Mario Kart
Footballguy
Overall, I think Ron Rivera got a little payback from the Superbowl game a couple years ago. Good for him.
The "odd" part I am referring to in the title was the snap count during the first half of the game. The Colts were doing their normal thing, Manning reading the defense when they set up (although the defense changed the look which Manning did not like), and snapping the ball in the 1-3 seconds left on the play clock. The San Diego defense disguised their look and did many things in the first half that won them the battle.
Early second quarter or late in the first quarter, John Madden made a few comments about how the San Diego defense was switching things up. But, he specifically mentioned at the 10 second mark in the play clock is when they began to shift around and finally set their defense near the end of the play clock. He went on for a few minutes about it and NBC even showed how San Diego was doing this.
During the first half, the Colts did not make any changes to how or when they were snapping the ball. They played their game.
Now, in the second half, what happened? The Colts switched things up and starting hiking the ball earlier than the 1-3 second mark. By an "odd" coincidence, they hiked the ball near the 10 second mark on a few series' which ended up working out for them. And, NBC even demonstrated and emphasized the change the Colts' offense did.
Now, maybe Manning and the offense are clever enough to see the timing the Chargers were using (10 second) and making adjustments. However, I find it "odd" or "coincidental" or even "suspicious" that the Colts just so happened to change things up just enough as what the NBC commentators talked about, showed, and emphasized during the telecast. I am not going to say NBC, Madden, viewers or the combination "helped" the Colts in any way, but I find it rather odd that the change happened in just the same manner that was outlined by Madden and crew.
Yeah, yeah. Put the on and all but, what if?
The "odd" part I am referring to in the title was the snap count during the first half of the game. The Colts were doing their normal thing, Manning reading the defense when they set up (although the defense changed the look which Manning did not like), and snapping the ball in the 1-3 seconds left on the play clock. The San Diego defense disguised their look and did many things in the first half that won them the battle.
Early second quarter or late in the first quarter, John Madden made a few comments about how the San Diego defense was switching things up. But, he specifically mentioned at the 10 second mark in the play clock is when they began to shift around and finally set their defense near the end of the play clock. He went on for a few minutes about it and NBC even showed how San Diego was doing this.
During the first half, the Colts did not make any changes to how or when they were snapping the ball. They played their game.
Now, in the second half, what happened? The Colts switched things up and starting hiking the ball earlier than the 1-3 second mark. By an "odd" coincidence, they hiked the ball near the 10 second mark on a few series' which ended up working out for them. And, NBC even demonstrated and emphasized the change the Colts' offense did.
Now, maybe Manning and the offense are clever enough to see the timing the Chargers were using (10 second) and making adjustments. However, I find it "odd" or "coincidental" or even "suspicious" that the Colts just so happened to change things up just enough as what the NBC commentators talked about, showed, and emphasized during the telecast. I am not going to say NBC, Madden, viewers or the combination "helped" the Colts in any way, but I find it rather odd that the change happened in just the same manner that was outlined by Madden and crew.
Yeah, yeah. Put the on and all but, what if?
Last edited by a moderator: