "poor sportsmanship", when Shanahan called that timeout vs OAK, necessitating their kicker make TWO 55yd kicks, since the first one didnt count?

If so...why?

If not...why?

167

Great One
ID: 201155199
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 20:52

Didn't say it was right, just giving the rationale for why some college coaches keep their foot on the accelerator a bit longer. And even then they take out their starters - the big difference is that the backups at Michigan are STILL better players than Northwestern and they can run right over them. There isn't that disparity in the NFL.

168

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 21:14

Man, I sure miss the football boards and the old days. I still play Ultimate football and i'm still in the same fantasy league that i've been in for 20+ years.

Thanks for the conversation....we'll see ya around!

169

Boxman
ID: 571114225
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 21:15

There isn't that disparity in the NFL.

Did you see the Pats / Skins game this weekend?

By the way, Viva la Sarge!

170

sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 22:08

Didn't say it was right, just giving the rationale for why some...

Rationale = excuse?

171

Seattle Zen
ID: 529121611
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 23:29

The real question, Sarge, is why do you ask questions in the thread when you do not bother to listen to anyone, just the guy looking at you in the mirror. You have an unending capacity to suck the air out of any thread. Is that a skill you employ in sales?

172

Great One
ID: 201155199
Thu, Nov 01, 2007, 23:51

Yes, did see the Pats/Skins game... please provide a 2nd example of a 40+ point blowout in the NFL this season since we are already discussing this one.

Then lets total the number of 40+ point blowouts in college. Are you going to try and say the two totals are even remotely close? Even make a ratio since there are more college games per weekend... even the ratio wouldn't be close.

Lets pick one of them from this weekend too...
Clemson 70, Central Michigan 14
Clemson starters were pulled midway through the 3rd quarter at 56-14.

That being said, I wonder why Belicheck doesn't go for all the 2-point conversions when they are up by 40. I mean, he's leaving points on the board, right? Isn't it their job to score points?!

173

Perm Dude
ID: 57102716
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 00:08

Given that Coach B is part of the team's management, the idea that he is keeping the starters in the game in order to up the bonuses that the team pays out is laughable.

So: HAHAHAHAHA.

Seriously, that is just a very silly example of trying to cobble together something (anything) that would benefit the Pats and putting that out there as a good reason for them to run up the score.

174

Great One
ID: 201155199
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 00:14

Yeah kind of like the list of games that were "running up the score" when they didn't attempt a pass in the 4th quarter... lol...

PD - can't see you see Mr. Kraft discussing with Belichek, "make sure you keep them in and keep throwing so they can hit all their bonus clauses! I really want to issue millions in contract incentives!"

175

Perm Dude
ID: 57102716
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 01:01

Yeah, it is Coach's heart of gold that the rest of us just don't see.

:)

176

Boxman
ID: 571114225
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 06:10

Given that Coach B is part of the team's management, the idea that he is keeping the starters in the game in order to up the bonuses that the team pays out is laughable.

Does B own part of the team? Is it his money?

177

sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 09:05

I have listened Zen. Apparently though, I am not being heard...

Outside a rules definition, sportsmanship is a subjective term, not an objective one. It is the overriding opinion of this forum, that the action was unsportsmanlike. It is the overriding opinion of another forum, that it wasnt. OPINION, is the key word. For that is all it is.

I'm still waiting btw, for answers to 166.

178

WiddleAvi
ID: 25102616
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 09:46

Sarge in reply to 166.

I don't know how many teams would kick a FG I think most would go for it on 4th but regardless it may lift the morale of a team NOT to be shutout in game. But I don't think it makes much different to teams morale if they win in a blowout by an extra few points.

As for the timeout question you are kidding right ? Definitly not a sportsmanship issue. This was a kick to win the the game. He is trying to freeze the kicker. Now whether the NFL should change the rules about those last second timeouts is a whole other issue.

179

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 09:48

And in a tight game you do whatever you can to win the game.

Rubbing it in is a whole different thing. Thats being a sorewinner.

180

Perm Dude
ID: 110228
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:02

Does B own part of the team? Is it his money?

That's not the definition of any manager I know of. You are describing an owner or investor. The Coach is still part of management, regardless of whether it is Kraft's money or not.

As for the shutout question of sarge's, I think Widdle nails it. Teams don't want to be shut out, and getting some points on the board is a moral victory of sorts.

181

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:09

The derision re the bonuses, is indeed laughable. If the owners were so gddmn hesitant to pay them, why doesnt Minn sit A PetersoN?

Peterson in line to earn millions in bonuses

The simple fact is, its ALL about winning and getting a Championship. At the income levels of an NFL franchise owner, $2,000,000 or even $10,000,000 doesnt hold the financial impact of 10-Grand to the rest of us. Its about bragging rights, achievement and ROI. Champions fill the stadium seats and those ticket/merchandise/etc sales, are what pay those bonuses.

So re 166...the one issue isnt even about sportsmanship? Neither is this, though many have chosen to frame it as though it were.

Another question for those who who claim its unsportsmanlike...How many of you have NE players in one or more of your FFLs? How many of those, have contacted their league commish, and said that they dont WANT the 4th qtr points, because those guys shouldnt have been playing anyway? And if they were, they shouldnt have been passing. If you havent, then either you're a poor sportsman yourself, or you're a hypocrit. Take your pick.

Back to 166...if it isnt poor sportsmanship to kick a meaningless FG and lose 41-3 instead of 41-0, but ruining the Ds shut-out, then it cannot be poor sportsmanship to win 41-3 instead of 27-3. The two are the flip sides of the same coin.

Coach B isout to prove a point, and this weeks discussion re this game, occuring on multiple forums, is serving that end. Its his NE team against the world, and thats just what he wants.

Prediction for Sundays NE-Indy game:

NE: 38
Indy: 17

182

E'ville
ID: 159183011
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:18

I think the point should be considered about the difference between defense and offense. I'm taking this in the greater sense of sports and life in general.

The purpose of an offense is to attack and do damage and rightfully so. The function of a defense is to protect yourself from damage.

You never at any time lay down your defense and intentionally absorb damage but on the same token unless there is a necessary purpose why continue to inflict damage when there is no value in doing so. Most extreme blowouts in professional sports are partially because of defensive scores when the opposing offense is gambling.

Actually the diffence between defense and offense is the same as the difference between trying to win a war and genicide. You protect your own to the very end, but you don't try to hunt down and kill every last enemy to make a point.

Just a thought....

183

Perm Dude
ID: 110228
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:22

The simple fact is, its ALL about winning and getting a Championship

Yes. it is. And when the outcome is in doubt we all agree that teams can kick and claw for the W. What we disagree on is, when the game is no longer in doubt that the team should continue to pummel their opponent.

So you believe that Peterson's playing time is driven by the need for the Vikes to pay his bonuses? I think it has to do more with his value in getting them victories. And if the Vikes were up by 3 scores late, do you think Peterson would be out there because the Vikes want to get him a bonus? What a joke. Sorry, but that argument doesn't go anywhere. Management (top to bottom) is never going to go out of their way to get players a bonus. The players earn them on the field.

184

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:29

Contrary to your statement PD, the comparative is spot on. Minnesotas season is no longer in question. They are not making the playoffs. Aint gonna happen. So why risk injury to the only real Offensive weapon you have?

I didnt see the game in question, but did WASH start playing all their backup defenders when the game was "no longer in doubt"? If not, then NE has every right to keep their best on the field, against Washingtons best. And even if WASH DID play backups, there is nothing compelling any team, to play less than their best on the field of competition.

You want to whine, cry and snivel about what "bad sports" NE is? Go ahead. They dont mind. They'll take your name calling, all the way to the bank.

185

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Fri, Nov 02, 2007, 10:51

They really didn't have enough players healthy to do so at that point.
But Redskins players such as Daniels did have a problem, saying flat out that Belichick was running up the score.

Of course, the Redskins didn't have the ability to stop it. Their defense entered the game short-handed and left beheaded. Fred Smoot, the team's third cornerback, couldn't play because of a hamstring injury. Linebacker Marcus Washington was limited to passing plays because of a sore hamstring. On the Patriots' first touchdown drive, starting cornerback Carlos Rogers suffered an injury that could range from a sprained MCL (out for a few days) to a torn ACL (lost for the season). Linebacker Rocky McIntosh also was injured.

Consequently, the Redskins lost their opportunity to match up with the Pats' top four receivers. Gibbs had just three true corners left on the active roster -- Shawn Springs, Leigh Torrence and David Macklin. Brady completed 29 of 38 for 306 yards and three touchdowns.

To make matters worse, Gibbs and the coaches lost their communication system during the game. They couldn't work the headsets.

"There were issues," Gibbs said. "It's a problem across the league. I don't want to use that as an excuse for what happened to us today. We'll just continue to let the league know what happened to us today, and we'll just have to see how they deal with it."

Belichick was aware of the problem but, naturally, didn't care. He was communicating his own way -- sending a message to the 31 other teams that the Pats will take no prisoners.

186

wiggs
Sustainer
ID: 04991311
Sun, Nov 04, 2007, 16:34

wow, even the lions know enough to play their subs.

187

Great One
ID: 201155199
Sun, Nov 04, 2007, 16:56

JT O'Sullivan and TJ Duckett in the 4th?! yeah I'd say they know how to finish off a game when up 40 points lol...

188

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 08:50

At the end of the game when Brady was kneeling down killing the clock, I could'nt help but think how easy it would be to fake and throw a TD.

Give the Pats thier due. They came into the Colts house and whipped em fair and square.

189

Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 09:00

Yeah, what was the deal with the kneel down?! there were still points to be scored! :)

190

wiggs
ID: 6825712
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 10:29

They came into the Colts house and whipped em fair and square

You have to be kidding me. They Whipped them? Down by 10 with 9 minutes left. They won, and I give them credit for that, but i wouldnt say they whipped them.

191

Perm Dude
ID: 22105557
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 10:45

I agree. Great game by the Pats, but a "whipping" implies a clear and convincing performance for the entire course of the game.

192

C1-NRB
ID: 5932328
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 10:46

Did anybody hear Madden say last night when the Cowboys had two first-and-goals in a row (because of Eagle penalties) in the fourth quarter, "If this was the Patriots, people would accuse them of running up the score."

The Cowboys couldn't punch it in and settled for a field goal.

193

Texas Flood
ID: 353452713
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 10:55

OK, Colt fan boys quit pissing all over yourselves! I meant "Whipped" as metaphore. It was a tough game, but that comeback was somethin else eh!

Yeah and did you see McNabb and Westbrook late in the game doing nothing but padding stats. You would think with their injury history Reid would have enough sense to get them out of there.

That game had become quite chippy and some bad things could have happened.

194

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 11:02

On the first kneel why was Brady barking at the refs and players? Most guys will give a token push, but nothing major, I didn't see anyone going all out, but Brady looked like he was pissed.

195

Punk42AE
Donor
ID: 036635522
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 11:25

I wondered that too Frick. They didn't even talk about it at all.

196

wiggs
ID: 6825712
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 12:27

Texas Flood I am not a Colts fan. Just think they deserve credit for a great game.

197

¤ Mario LeMoose ¤
ID: 139153014
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 15:41

Re: #194

Tom Brady does a call-in segment on WEEI's Dennis and Callahan show; he mentioned this morning that Colts player(s) stimulated a snap count, which is a rules infraction, and the officials failed to call a penalty. The show is archived in the Patriots Monday Audio Vault.

Bill Belichick does a segment on The Big Show, which is also archived.

198

Tree
ID: 3533298
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 15:59

yea, the Ravens accused the Jets of that earlier this season.

i will say this - the Patriots may honestly be the sorest winners in the history of professional sports. never in my life have i seen a team win the big game, and then proceed to have one, big, gigantic bitchfest and complain about everything.

i'm guessing it might just be a case of all of their menstrual cycles synching up, or, they really could just be a bunch of babies.

199

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Mon, Nov 05, 2007, 17:32

At the end of the game when Brady was kneeling down killing the clock, I could'nt help but think how easy it would be to fake and throw a TD.

Should have thrown that TD for I would have won RSF's $50 challenge!

200

Farn
Leader
ID: 451044109
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:20

at the risk of topping this thread....

Did the Pats just go for it on 4th and 1 from the 5yd line up 35-7 early in the 3rd on a weak Bills team and pass for a TD?

201

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:24

I wouldn't get on the Pats for anything they do before the 4th quarter.

202

Farn
Leader
ID: 451044109
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:26

going for it on 4th and 1 at the 5 up 28 points? I'd say that's a bit out of place.

203

wiggs
Sustainer
ID: 04991311
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:28

i really cant wait for something big to happen, ie brady to get hit and get knocked out of the game for a while.

And I really cant wait til the patriots start to suck again. Maybe 5 years down the road these teams will be able to pile it on them

204

Poker pro
ID: 53938220
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:30

this ois total crap!Im going to lose a fantasy game that i shouldnt cause of these.,....Screw you new england

205

Poker pro
ID: 53938220
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:34

Is there a way to reach Bella dick?Hes a jerk

206

wiggs
ID: 51013815
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:42

went for it on 4th down again.

207

Poker pro
ID: 53938220
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:43

i WANT 5 MINUTES ALONE WITH THE PRICK bELLA BLOW

208

Perm Dude
ID: 251071711
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:43

It's all the Bills' fault, of course.

209

Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:44

Wiggs is just mad because Donte' Stallworth sealed the deal for me in our H2H match this week.

:)

210

Toral
ID: 575542418
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 22:59

I need to do some research and you guys can help me.

How would one do a search and find the names and addresses of Bill Belichick's family members?

Toral

211

Bond, James Bond
Donor
ID: 04352469
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 23:23

Try the Boston Zoo. Look for: Jackasses ;)

212

Perm Dude
ID: 251071711
Sun, Nov 18, 2007, 23:42

He killed and ate them. They were sucking up all his football time.

213

Tree
ID: 3533298
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 07:28

there was that one moment where Brady scrambled, went into the slide, and got grazed on the helmet by one of the Bills - he came up screaming, and i thought he was going to burst into tears.

do a few more runs like that Brady, and you'll be able to experience how a 6th round pick hangs out on the sidelines on crutches.

214

¤ Mario LeMoose ¤
ID: 4510281820
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 08:03

Bills aren't in a whine mood
Team doesn't complain about lopsided score

... "Sure, it gets to you," Bills free safety George Wilson said. "There was a situation like this against the Redskins a few weeks ago and some spoke up. I'm not going to do that. This is a 60-minute game and if they want to go for it on fourth down you've got to strap it up and stop it. This ain't no pity party. In this league there is no remorse."

"I don't feel bad about it," echoed Buffalo strong safety Donte Whitner. "This is football. Our job is to stop it if they want to go for it. There's nothing against them. They play hard, they play the whole game. I don't begrudge them. You have to stop it."

... "I haven't seen a lot of people slow them down," Bills coach Dick Jauron said. "We knew that if we weren't on our game, it could get out of hand. It got out of hand pretty early. I have no problem with them. Our job is to stop them. Their job is to play. That's football."

215

Slizz
ID: 231041822
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 08:13

re: 213

"HE CANT DO THAT!!!!!" "DONT YOU KNOW!?!?! HE CANT DO THAT"

216

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 08:49

I did notice that later in the game Brady slid much, much earlier. If he waits until the last second to slide, don't complain when the 300 lb lineman can't pull up at the last second. You're ahead by 40 points, do you really, really need that last yard?

People are claiming that this year's NE team is the best of all time. I don't see it. Sure they can run up the score and don't seem to care, but they don't have a decent running game.

I also loved Madden's argument that it was more humane to go for it on 4th down, and pass on 4th and short, and score a touchdown rather than kick the field goal. Although this only happened twice.

217

Punk42AE
Donor
ID: 036635522
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 11:10

What's wrong with them playing "Madden Style"? I always know when i'm that close on 4th down i'll go for the TD than a short FG. :')

218

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 11:20

One of the things that I wonder is what is going to be the reaction in Patsland in the future when Buffalo, Miami or the Jets return the favor?

I saw an interesting stat from Peter King's MMQB. From MMBQ "I did some quick math on the Patriots' first-team offense over the past nine possessions, going back to the fourth quarter of the Colts' game, and not including their final possession in Indy, when they were trying to run out the clock and not trying to score. "

Possessions: 9
Touchdowns: 9
Quarters played: 4
Tom Brady touchdown passes: 7
Tom Brady passing yards: 504
Yards per drive: 65.9
Time per drive: 3:21

They are averaging 4.7 yards per drive rushing. Yes they have an ustoppable offense, but shouldn't they be a bit afraid of playing a game in NE in January? As last night showed, their running game is missing Corey Dillon's punashing rushing style where they can grind out the clock.

219

barilko6
ID: 219342212
Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 11:53

One of the Bills' players was talking on the hometown station, WGR550, and he said that the fans are paying to watch players play 100%, not to let up, and that it was the Bill's defense's job to figure out how to stop the Pats.

220

¤ Mario LeMoose ¤
ID: 341093020
Sat, Dec 01, 2007, 21:36

Cooking with Bill Belichick

221

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Tue, Dec 04, 2007, 12:09

I'm not a Ravens fan or a Patriots hater, but that was the most disappointing end of a game all year. The Pats are like vampires, you keep killing them and killing them, but they don't die until you drive a wooden stake through their heart. Just as the Ravens strike the hammer upon the stake, their STUPID F'ING COACH CALLS TIME OUT! Fire that clown!

222

KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 15023167
Tue, Dec 04, 2007, 13:00

Maybe their next opponent should just wear garlic around their necks. ;) Hey, it might actually work better than anything another team has tried all year!

223

Mith
ID: 2894309
Mon, Nov 10, 2008, 15:01

A quick note - compare the 4th quarter of last season's wk 8 Pats/Skins game (see post 94) to yesterday's Jets/Rams contest at the meadowlands.

Just like the Pats, The Jets got the ball with just over 2 minutes left in the 3rd quarter with a huge lead (40-3). They orchestrated an 8 play drive with 6 running plays that ended in a touchdown, eating up 5:30. The Rams then went 3 and out and the Jets got the ball back on their own 22 with 11:09 left in the game. The Jets brought in backup QB Kellen Clemens and ran 12 straight running plays, getting them 4 first downs and 70 yards and eating 9 minutes off the clock. So they came out of the 2 minute warning with first and goal on the Rams 8 yard line. With a cinch field goal and the opportunity for their second 50 point game of the season (not to mention Clemens' first touchdown opportunity of the season) staring them in the face, he took a knee on three straight plays and let the clock run out.

With a division showdown looming this Thursday against the hated Patriots, Coach Mangini made exactly the opposite statement that Belichick chose to go with 54 weeks earlier in almost exactly the same situation: a display of sportsmanship.

224

Slizz
ID: 33951713
Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 09:21

building on that..wtf was Mangini thinking running Thomas Jones late into the 4th quarter?!?!

I can see why you'd want to keep Favre in to get him additional game reps with the offense, but to have your starting backfield in at that point in the game is head-scratching.

225

Jaydog
ID: 516212910
Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 09:28

Might show that he values Leon Washington more than Thomas Jones. Would rather risk an injury to Jones than Washington.

226

Mith
ID: 2894309
Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 10:08

My friends and I were asking each other the same thing. Washington probably is as important to the team as Jones. And Marcus Jones, the 3rd string runner, was just signed to the Jets active roster on 10/29 following Jesse Chatman being placed on the IR list.

227

Mith
ID: 2894309
Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 10:08

Er... Marcus Mason.

Forum: footPage 5004Subject: Pats run up the score

Forum: foot
Page 5004
Subject: Pats run up the score