Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
No, no CrossEyed. Thank you! That you only need that much information to form your opinions tells me how much reliance I should place on them.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Bill B. to be exposed (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter grind
- Start date
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
It's called jealousy, that's where the venom stems from. I'll be honost, I wish the Cowboys were that good right now. I am jealous that my team isn't as good.I do disagree with you on a couple issue though.People do care about how the score is being run up. If it was 3rd and 8 and somehow a running back just ran up the middle and bulldozed over 4 guys and ran for a 55 yard TD, the opposing team/fans would basically have to say, they deserve to get scored on. The team is TRYING to get tackled and they can't even do that.That kind of mentality is different than going for it on 4th down and passing the ball. Then when scoring the TD to go up 52-0, you spike the ball down as if you just caught the game clincher.There is a difference there and people need to objectively look at it.I don't like posting in threads that call Belichick a coward, because that's ridiculous. I just happened to read your response David and by coinsidence I was driving to work the other day and the question, " Why are people so upset?" with them, really coming from. In the end, everyone just wishes their team was that good. When Dallas was dominating, EVERYONE hated Dallas if they didn't love them. They had "whatever" reasons for hating them. So, I'm trying hard not to fall into not liking the Patriots because of their greatness but trying to stick to the fact that I don't like what they're doing at the end of games and trying to stay away from any name calling etc...
daveandken
Footballguy
I'm far from a Patriots fan and I have NO envy of them. I'd rather have my team win one superbowl with no controversy, allegations or *s, than win 10 superbowls surrounded by allegations of cheating.I personally don't think the Patriots have done anything major wrong, but it still wouldn't be much fun for me to be a Patriots fan right now. Not the fans fault, but its not something to envy at all at this point.
Sweeper
Footballguy
Dude, you have some authority. Is there any way we can merge the 18 "Pats run up the score" threads with the 12 "BB is a coward/###/loser that has no respect for the game" threads so we can have one discussion, one argument and only have to post a single time?
daveandken
Footballguy
You have to admit, the Ron Jeremy reference and the 'hot younger women' quote did ruin your credibility if this is a serious argument. It doesn't take much more information than that to form an opinion in this case.
Itchy Amos
Footballguy
I have two sons and would love for them to grow up to be as successful as either one of them. With that being said I would want my kids to grow up to be more like Gibbs. This is not because of how much class he exhibits as a football coach. It is because BB is obsessed only with winning. Although, I have never met him, my impression of him is that he is not much of a family man. He doesnt seem to be too happy and he is probably a jerk. The same things probably can not be said about Gibbs.Saying class is class is a gross over-generalization. That is like saying a crime is a crime. There are as many varying degrees of class as there are varying degrees of crimes. Is it classy to run up the score in a professional football game?...no it isn't. Is it a horrible transgretion against human kind?...no it isn't. Is Bill a classy guy? Well, he certainly isnt the classiest person walking the earth, but there is a big difference between showing little class and winning dirty. As a Patriots fan, I want them to win by playing a clean, hard nosed game. I have no problem supporting them for blowing out their competition. In fact, as a fan I love watching it. I want the football coach of the team that I root for to be obsessed with winning and do what he can - within the stated rules - to help his cause. In this case, I think that destroying other teams helps the Patriots win. If teams believe that they need to play their best game to win or take risky chances because they are afraid that they cant hang with the Patriot offense or that they will look bad, then I say that BB has done his team a favor. I see lots of talk in this and other threads about how teams should try to intentionally injure Brady/Moss or whomever. That goes beyond "classy" and straight to dirty and cheap. If the Pats went out of their way to injure the opposing teams best players, I would have a big problem with them. Was I proud to be a fan of New England when Spygate came out? Absolutely not, but I am not going to abandon my team. Do you have children involved in athletics? If you do, then I am sure you know that running up the score in a pee wee football game if far worse than doing it in the NFL. Like I said before, I dont have a problem with them hurting the feelings of the other players/coaches. I find that aspect of it very funny. I dont think they are setting a good example for kids, if they are in fact running up the score.Nobody questions his success. Does that give someone a pass on how they conduct themselves? I don't know if you have a son or not, but let me ask you a question. Would you rather he grew up to be Bill Belichick or Joe Gibbs?Probably the glare from the Super Bowl rings.Class is class, whether you coach 8 year olds or in the NFL. And Belichick has none. I'm not sure why people can't see that.I realize that you are trying to make a point by highlighting an extreme example, but the comparison shows the problem that I have with this whole argument. There is a big difference between 8 year olds playing pee wee football and professional athletes playing in the NFL. I would say that the primary focus of Pee-wee football and youth sports, in general, is about having fun and learning the values of teamwork. The primary focus for the players in the NFL is most definately not having fun. Professional football is about winning. period. These are grown men who are elite talents at what they do. If NFL teams have varying degrees of player talent, that is the GM's fault. If a youth football team has an advantage due to age, number of kids, it certainly isnt the coaches fault.There is very little gained by a bunch of 10 year olds beating up on a bunch of 8 year olds. The beating is expected. Whether you acknowledge it or not, the NFL is an even playing field. The teams draft or sign the players that they want. They all have the same salary cap, so if they are not competative, they have nobody to blame but themselves.If you want to argue that the Patriots running up the score serves as a bad example to our youth, go ahead. I cant argue with that. If you want me to think that it is not right because you believe that the Patriots have an obligation to the other professional football team to hold the score down simply because they will be embarrassed and mad about it, I guess I am not buying it.It's only different becuase you say it is. NFL teams have varying degrees of player talent coaching talent and player age/experience as well. If you disliked a more talented team beating up on your less talented team, then I guess you can do many things including stopping them and complaining on an internet message board.As I said, this was much different than the NFL . . .We had small, inexperienced kids and mostly first year plyaers. They had mostly much bigger, experienced kids in their third year playing football. It's not like you can simply tell kids to block someone that outweighs them by 40-50 pounds and magically get results.If you have a problem with it - stop them.
Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
You're quick! Bill Belichick's coaching decisions have as much impact on how I would raise my son as whether or not he would bring hot young women around for me to ogle. It couldn't be a less serious argument. It's a ridiculous question. On a ridiculous topic. But it's so much fun and so relevant, let's throw another one out there. If you asked CrossEyed in 2002 whether he would prefer his son grow up to be Rasheed Wallace or Kobe Bryant, what do you think his response would have been? I mean, just look at how much more sportsmanship Kobe Bryant displays on the floor during NBA games. I hope my son grows up to visit Colorado resorts JUST LIKE HIM. Joe Gibbs could sell meth to school children in his spare time for all I know.If you're taking a team's decision whether or not to go for it on a fourth down THAT seriously, you might rank below Belichick on the list of people I want my son to grow up to be.
Last edited by a moderator:
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
BUMP:
Genius article here on the Patriots "Running up the score"
Skeletons in the closet
Cold, Hard Football Facts for October 31, 2007
By Kerry J. Byrne
Cold, Hard Football Facts whine cooler
It's Halloween. What better time to uncover some skeletons in the closet?
We all have them. You have them. We have them (though ours are a little, ahem, "big boned"). Players and "pundits" have them, too.
We were reminded of all these skeletons when we saw so many players, fans and "pundits" dressed up as whiny little #####es this week.
In case you hadn’t heard, New England is "running up the score" on its opponents. It’s been among the hot topics on every sports talk show since Sunday, when the Patriots laid a 52-7 whipping on the Redskins who – last we checked – were a team of highly paid professionals, with a winning record, and who very well may end up in the playoffs this year.
In other words, the Redskins aren't exactly the JV squad from Boris Karloff School of Acting.
But apparently the Redskins – and certain segments of pigskin “punditry” – feel that the Patriots should have shown a little more "respect" by, like, just falling on their faces each play of the second half. As if that would have been more respectful.
The situation that got everyone's panties in a bunch was this: New England was leading 38-0 with 11 minutes to play in the fourth quarter, and facing a 4th and 1 within easy field goal range at the Washington 7. But New England eschewed the easy field goal attempt -- in other words, they essentially took points off the board -- and responded with the most conservative play in sports: a QB dive up the middle.
New England got the first down, and proceeded to score another touchdown, on a short pass to Wes Welker. New England also converted a fourth down later in the game, on a pass from second-string QB Matt Cassel, a guy who's thrown about three passes in anger since high school, to Jabar Gaffney, a sixth-year journeyman receiver who has fewer TD catches in his career (9) than outside linebacker Mike Vrabel (10).
So are the Patriots running up the score? We don't know.
And neither do you.
We do know this: the Patriots are among the most balanced teams in football, passing the ball on 51 percent of their offensive plays. They're also a classic example of a team that builds a lead with the pass and then secures the lead with the run.
* The Patriots have passed the ball on 160 of 285 first-half plays (56 percent)
* The Patriots have passed the ball on 107 of 229 second-half plays (47 percent)
But since the Cold, Hard Football Facts are not always enough to silence the screams of "running up the score," we thought it was worth diving into the ghoulish past of the most vocal critics.
STEVE YOUNG'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: Young said on ESPN Monday that New England’s big victories are tarnishing its image. Apparently, he pines for the days when the Patriots were a “lucky” team manned by a bunch of “overachievers” who squeaked out close wins. He also implied some sort of psychoses on behalf of Bill Belichick this year.
New England’s big margins of victory are the result of Belichick’s “insecurity from spygate,” said Young from behind the desk on ESPN.
The skeletons in the closet: Maybe Belichick is feeling the same kind of insecurity Young felt after playing second fiddle to Joe Montana in the hearts and minds of San Francisco football fans – the same kind of insecurity that caused Young to throw a record six TD passes in Super Bowl XXIX, the last in the fourth quarter with his team sporting a comfortable 42-18 lead against the overmatched 11-5 Chargers.
Young in the ESPN segment also lamented getting his ### handed to him by the Bears back when he was with Tampa Bay.
Indeed, the Bears did beat the Bucs 48-14 back in 1986, Young’s second and last year in Tampa. But he conveniently failed to mention San Francisco’s 52-14 deconstruction of the Bears when he was with the 49ers in 1991.
Finally, Young also kind of forgot to mention how the 49ers treated the woeful Falcons during his tenure in San Francisco: which is pretty much the same way you treat the water in your toilet bowl.
Here are just some of the scores of the San Francisco-Atlanta series during Young’s tenure leading the post-Montana 49ers:
* 1992 – San Fran 56, Atlanta 17
* 1992 – San Fran 41, Atlanta 3
* 1994 – San Fran 42, Atlanta 3
* 1994 – San Fran 50, Atlanta 14
You know, if the 49ers hadn’t hung 16 fourth-quarter points on the Falcons in that 50-14 tune-up for their Super Bowl run, maybe it wouldn't have tarnished San Fran's image so drastically.
JASON CAMPBELL'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: The Redskins quarterback had a gem after the Patriots game Sunday.
“When we’re in those situations,” said Campbell, “we tend to back off.”
The skeletons in the closet: Campbell's quote is funny, seeing he's never been in “one those situations” in his NFL career.
In his one and a half seasons in a Washington uniform (he didn't do anything his first year, 2005), the Redskins have won a grand total of one game by two TDs or more – a 34-3 win over Detroit earlier this year.
In other words, Campbell has never in his time with the Redskins found himself in "one of those situations" where he would “tend to back off.”
Maybe Campbell had his pro career confused with his college career, like that time he led upstart Auburn to a 73-7 win over the mighty Warhawks of Louisiana-Monroe.
MIAMI'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: Miami fans say New England rubbed it in two weeks ago when they pulled Tom Brady, yet then put him back in the game to lead the Patriots to another score.
The skeletons in the closet: The Patriots did the supposedly humane thing by pulling Brady for the entire fourth quarter of their 49-28 win over the Dolphins. New England was instantly rewarded with a defensive touchdown by Miami, to make the score 42-21 early in the fourth quarter.
Has anyone else here seen a team overcome a three-TD deficit in the fourth? That's right. We have, too.
So New England reinserted Brady, in a move that absolutely accomplished the goal of professional football: it crushed the spirit of the Dolphins. Miami played like a defeated group after Brady came back in, allowing the re-inserted QB to drive the Patriots 59 yards for a score in just four plays.
Of course, Miami fans are the last people in the world who should lament a victory by a team that crushed the spirit of its opponent.
Does 1972 ring a bell, anyone?
The famous undefeated Dolphins didn't even throw a single dry bone to the pathetic Patriots (who went 3-11) that year. In fact, Miami reserved its biggest beating for its northern rivals: the Dolphins won, 52-0.
There is no "running up the score" in professional football, folks, just as there is no crying in baseball.
But you better be careful what you ##### about. Because there are always skeletons in the closet.
Genius article here on the Patriots "Running up the score"
Skeletons in the closet
Cold, Hard Football Facts for October 31, 2007
By Kerry J. Byrne
Cold, Hard Football Facts whine cooler
It's Halloween. What better time to uncover some skeletons in the closet?
We all have them. You have them. We have them (though ours are a little, ahem, "big boned"). Players and "pundits" have them, too.
We were reminded of all these skeletons when we saw so many players, fans and "pundits" dressed up as whiny little #####es this week.
In case you hadn’t heard, New England is "running up the score" on its opponents. It’s been among the hot topics on every sports talk show since Sunday, when the Patriots laid a 52-7 whipping on the Redskins who – last we checked – were a team of highly paid professionals, with a winning record, and who very well may end up in the playoffs this year.
In other words, the Redskins aren't exactly the JV squad from Boris Karloff School of Acting.
But apparently the Redskins – and certain segments of pigskin “punditry” – feel that the Patriots should have shown a little more "respect" by, like, just falling on their faces each play of the second half. As if that would have been more respectful.
The situation that got everyone's panties in a bunch was this: New England was leading 38-0 with 11 minutes to play in the fourth quarter, and facing a 4th and 1 within easy field goal range at the Washington 7. But New England eschewed the easy field goal attempt -- in other words, they essentially took points off the board -- and responded with the most conservative play in sports: a QB dive up the middle.
New England got the first down, and proceeded to score another touchdown, on a short pass to Wes Welker. New England also converted a fourth down later in the game, on a pass from second-string QB Matt Cassel, a guy who's thrown about three passes in anger since high school, to Jabar Gaffney, a sixth-year journeyman receiver who has fewer TD catches in his career (9) than outside linebacker Mike Vrabel (10).
So are the Patriots running up the score? We don't know.
And neither do you.
We do know this: the Patriots are among the most balanced teams in football, passing the ball on 51 percent of their offensive plays. They're also a classic example of a team that builds a lead with the pass and then secures the lead with the run.
* The Patriots have passed the ball on 160 of 285 first-half plays (56 percent)
* The Patriots have passed the ball on 107 of 229 second-half plays (47 percent)
But since the Cold, Hard Football Facts are not always enough to silence the screams of "running up the score," we thought it was worth diving into the ghoulish past of the most vocal critics.
STEVE YOUNG'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: Young said on ESPN Monday that New England’s big victories are tarnishing its image. Apparently, he pines for the days when the Patriots were a “lucky” team manned by a bunch of “overachievers” who squeaked out close wins. He also implied some sort of psychoses on behalf of Bill Belichick this year.
New England’s big margins of victory are the result of Belichick’s “insecurity from spygate,” said Young from behind the desk on ESPN.
The skeletons in the closet: Maybe Belichick is feeling the same kind of insecurity Young felt after playing second fiddle to Joe Montana in the hearts and minds of San Francisco football fans – the same kind of insecurity that caused Young to throw a record six TD passes in Super Bowl XXIX, the last in the fourth quarter with his team sporting a comfortable 42-18 lead against the overmatched 11-5 Chargers.
Young in the ESPN segment also lamented getting his ### handed to him by the Bears back when he was with Tampa Bay.
Indeed, the Bears did beat the Bucs 48-14 back in 1986, Young’s second and last year in Tampa. But he conveniently failed to mention San Francisco’s 52-14 deconstruction of the Bears when he was with the 49ers in 1991.
Finally, Young also kind of forgot to mention how the 49ers treated the woeful Falcons during his tenure in San Francisco: which is pretty much the same way you treat the water in your toilet bowl.
Here are just some of the scores of the San Francisco-Atlanta series during Young’s tenure leading the post-Montana 49ers:
* 1992 – San Fran 56, Atlanta 17
* 1992 – San Fran 41, Atlanta 3
* 1994 – San Fran 42, Atlanta 3
* 1994 – San Fran 50, Atlanta 14
You know, if the 49ers hadn’t hung 16 fourth-quarter points on the Falcons in that 50-14 tune-up for their Super Bowl run, maybe it wouldn't have tarnished San Fran's image so drastically.
JASON CAMPBELL'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: The Redskins quarterback had a gem after the Patriots game Sunday.
“When we’re in those situations,” said Campbell, “we tend to back off.”
The skeletons in the closet: Campbell's quote is funny, seeing he's never been in “one those situations” in his NFL career.
In his one and a half seasons in a Washington uniform (he didn't do anything his first year, 2005), the Redskins have won a grand total of one game by two TDs or more – a 34-3 win over Detroit earlier this year.
In other words, Campbell has never in his time with the Redskins found himself in "one of those situations" where he would “tend to back off.”
Maybe Campbell had his pro career confused with his college career, like that time he led upstart Auburn to a 73-7 win over the mighty Warhawks of Louisiana-Monroe.
MIAMI'S SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET
The complaint: Miami fans say New England rubbed it in two weeks ago when they pulled Tom Brady, yet then put him back in the game to lead the Patriots to another score.
The skeletons in the closet: The Patriots did the supposedly humane thing by pulling Brady for the entire fourth quarter of their 49-28 win over the Dolphins. New England was instantly rewarded with a defensive touchdown by Miami, to make the score 42-21 early in the fourth quarter.
Has anyone else here seen a team overcome a three-TD deficit in the fourth? That's right. We have, too.
So New England reinserted Brady, in a move that absolutely accomplished the goal of professional football: it crushed the spirit of the Dolphins. Miami played like a defeated group after Brady came back in, allowing the re-inserted QB to drive the Patriots 59 yards for a score in just four plays.
Of course, Miami fans are the last people in the world who should lament a victory by a team that crushed the spirit of its opponent.
Does 1972 ring a bell, anyone?
The famous undefeated Dolphins didn't even throw a single dry bone to the pathetic Patriots (who went 3-11) that year. In fact, Miami reserved its biggest beating for its northern rivals: the Dolphins won, 52-0.
There is no "running up the score" in professional football, folks, just as there is no crying in baseball.
But you better be careful what you ##### about. Because there are always skeletons in the closet.
greenline
Footballguy
Four score and several more
By Eric Wilbur, Boston.com Staff
How's this for a four-game stretch of NFL greatness?
Article Tools
E-mail to a friend
Other sports RSS feed
Available RSS feeds
Reprints/permissions
Most e-mailed
More:
Sports section |
Latest sports news |
Globe front page |
Boston.com
Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts W, 49-14
W, 41-10
W, 41-9
W, 51-24
That quartet of one-sided scores comes to you courtesy of the 2004 Indianapolis Colts from a November-December period during which Peyton Manning and Company annihilated the Texans, Bears, Lions, and Titans, respectively. And, you know it's funny, I don't remember one person whining about them running up the score.
In fact, quite the opposite happened. The Colts were celebrated as the bright and shining star of the NFL. Following the 51-24 win over Tennessee, the Indy Star's Bob Kravitz wrote, "At this point, we're not just watching football anymore. We're watching history. Every week, the Indianapolis Colts' offense uses the football field as its canvas, and every week, it creates an art form that is distinct from everything else in the copycat NFL."
Flash forward almost three years, and the very same Kravitz wrote about the juggernaut New England Patriots, "In the last three weeks, New England has scored 48, 49, and 52 points, inspiring inquiring minds to wonder, 'Did the Patriots pile on?' And every week, the obvious answer is, 'Duh.'"
Whether the Patriots are needlessly running up the score on a weekly basis is open for debate of course, but not much. Tom Brady and Company are pounding teams to the brink of humiliation. At this level of the game, what's the problem with that? I get the feeling much of the national media would rather witness Bill Belichick coddle the opposition with concern for their feelings, stroking them with a false sense of concession compassion.
I can only imagine what Greg Easterbrook and the like might have written the morning after Wilt Chamberlain poured in 100 back in 1962, probably demanding an explanation as to why Wilt didn't sit out the fourth quarter against the poor, poor Knicks.
In any case, you might have noticed there's quite a clash on tap for Sunday in the new, touchy-feely National Football League, where bodies and spirits are demolished and demoralized on a weekly basis, but with the unwritten rule, apparently, that coaches shall exhibit empathy for the opponent, lest things get too embarrassing. It is the first time in league history that two undefeated teams have met this late into a season, and is likely a game of major importance in determining which team gets home field advantage in January's AFC Championship Game, a.k.a. the de facto Super Bowl.
It's the 8-0 Patriots against the 7-0 Colts, or "Good vs. Evil" as both ESPN and Fox have touted the past week in identical headlines.
Such a tired double standard exists when it comes to the Colts and Patriots. When it is the Patriots and Tom Brady that threaten the record-performances put up by Manning and the Colts in the past, folks start to get nervous. The love-fest that exists for Madison Avenue's favorite son extends to his coach Tony Dungy, a nice, congenial man who takes the time out every Sunday morning to bake for the team on the opposite sideline. Or so, we should think.
On the other side this weekend will be Bill Belichick, the gruff, maniacal genius who tends to videotape the opposition, gives curt answers at press conferences, and had his resume come into question when spy-gate broke earlier this season. The man hates cookies.
If you could predict any one statement to backfire this season, it would be when pundits began to question the past Super Bowl triumphs of these Patriots in the wake of spy-gate. You might as well have just handed them Mr. Lombardi's trophy right then and there, because it virtually guaranteed a perfect season. These are the same Patriots who take the slightest dig and turn it into a rallying call that William Wallace would envy. Question the validity of their crowning achievements? Like there wasn't going to be a price to pay for that.
But because the Patriots are the team - and coach - everybody loves to hate, there's something inherently wrong with winning big-time. After plain embarrassing the Redskins on Sunday at Gillette, 52-7, the hue began. "The Patriots are running up the score." "The Patriots show no class." "The Patriots are showing the game disrespect."
Please. As Gary Shelton wrote in the St. Petersburg Times, "Scoring 52 points doesn't disrespect the game; giving up 52 does."
You don't like it? Fine. Stop them. Do something to slow down the steaming, oncoming train that is New England. Can't do it? Tip your hat and call it a day. Or, whine about it into the ensuing days when you really should be preparing for your next opponent. Your call. But please do not try to make the argument that what the Pats are doing is bad for the game. It is certainly up for debate, but anyone who celebrated what the Colts did in 2004, then turns around and points the reproach finger at the Patriots isn't invited to the argument.
For the record, during that aforementioned four-game stretch for the Colts, backup quarterback Jim Sorgi threw exactly four passes. Patriots backup Matt Cassel, the man everyone argues should be in the game for junk time, lest the Pats further embarrass the opposition in the fourth
- OK who are we kidding, second - quarter, has thrown five the last two games.
Remember that angry demand nationwide for Sorgi when Manning and Company were out there -- not embarrassing -- but showing good sportsmanship against their opponents with 30-plus point differentials?
Of course, everyone's complaints about this running up the score nonsense comes when the Patriots and Colts are set for another showdown, their first since last January's AFC title classic, the game that essentially prompted Belichick to award Brady with the toys he's never been privy to in the game. You got a problem with Caldwell, Tom. OK, here's Moss. Have fun, kid.
I fear what might happen if they run it up on the beloved Colts. There might be an investigation into whether Kraft legally bought the team 13 years ago. Maybe Indy will get another rule change instituted.
After beating the Texans, 41-9 on Nov. 14 three years ago, ESPN's Eric Allen addressed the issue as to whether or not Manning should have been pulled in the fourth quarter. "I don't think they should have for two reasons. One, right now Manning is extremely hot and has the opportunity to break a few very hard to reach records. It's nice to see a guy in the zone that much still on the field making it happen for his team."
That was then. That was Manning. When it comes to Brady and the Patriots, the story completely changes. For the Colts, it's history, and special. For the Patriots, it's smug and disrespectful. And for those waiting for Belichick's comeuppance, well, let's just hope you're comfortable.
By Eric Wilbur, Boston.com Staff
How's this for a four-game stretch of NFL greatness?
Article Tools
E-mail to a friend
Other sports RSS feed
Available RSS feeds
Reprints/permissions
Most e-mailed
More:
Sports section |
Latest sports news |
Globe front page |
Boston.com
Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts W, 49-14
W, 41-10
W, 41-9
W, 51-24
That quartet of one-sided scores comes to you courtesy of the 2004 Indianapolis Colts from a November-December period during which Peyton Manning and Company annihilated the Texans, Bears, Lions, and Titans, respectively. And, you know it's funny, I don't remember one person whining about them running up the score.
In fact, quite the opposite happened. The Colts were celebrated as the bright and shining star of the NFL. Following the 51-24 win over Tennessee, the Indy Star's Bob Kravitz wrote, "At this point, we're not just watching football anymore. We're watching history. Every week, the Indianapolis Colts' offense uses the football field as its canvas, and every week, it creates an art form that is distinct from everything else in the copycat NFL."
Flash forward almost three years, and the very same Kravitz wrote about the juggernaut New England Patriots, "In the last three weeks, New England has scored 48, 49, and 52 points, inspiring inquiring minds to wonder, 'Did the Patriots pile on?' And every week, the obvious answer is, 'Duh.'"
Whether the Patriots are needlessly running up the score on a weekly basis is open for debate of course, but not much. Tom Brady and Company are pounding teams to the brink of humiliation. At this level of the game, what's the problem with that? I get the feeling much of the national media would rather witness Bill Belichick coddle the opposition with concern for their feelings, stroking them with a false sense of concession compassion.
I can only imagine what Greg Easterbrook and the like might have written the morning after Wilt Chamberlain poured in 100 back in 1962, probably demanding an explanation as to why Wilt didn't sit out the fourth quarter against the poor, poor Knicks.
In any case, you might have noticed there's quite a clash on tap for Sunday in the new, touchy-feely National Football League, where bodies and spirits are demolished and demoralized on a weekly basis, but with the unwritten rule, apparently, that coaches shall exhibit empathy for the opponent, lest things get too embarrassing. It is the first time in league history that two undefeated teams have met this late into a season, and is likely a game of major importance in determining which team gets home field advantage in January's AFC Championship Game, a.k.a. the de facto Super Bowl.
It's the 8-0 Patriots against the 7-0 Colts, or "Good vs. Evil" as both ESPN and Fox have touted the past week in identical headlines.
Such a tired double standard exists when it comes to the Colts and Patriots. When it is the Patriots and Tom Brady that threaten the record-performances put up by Manning and the Colts in the past, folks start to get nervous. The love-fest that exists for Madison Avenue's favorite son extends to his coach Tony Dungy, a nice, congenial man who takes the time out every Sunday morning to bake for the team on the opposite sideline. Or so, we should think.
On the other side this weekend will be Bill Belichick, the gruff, maniacal genius who tends to videotape the opposition, gives curt answers at press conferences, and had his resume come into question when spy-gate broke earlier this season. The man hates cookies.
If you could predict any one statement to backfire this season, it would be when pundits began to question the past Super Bowl triumphs of these Patriots in the wake of spy-gate. You might as well have just handed them Mr. Lombardi's trophy right then and there, because it virtually guaranteed a perfect season. These are the same Patriots who take the slightest dig and turn it into a rallying call that William Wallace would envy. Question the validity of their crowning achievements? Like there wasn't going to be a price to pay for that.
But because the Patriots are the team - and coach - everybody loves to hate, there's something inherently wrong with winning big-time. After plain embarrassing the Redskins on Sunday at Gillette, 52-7, the hue began. "The Patriots are running up the score." "The Patriots show no class." "The Patriots are showing the game disrespect."
Please. As Gary Shelton wrote in the St. Petersburg Times, "Scoring 52 points doesn't disrespect the game; giving up 52 does."
You don't like it? Fine. Stop them. Do something to slow down the steaming, oncoming train that is New England. Can't do it? Tip your hat and call it a day. Or, whine about it into the ensuing days when you really should be preparing for your next opponent. Your call. But please do not try to make the argument that what the Pats are doing is bad for the game. It is certainly up for debate, but anyone who celebrated what the Colts did in 2004, then turns around and points the reproach finger at the Patriots isn't invited to the argument.
For the record, during that aforementioned four-game stretch for the Colts, backup quarterback Jim Sorgi threw exactly four passes. Patriots backup Matt Cassel, the man everyone argues should be in the game for junk time, lest the Pats further embarrass the opposition in the fourth
- OK who are we kidding, second - quarter, has thrown five the last two games.
Remember that angry demand nationwide for Sorgi when Manning and Company were out there -- not embarrassing -- but showing good sportsmanship against their opponents with 30-plus point differentials?
Of course, everyone's complaints about this running up the score nonsense comes when the Patriots and Colts are set for another showdown, their first since last January's AFC title classic, the game that essentially prompted Belichick to award Brady with the toys he's never been privy to in the game. You got a problem with Caldwell, Tom. OK, here's Moss. Have fun, kid.
I fear what might happen if they run it up on the beloved Colts. There might be an investigation into whether Kraft legally bought the team 13 years ago. Maybe Indy will get another rule change instituted.
After beating the Texans, 41-9 on Nov. 14 three years ago, ESPN's Eric Allen addressed the issue as to whether or not Manning should have been pulled in the fourth quarter. "I don't think they should have for two reasons. One, right now Manning is extremely hot and has the opportunity to break a few very hard to reach records. It's nice to see a guy in the zone that much still on the field making it happen for his team."
That was then. That was Manning. When it comes to Brady and the Patriots, the story completely changes. For the Colts, it's history, and special. For the Patriots, it's smug and disrespectful. And for those waiting for Belichick's comeuppance, well, let's just hope you're comfortable.
Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
Like staplers in the mail, so are the days of our lives.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Hate to add to this ongoing debate which is mostly irrelevant, but the mischaracterizations of the Skins bothers me as a fan, and the mischaracterization of the arguments bothers me as someone who enjoys healthy debate.
I don't see too many complaints about the "going for it on 4th and 1" plays. Those seem to be straw men that Bellicheck and Pats fans are holding up as non-"rubbing it in" plays," when in actuality, few people (or at least few intelligent people) are complaining about them. Rather, these the parts of the game (very few of them, mind you) that I considered in somewhat poor taste:
First, by far: 1-10-NE 49 (12:50) (Shotgun) 12-T.Brady pass deep right to 81-R.Moss pushed ob at WAS 16 for 35 yards (24-S.Springs).
I have yet to see anyone defend this playcall. You're up 38-0. It's first down. The Redskins secondary is playing without Smoot and had lost Carlos Rogers in-game (for the year with a torn ACL, it would turn out). They're scrambling to do everything they can with their safeties to compensate for those losses. Is there any defensible reason to throw deep to Moss in this situation other than to post a meaningless score? This, to me, was the only truly disgraceful playcall of the game, and the next down was probably the only 45 seconds when I would have completely absolved a Redskin for taking a late hit at Brady with intent to injure.
Second: Brady and the entire first team come out to start the 4th Quarter with the score already 38-0, and going into the shotgun. Not horrific, but certainly unnecessary at best.
Third: Cassel passing on three straight downs up 45-0 in the middle of the 4th quarter. I don't buy the "he needs in-game practice" routine. If you think you're seeing anything resembling "in-game" action at 45-0 in the middle of the 4th quarter, well, more power to you. Not really too bad, but again, totally unnecessary.
Really, that's about it. Nothing worth getting hysterical over, but I was getting tired of Pats fans making the "straw man" argument about the 4th downs just to know them over. The last one (up 45-0 at the 37) was in mildly poor taste, but I think the Skins and their fans lose the right to complain about them when Portis, Cooley and Campbell trotted out after the Cassel score.
So having met you more than halfway, any Pats fans or others want to tackle the play call at 12:50 in the 4th as anything other than Belicheck and Brady shoving their collective middle finger up at one of the classiest and most-respected coaches in the history of the game? That's the only one that sticks with me.
I don't see too many complaints about the "going for it on 4th and 1" plays. Those seem to be straw men that Bellicheck and Pats fans are holding up as non-"rubbing it in" plays," when in actuality, few people (or at least few intelligent people) are complaining about them. Rather, these the parts of the game (very few of them, mind you) that I considered in somewhat poor taste:
First, by far: 1-10-NE 49 (12:50) (Shotgun) 12-T.Brady pass deep right to 81-R.Moss pushed ob at WAS 16 for 35 yards (24-S.Springs).
I have yet to see anyone defend this playcall. You're up 38-0. It's first down. The Redskins secondary is playing without Smoot and had lost Carlos Rogers in-game (for the year with a torn ACL, it would turn out). They're scrambling to do everything they can with their safeties to compensate for those losses. Is there any defensible reason to throw deep to Moss in this situation other than to post a meaningless score? This, to me, was the only truly disgraceful playcall of the game, and the next down was probably the only 45 seconds when I would have completely absolved a Redskin for taking a late hit at Brady with intent to injure.
Second: Brady and the entire first team come out to start the 4th Quarter with the score already 38-0, and going into the shotgun. Not horrific, but certainly unnecessary at best.
Third: Cassel passing on three straight downs up 45-0 in the middle of the 4th quarter. I don't buy the "he needs in-game practice" routine. If you think you're seeing anything resembling "in-game" action at 45-0 in the middle of the 4th quarter, well, more power to you. Not really too bad, but again, totally unnecessary.
Really, that's about it. Nothing worth getting hysterical over, but I was getting tired of Pats fans making the "straw man" argument about the 4th downs just to know them over. The last one (up 45-0 at the 37) was in mildly poor taste, but I think the Skins and their fans lose the right to complain about them when Portis, Cooley and Campbell trotted out after the Cassel score.
So having met you more than halfway, any Pats fans or others want to tackle the play call at 12:50 in the 4th as anything other than Belicheck and Brady shoving their collective middle finger up at one of the classiest and most-respected coaches in the history of the game? That's the only one that sticks with me.
hes going to do what is best for the team.if he thinks he can convert 4th down against washington, he should do itif he doesn't think he can convert 4th against indy, or its a close game, he shouldnt
if you paid $300 to watch this game, and you got to only watch this team actually play for one-half, youd be pissedin 10 years, when moss is up for induction into the HOF , and people are debating his numbers, are they going to remind everyone that he only played half a season because belichick felt bad for the opposition???get real, this is their job. they bust their ### all year. they have the right to prove they are the most dominant team to ever step on the field.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
You have obviously been smoking gargantuan amounts of Crystal Methamphetamine
scooterg61
Footballguy
wake up!!!!did you watch the game????? 38-0.. 4th qtr..late.. 4th down on the 7.. you dont go for it.. yes you kick the FG.. NO COACH would think anything.. OR YOU JUST KNEEL DOWN AND LET THE SKINS take over on downs... but noooo.. they THROW FOR A 1ST DOWN AND THAN THROW FOR A TD.. REPEAT!!!.. 38-0 AND THEY THROW.. 2nd string qb comes in... AND THROWS ON 3RD DOWN!!! UP 45-0... give me a break.. hope indy rolls up on NE in a big way.. i like brady and company.. but it is childish and ###@@@@@@@.. to do what they did.. NFL isnt the BCS series were points count..
Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
Having a second string QB who needs the reps throw on third down? Against a bunch of guys who are paid to stop him from completing a pass? MADNESS!!!
Sounds a little too specific to be just a random comparison. Why wouldn't your "hypothetical" father only be 6'2".....hmmm
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
If I was a professional football player and the team that was beating my team badly did this, I would immediately rush the field and start a brawl. I can't think of anything more insulting than saying "here you go" and handing the ball back.scooterg61 said:
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Good point! Ooops!
Saints-Man
Footballguy
I love Boston as a city and have never been to Indianapolis. I like both teams, and I do root for the Colts over the Patriots because I have big a fan of the Manning family since the early 70's.However, reading that article, I never realized that Boston(at least this sportswriter) sees itself as such a second class city. Brady is more loved than Manning around the nation. I don't think many people hate Manning, but some people feel he had an unfair advantage with a dad as a professional QB. Brady is seen as having a better touch with the everyday joes of the country. I think Brady is more charismatic than Manning. Heckfire, he is Bridget Moynihan's baby daddy for goodness sakes!! Also, many females think Brady is outright hot and Manning is okay, even dorky looking. The reverse is almost true for the coaches. Dungy is liked because he is soft-spoken, never seems to duck a question, even the difficult ones. He won an award while the HC in Tampa for being most accesible to the media. BB comes across as arrogant. He provides little or no info to the media, rarely answers a question. These attributes make Dungy more likeable than BB. None of that article compared the specific issues raised with the Patriots. I don't have a play list for those games mentioned, but did they go for it on 4th down? Were they throwing the ball downfield in the regular offense or at least making an attempt to run out the clock? I don't know...I don't remember the games in question. Those are the specific points. That "journalist" comes accross as a whiny tool without providing any concrete data to rebut the assertion. Oh, and I am of the camp that I have no problem with what the Patriots are doing. You are professionals, and you should be able to stop them.greenline said:
Saints-Man
Footballguy
I am firmly in this camp. Parcells did a good job picking the right DC.
Marvin88
Footballguy
When you play in the AFC East, ANY lead is safe.I am a diehard Colt fan. My problem is NOT the running up of the score necessarily, but the attitude that in my mind tips the Pat's hand that they are indeed trying to run up the score. David has already pointed out Welker spiking the ball when the Pats are already up by a bazillion. Brady WAY overreacting to a false start in the red zone. Billijerk's reaction to being questioned about running up the score. He could have diffused alot of this just by how he reacted to that question, but instead he chose his typical arrogant path. Comebacks happen against teams that lack in some area and/or teams that are not great. No one in their right mind could say that ANY of the teams the Pats have played could have staged such a comeback.
In a BB interview I heard a ocuple of weeks ago. They'll stop trying to score, read take a knee, when it's mathematically impossible for the other team to get the ball back. Jim Rome said it the best. These other teams have the same payroll as the Pats. It's not the Pats fault they're quitting, allowing the second team to drive the field. As to your point about kicking the field goal. I completely agree. To me, going for it on 4th and 3, etcwerves 2 purposes. Practice for your team. AND, the opportunity for the defense to stop you without any points. For, if the smart play was to go for it, we'd never see field goals. Why? Because it's too easy to come away w/ no points.
Interesting article on '04 Colts running up the score...
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...8/1058/SPORTS03
Don't you hate it when the facts get in the way of a good story?
A reporter for the Boston Globe Web site, Eric Wilbur, wondered why there weren't accusations of running up the score and padding statistics in 2004, when Peyton Manning was setting the single-season TD pass record and the Colts were winning by huge margins.
Here's why, good friend.
Of the 49 TD passes, just one came in the fourth quarter of a one-sided game.
Wilbur specifically alluded to a four-game stretch of Colts blowouts to buttress his argument. Problem is, the numbers don't support the argument.
The Colts beat Houston 49-14. Manning threw five TD passes, none in the fourth quarter.
The Colts beat Chicago 41-10. Manning had four TD passes. Jim Sorgi played the fourth quarter.
The Colts beat Detroit 41-9. Manning threw for six TD passes. Sorgi went into the game with 1:15 left in the third quarter.
The Colts beat Tennessee 51-24. Manning's last TD pass, his fourth of the game, made it 48-24 with 13 minutes left. That's when Sorgi entered the game.
By comparison, Brady has thrown six fourth-quarter touchdown passes in the Patriots' first eight games, five of them with a lead of 17 points or more.
Facts. They're so inconvenient sometimes.
-- Bob Kravitz
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...8/1058/SPORTS03
Don't you hate it when the facts get in the way of a good story?
A reporter for the Boston Globe Web site, Eric Wilbur, wondered why there weren't accusations of running up the score and padding statistics in 2004, when Peyton Manning was setting the single-season TD pass record and the Colts were winning by huge margins.
Here's why, good friend.
Of the 49 TD passes, just one came in the fourth quarter of a one-sided game.
Wilbur specifically alluded to a four-game stretch of Colts blowouts to buttress his argument. Problem is, the numbers don't support the argument.
The Colts beat Houston 49-14. Manning threw five TD passes, none in the fourth quarter.
The Colts beat Chicago 41-10. Manning had four TD passes. Jim Sorgi played the fourth quarter.
The Colts beat Detroit 41-9. Manning threw for six TD passes. Sorgi went into the game with 1:15 left in the third quarter.
The Colts beat Tennessee 51-24. Manning's last TD pass, his fourth of the game, made it 48-24 with 13 minutes left. That's when Sorgi entered the game.
By comparison, Brady has thrown six fourth-quarter touchdown passes in the Patriots' first eight games, five of them with a lead of 17 points or more.
Facts. They're so inconvenient sometimes.
-- Bob Kravitz
Last edited by a moderator:
Like I alluded to earlier. Most teams don’t blitz on defense when up 40 points in the 4th quarter. Just get the game over and head to the locker room. At this point, I’d throw that out the window up 40 or down 40 points. I’d blitz the hell out the Pats late into the fourth quarter regardless of the fact you may be down 30 points plus. Knock around Brady or Cassal or whoever is in there at QB. Wonder how many injuries to QB’s occur from blindside blitzes, etc? Get burned on the blitz and give up a TD. Oh well. It’s a 37 point game instead of a 30 point game. It’s irrelevant at that point. Practice those blitzes until the clock is at 0:00.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
So, I'm assuming that when you have a FF matchup you bench players once you have your opponent beat. So they've played all their players and you're winning going into Monday night you bench your players so you don't rub it in. That's the way YOU handle it, right?Not, me. I pile it on on Monday night so I can beat them by as much as possible.Let's look at this from a defensive point of view. Wouldn't you rather get more playing time against the #1 offense so that you improve for the next game? Why not give some of your backups a chancce to play against a #1 offense so that they get better? Why turn regular season games into preseason games? I know how I feel about preseason games. Don't the NFL players complain about them? I guess it is just easiest for NFL coaches and players to cry about how disrespected they are. Perhaps the fact that they stink is why they are not respected. Teams and players that talk otherwise should be fired.scooterg61 said:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Exactly, use every minute of playing time to get better. You should have no chance of winning the Super Bowl by being average.
massmarauder
Footballguy
Why are so many people upset that the Patriots are using every minute of playing time to get better, then? Oh, right. "class".MOAT said:
PatsFanCT
Footballguy
See, that's funny because in the Browns game, the last TD Brady threw was with 9:40 to go with only a 10 point lead. The Cincinnati game they had a 14 point lead with 3:18 to go in the game, clearly not enough time for the Bengals to score twice. Against Dallas, Brady's last TD pass came with over 12 minutes to go in the game, up by 7. Against the Dolphins, he did toss a TD late, but that was after the Dolphins scored two quick TD's, so that isn't exactly "running it up". But I will give you the Buffalo and Washington TD passes.However, I will agree with this part. "Facts. They're so inconvenient sometimes."
And you truthfully beleive that the Patriots got a ton better going from 38-0 to 45-0 late in the fourth quarter with their starters? Wow. I could understand the score from 45-0 to 52-0 being used to get their backups some legit playing time. Just don't understand how starters get substantially better going from 38-0 to 45-0 against a defense that most likely has packed it inWhy are so many people upset that the Patriots are using every minute of playing time to get better, then? Oh, right. "class".MOAT said:
mdog1967
Footballguy
We need to smash this culture of "They are not respecting me", I truley despise the make everyone feel good era. The most blatent evil post has come form the "felon" wishing for some one to take out Brady's knee. Its of little argument that if the Colts had the same performance during their wins every sports show would be singing about how great it is to see Peyton Manning playing his heart out all 4 quarters. Hypocracy!! Get over it already. You morally outraged posters better sharpen up your keyboards, cause this week is going to drive you insane. Pats 52 - Colts 21.
