Are the Packers unsportsmanlike for running up the score? (1 Viewer)

[Sinn Fein]

Well, are they? Back in the day, the Patriots were vilified for doing pretty much the same thing the Packers are doing - running up the score, passing too much when they are winning, etc.

I have not seen much criticism of the Packers, and certainly not the level of disdain as the Patriots.

Why is that?

 

[Ghost Rider]

There is no such thing as running up the score in the NFL.

This isn't college ball where Oklahoma can pummel a Division II team repeatedly for four quarters; this is the NFL. Don't want someone to score? Play some defense.

 

[Godsbrother]

There is no such thing as running up the score in the NFL. This isn't college ball where Oklahoma can pummel a Division II team repeatedly for four quarters; this is the NFL. Don't want someone to score? Play some defense.

Agreed but the Packers were taking a big risk when they kept Rogers in the game they had clearly won inthe first half.

 

[jim k]

Running up the score imo = more than 23 point lead, less than 8 minutes and you are still in hurry up or throwing slow developing deep throws.

This Jennings injury will quell Packers from this going forward.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Absolutely nothing to see here.In the entire second half the Packers only scored on field goals and a fumble return.Plus, all year long they've been accused of "easing up" late in games and making them closer than they need to be, instead of finishing strong.

 

[SlevinKelevra]

Why is that?

Because they're not running up the score

 

[Bigdee]

As a Broncos fan, I have no objection to anyone scoring as much as possible on the Raiders. No such thing as running it up on the Raiders!

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Don't know how the OP's question can be construed as anything but fishing. As stated earlier, if you don't like getting run up on, then play some D. That and the fact that the Packers have to be true to themselves. They are what they are. Their whole offense works through Aaron Rodgers and his ability to shred defenses with his arm. Running the ball, the Packers are by and large a pedestrian offense. And I think even they doubt they can sustain long drives with just the running game. If throwing the ball with the lead moves the chains and demoralizes their opponent, while killing the clock, I don't see how that can be considered "running up the score".

 

[dmb359]

Don't know how the OP's question can be construed as anything but fishing. As stated earlier, if you don't like getting run up on, then play some D. That and the fact that the Packers have to be true to themselves. They are what they are. Their whole offense works through Aaron Rodgers and his ability to shred defenses with his arm. Running the ball, the Packers are by and large a pedestrian offense. And I think even they doubt they can sustain long drives with just the running game. If throwing the ball with the lead moves the chains and demoralizes their opponent, while killing the clock, I don't see how that can be considered "running up the score".

agreed. I don't care what you call it, they should put up as many points as they can with that high powered offense. If you don't like it, then stop them.

 

[Big_Russel]

People hate the Patriots... People dont hate the Packers.... (Yet).

 

[dmb359]

I hate the Packers and like the Patriots

 

[cr8f]

What they should do going forward is run up the score in the first half and try and rest Rodgers. They are starting to get a killer instinct. 2 years ago they let the bad Tampa Bay Bucs hang around, get confident and then lose in the 4th quarter.

More running up the score for the first 2 quarters.

 

[matttyl]

They put in a backup QB in the 3rd quarter who had all of 2 pass attempts the rest of the way. They likely would have taken Rodgers out earlier, but Oakland did score a TD on their first possession of the 2nd half, cutting the lead to 28 with over a quarter and a half to go.

This is not at all like what the Patriots were doing a few years back, where in one game they didn't take Brady out till they were up 56-10 with 10 minutes to go in the 4th.

 

[Dark Matter]

The fishing that goes on in the Shark Pool these days. Did you even watch the game, OP? This post and the conspiracy theory that the NFL has a vested interest in the seeing the Packers go undefeated is so wrong. I have a new idea, let's give the Champs their due and admit The 2011 version of the Green Bay Packers is just damned good and should be given credit as such.

 

[az_prof]

I don't think they were and I am a Vikings fan. On the last INT, the Green Bay DB could have run it back for a pick 6. Instead, he took a knee. That was classy.

 

[Ditka is God]

Don't know how the OP's question can be construed as anything but fishing. As stated earlier, if you don't like getting run up on, then play some D. That and the fact that the Packers have to be true to themselves. They are what they are. Their whole offense works through Aaron Rodgers and his ability to shred defenses with his arm. Running the ball, the Packers are by and large a pedestrian offense. And I think even they doubt they can sustain long drives with just the running game. If throwing the ball with the lead moves the chains and demoralizes their opponent, while killing the clock, I don't see how that can be considered "running up the score".

agreed. I don't care what you call it, they should put up as many points as they can with that high powered offense. If you don't like it, then stop them.

As an opposing player/coach I would find it more disrespectful if I knew my opponent were letting up.

 

[jacobo_moses]

IF your going to say this about the Packers you have to say the same thing about the Saints when they pummeled the Colts this year. I don't think its running up the score unless you keep all your starters in the whole game. And you go for it on 4th and 2 or 4th and 3 when your up by 25 plus points. Thats really just the Patriots and Belechik.

 

[Phenix]

stupidest thread ever, our society is weak minded. No such thing as running up the score, if your that much better than them so what, you play 60 minutes. you dont play to satisfy fans or the media.

 

[sho nuff]

Rodgers was out in the 3rd quarter...how is that running up the score?

 

[Flying Elvis]

People hate the Patriots... People dont hate the Packers.... (Yet).

Exactly what I was thinking, right down to the yet. Get out of my head!Don't like a team scoring buckets of points on you? Stop them. Running up the score is a phrase that should only be used when children are involved.

 

[Sabertooth]

I thought they were foolish to leave Rodgers in there. Especially after the Jennings injury.

 

[Black&Gold]

No way did they run up the score. I have no problem with the play calling. What I did see however....for the first time watching the Packers, was a little overconfidence in Rodgers. He's starting to get that look like Brady had vs. the Giants in the Super Bowl. They're going to come down hard very soon. If you're a Packer fan, I'd hope it would be before the playoffs.

 

[12punch]

Kind of hard to avoid running up the score on the raiders ---- even if you didn't take the field they'd probablly commit penalties 'til they backed up into their endzone.

 

[FavreCo]

Running up the score imo = more than 23 point lead, less than 8 minutes and you are still in hurry up or throwing slow developing deep throws. This Jennings injury will quell Packers from this going forward.

What if you are going against The Tebow? Is any lead safe?

 

[BroadwayG]

Unless the other team is taking a knee on offense, there is no running up the score.

 

[DocHolliday]

Running up the score imo = more than 23 point lead, less than 8 minutes and you are still in hurry up or throwing slow developing deep throws. This Jennings injury will quell Packers from this going forward.

What if you are going against The Tebow? Is any lead safe?

Tebow proves every week that no lead can stop him from leading the mighty Broncos to victory. Tebow will lead a 4th quarter comeback in the SB and beat the Packers.

 

[Alberta Clipper]

No is all that needs to be said.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I'm sorry, but some of the above responses are absurd. Yes, there is such a thing as running up the score. The object is not to score as many points as possible-- it's to win the game. Once the game is won, you gain nothing (except maybe contract incentives) by running up the score. The offense's job is not to score as much as possible-- it's to help the team win. If that means running out the clock, that's what they do.

It's not insulting to the other team to let up. That's why teams take a knee at the end of a game. It's common practice.

Some people seem to forget that winning by 24 and winning by 44 still only gets you one win. The irony is that proponents of running up the score consider not doing so a sign of a soft society, nd "manning up" means winning by as many points as possible. It's a fantasy football mentality, which is ill-equipped for the real world.

Here's something many fans don't understand: All those millionaires on the field are friends. They work for the same employer-- the NFL. They have no loyalty to you or your silly logos. That's why, win or lose, they smile and shake hands and tweet each other about going out later. The fans can whine on talk radio and cry while they wait in bumper-to-bumper traffic on the way home. But once they win, they just don't want to get hurt so they can keep the money rolling in.

So really there's no benefit to running up the score. A win is a win is a win. All you're doing is humiliating a co-worker for no reason. The idea that a win is good...but really rubbing your opponent in the dirt is somehow better is a Jerry Springer mentality that doesn't benefit anyone, especially the people who play the game.

With regard to the Packers, I don't think they were running up the score.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

I don't mind them scoring as much as possible - especially if it helps them develop as a championship team. I did find it intriguing when they were up 31-0 with 1st and goal at the 8 and they are still passing. Maybe that is just their offense. Would you tell a running team to start passing when they were ahead in the game?

Like others have said - if you don't like it, then stop them. That said, no complaints should come from GB when the starters are left n and the game is clearly out of hand and a disgruntled opponent takes out their star qb or wr. Not saying it is justified, and not saying it is even likely in this enlightened era of the NFL. Back in the 70s guys would be crippled if they tried to run it up.

 

[Reepicheep]

I feel the same way now as I did about this in 2007. You don't want the score run up, then stop the other team. I also happen to think the late 3rd quarter is the earliest any team should start pulling starters, I think it would be more insulting to the other team to bench your star players coming out of the half.

 

[gruecd]

What I did see however....for the first time watching the Packers, was a little overconfidence in Rodgers. He's starting to get that look like Brady had vs. the Giants in the Super Bowl. They're going to come down hard very soon. If you're a Packer fan, I'd hope it would be before the playoffs.

I definitely see a lot of confidence....a swagger, even....but I wouldn't say it's overconfidence.

 

[Sabertooth]

Unless the other team is taking a knee on offense, there is no running up the score.

Well said.

 

[Papa Georgio]

This really seems like fishing to me. The only thing I saw in the game questionable was the Raiders keeping their starters in the whole game risking injury to a team that still has play-off hopes. GB subbed and took it easy on the play calling. I don't really see the point on this one.

 

[ConfusedRealist]

People hate the Patriots... People dont hate the Packers.... (Yet).

I dislike both teams, bottom line is the Packers aren't running it up so people aren't complaining about it.

 

[ShaHBucks]

You spend 6 days preparing for 1 game. As a player your just executing and having fun, not feeling sorry for grown men.

 

[donaldhaas]

Rodgers was taken out in the 3rd quarter as were many other starters as the fourth quarter progressed

By comparison, Palmer and most of the Raiders played the whole game....

The Packers mostly ran the ball and punted the fourth quarter

I'm not sure how this compares to Tom Brady throwing a fourth down touchdown pass up 24 against the Chiefs with :57 left a week or two ago.....

If this thread is simply trolling, well done

Most people I've talked to have complained that the Packers yanked their players way too early.... (mostly fantasy anger)...

 

[donaldhaas]

This really seems like fishing to me. The only thing I saw in the game questionable was the Raiders keeping their starters in the whole game risking injury to a team that still has play-off hopes. GB subbed and took it easy on the play calling. I don't really see the point on this one.

yes, this... If anything I would be mad at Palmer for running up the INTs even to the last play of the game....That was unneccessary....

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'm not sure how this compares to Tom Brady throwing a fourth down touchdown pass up 24 against the Chiefs with :57 left a week or two ago.....

This thread is a ridiculous fishing trip, likely by some Pats fan who's looking to make a point but forgot to actually check his facts first.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I think this whole discussion is so off-base in that no one on the teams is even bothering with it as a subject. You need to realize that this is all a manufactured fan discussion meant to start up a topic of conversation out of thin air that really isn’t worth mentioning. Just to stir up a pot that doesn’t need stirring.

The fact is that players on each team have no great reward for “running it up”, other than trying for some sort of personal performance incentive. At the end of the day, the “W” is just one “W” whether it’s by 40 points or 4 points. They don’t give you style points for beating up a team. The players are all trying to win their game, but also know that it’s a business and a living. The goal of the players is to win and failing that, escape without injury to play another day and make money.

The players at the end of the game are friends in the same fraternity and they don’t feel the same deep seeded hatred that fans of teams have for fans of rival teams. The players don’t have allegiance for a jersey or color any more than their contracts require. They all know that the shoe could easily be on the other foot, as early as the next season. I’m sure that they don’t get any sick satisfaction in rubbing it in on the other team. Once the game is decided, they just want to hurry up and milk the clock and get out of it with their health intact.

I don’t see how anyone can cry foul over brilliant execution and timing of talented, well-coached playmakers over battered, injured, poorly coached players as “rubbing it in”. This is the NFL, not high school. And they go out and perform what they do in practice, and they don’t ever hold back in execution. Nor should they. The fact that they took out Rodgers in the 3rd quarter tells you everything you need to know. The better team won.

 

[nxmehta]

I hate this question so much. If you don't want the other team to score:

1. Stop them.

2. Take a knee.

Other than that, ####! These a professional football players!

People who complain about running up the score (for either the Packers or Patroits or any other good team) are just

 

[jasvic]

I'm sorry, but some of the above responses are absurd. Yes, there is such a thing as running up the score. The object is not to score as many points as possible-- it's to win the game. Once the game is won, you gain nothing (except maybe contract incentives) by running up the score. The offense's job is not to score as much as possible-- it's to help the team win. If that means running out the clock, that's what they do.

So if a team is up 21 points with 8 minutes left in the 4th quarter they should ease up cause the game is won, right? The 2010 Giants would disagree. Games are not won until after the 4th quarter. In the NFL, no lead is safe.

 

[Naramie]

I don't see a problem with it. As displayed by the Dallas Cowboys any lead can be squandered. It's a professional sports team we're not baking cookies here. At the same time when the score is so big, winning team risks injury to star players for essentially what is a free win.

 

[The Gatekeeper]

I hate the Packers but I have to say they are the opposite of a team that runs up the score. They lost me so many wagers this year by letting the other team "backdoor cover" after having a big lead it is sick. The Carolina game, Chargers game, and the first Vikings game are all examples of them having big leads and letting the other team comeback at the end of the game and get close.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Nope.

Never thought it in 2007 with NE and don't think it with GB now. Their opponents are professionals getting paid to do a job. If they cannot do it adequately, they deserved to get embarrassed.

Let's leave the "everyone gets a medal" thinking where it belongs...in pre-teen sports.

 

[Donnybrook]

I'm sorry, but some of the above responses are absurd. Yes, there is such a thing as running up the score. The object is not to score as many points as possible-- it's to win the game. Once the game is won, you gain nothing (except maybe contract incentives) by running up the score. The offense's job is not to score as much as possible-- it's to help the team win. If that means running out the clock, that's what they do. It's not insulting to the other team to let up. That's why teams take a knee at the end of a game. It's common practice. Some people seem to forget that winning by 24 and winning by 44 still only gets you one win. The irony is that proponents of running up the score consider not doing so a sign of a soft society, nd "manning up" means winning by as many points as possible. It's a fantasy football mentality, which is ill-equipped for the real world. Here's something many fans don't understand: All those millionaires on the field are friends. They work for the same employer-- the NFL. They have no loyalty to you or your silly logos. That's why, win or lose, they smile and shake hands and tweet each other about going out later. The fans can whine on talk radio and cry while they wait in bumper-to-bumper traffic on the way home. But once they win, they just don't want to get hurt so they can keep the money rolling in. So really there's no benefit to running up the score. A win is a win is a win. All you're doing is humiliating a co-worker for no reason. The idea that a win is good...but really rubbing your opponent in the dirt is somehow better is a Jerry Springer mentality that doesn't benefit anyone, especially the people who play the game.With regard to the Packers, I don't think they were running up the score.

I am gald someone else feels the same way about it.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

They put in a backup QB in the 3rd quarter who had all of 2 pass attempts the rest of the way. They likely would have taken Rodgers out earlier, but Oakland did score a TD on their first possession of the 2nd half, cutting the lead to 28 with over a quarter and a half to go.This is not at all like what the Patriots were doing a few years back, where in one game they didn't take Brady out till they were up 56-10 with 10 minutes to go in the 4th.

Totally agree.

 

[Kilgore]

Why is that?

Because they're not running up the score

Kicking a FG up 43-7 is kind of a d*ck move.

 

[faulkfan]

There is no such thing as running up the score in the NFL. This isn't college ball where Oklahoma can pummel a Division II team repeatedly for four quarters; this is the NFL. Don't want someone to score? Play some defense.

Agreed but the Packers were taking a big risk when they kept Rogers in the game they had clearly won inthe first half.

There is no risk in keeping Rodgers in all day because no one ever gets to him anyway. Getting a high score hung on you is your own fault. If you don't like it then pretend like you are a real defense and stop the other team.

 

[faulkfan]

Why is that?

Because they're not running up the score

Kicking a FG up 43-7 is kind of a d*ck move.

NO, challenging a spot for a first down at your own 30 when you are up 43-7 late in the 4th is a #### move. Kicking a FG is an act of mercy.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Interesting how much defensiveness there is in this thread, maybe if opposing teams were as defensive, the Packers would not be scoring as much.

I simply asked the question and did not suggest the Packers were unsportsmanlike. It is interesting to me that when the Patriots ran a pass-first offense, they were often criticized for playing too aggressively. The Packers, also play a pass-first offense, and for them moving the chains, and running the clock, often involves the passing game more than the running game.

I was mostly curious why people were quick to vilify the Patriots, but defend the Pack for very similar outcomes.

I am neither a fan nor a foe of either team.