NFL Week 11

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Never mind, I got around my blocker. Thanks all.

You're welcome!

[Kodos]

If Brady gets his knee taken out when they're up big late in a game, that will be the highlight of the season.

Edit: And I don't even dislike Brady. It's just the best way to short-circuit the Patriots season in the most poetic justice-type manner.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Kodos

If Brady gets his knee taken out when they're up big late in a game, that will be the highlight of the season.

that's just 0-16 talking. you don't really feel that way.

[Kodos]

Hey! We still have a ways to go before we get there.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Kodos

If Brady gets his knee taken out when they're up big late in a game, that will be the highlight of the season.

Edit: And I don't even dislike Brady. It's just the best way to short-circuit the Patriots season in the most poetic justice-type manner.

We have to wait until he says something about how God assembled this team to win the Super Bowl. Then the circle will be complete.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

this has always been my point. if you're asking the one team to essentially "call it a day" then the other team should have to do the same. otherwise i'd say you probably have a greater risk of guys getting injured when one team is "taking it easy" then you do if both teams are playing at the same intensity

It's not about the players "taking it easy", but the coaches putting in the backups and playing more conservative. The players will go all out and they should. And if they score a bunch, then they score... and that's ok. But running up the score is when the coach decides to keep the starters in and play aggresively.

Why is it different when the team down by 30 plays hard? Is that really a serious question? Or just obsfucation? The team that's down wants to take something positive out of the game after they've been destroyed. How is that the same for the team that's up by 30?

[finketr]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

that's just 0-16 talking. you don't really feel that way.

i do.

[Mustang]

Other than not wanting anyone to be injured, I wouldn't want Brady to be injured just for the simple fact that whomever won the Super Bowl would have to spend the rest of their days hearing - "Well, if Brady wasn't injured...."

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Other than not wanting anyone to be injured, I wouldn't want Brady to be injured just for the simple fact that whomever won the Super Bowl would have to spend the rest of their days hearing - "Well, if Brady wasn't injured...."

That doesn't matter, if for some reason the Pats don't get there the teams that do will inevitably hear "Well the best team didn't get there this year anyway...." Might as well at least give them a valid excuse.

[RendeR]

Oh and don't worry Kodos, you get the Bengals in week 17, you'll get at least 1 win this season. Cincinnati will find a way to lose to an 0-15 team.

[stevew]

the steelers will lose to the dolphins. they love to make chump teams into worldbeaters.

[Kodos]

Are you implying... that the Dullphins are a chump team?

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It's not about the players "taking it easy", but the coaches putting in the backups and playing more conservative. The players will go all out and they should. And if they score a bunch, then they score... and that's ok. But running up the score is when the coach decides to keep the starters in and play aggresively.

Why is it different when the team down by 30 plays hard? Is that really a serious question? Or just obsfucation? The team that's down wants to take something positive out of the game after they've been destroyed. How is that the same for the team that's up by 30?

So it's the responsibility of the team that is winning by 30 to back off so the other team can "take something positive" out of the game?

So in a boxing match if you've won the first 10 rounds you're supposed to stop throwing hard punches for the last couple rounds so your opponent won't feel bad about the match? That way he can take something positive from the fight?

If you're at the poker table and winning big you should back off a bit so the other players can not feel so bad?

If your company is the leader in your industry they should back off a little so your competitors won't get their feelings hurt?


It's not playing basketball in the back yard with your kids, it's their job. Just because one group doesn't do their job a well as another is no reason for the better group to back off so the lesser group can feel better about it.

They are playing a 16 game schedule. Why should they allow their opponent to take any kind of positive from the game that may help them in another game?


No matter what my feelings are about the Patriots at this point I am in shock and awe over their performance. Hell, they're averaging 41 points a game and their points allowed is among the best in the league. Their average margin of victory is 25 points, that's freaking amazing.


I am going to just close my eyes next week for the game, I don't think I can bear to watch what may happen to the Eagles. Not being a fair weathered fan, just realistic. I don't even think "on any given Sunday" means anything where the Patriots are concerned this season.

I'll say it here and now: If the Patriots beat the Eagles I will be rooting for 19-0.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Are you implying... that the Dullphins are a chump team?

They may very well go 0-16 this season. The Eagles tried and tried to hand them the game in the first half but they just wouldn't take it.

[Kodos]

That's Cam Cameron in a nutshell. Take it from someone who endured his tenure at Indiana...

[rkmsuf]

I was always facinated by the positive taken out of a late score down by 30. That's really something to hang your hat on.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

So it's the responsibility of the team that is winning by 30 to back off so the other team can "take something positive" out of the game?

If you are a good sportsman. I realize those are rare today though.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If you are a good sportsman. I realize those are rare today though.

Some would regard that as an insult at the professional level.

[larrymcg421]

People keep attacking the 72 Dolphins, but other than Shuila's recent comments which were taken completely out of context and the champagne ritual which has been debunked by Snopes, I don't get where people see this "grumpy" attitude.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Some would regard that as an insult at the professional level.

I can't think of anyone who was offended by a team taking out its starters when up by 4+ TDs in, say, the middle of the 3rd Quarter.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I can't think of anyone who was offended by a team taking out its starters when up by 4+ TDs in, say, the middle of the 3rd Quarter.

OK, so what postive are you taking out of the game then if that was your point. Oh boy, we could move the ball on their scrubs. Whoop de damn do.

[ISiddiqui]

You don't think that's more positive than getting smashed all the way to the end? Really?

[Jas_lov]

The Falcons scored a late TD in the 4th quarter vs. the Bucs when they were down 31-0. They got blown out and were embarassed, but at least they got something positive out of the game. What was it? I don't know. I don't think there's anything positive about being blown out by 30 points. What is this, little league? Why would the Patriots want the Bills to take something positive from the game? They don't and shouldn't. Just like the Packers piled it on the Vikings and the Bucs piled it on the Falcons.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

What was it? I don't know. I don't think there's anything positive about being blown out by 30 points.

Well, in the Falcan'ts situation, they got a clear indication of which QB ought to be starting.
And to some extent they got a pretty good look at which players will quit and which ones kept going until the very bitter end.

[ISiddiqui]

I realize we've gotten away from it in this day and age, but it's called sportsmanship. Coaches usually tried to avoid humiliating the other team by piling on the points if they could help it.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You don't think that's more positive than getting smashed all the way to the end? Really?

Not really. We got down 30 and they let us score one. wow. Like the Redskin game. You really think they felt real good about going down field against essentially no defense and punching one in? Really builds the confidence of Campbell was a quote I heard. Yeah, how to dominate garbage time is something to build on.

Don't get pounded and if you do, take it, don't quit and go work harder or get better players. That's it. Sucks yes but that's the way it goes.


High school I'm with you on this though.

[rkmsuf]

Sportsmanship? I mean what are we talking about here...multimillionaires playing for the fans enjoyment. You think half of the Bills really give a sh*t what the score was? Dunno, they get paid though and move on.

Love of the game? Sure they love playing...would they play for free? Doubt it.

The idealistic nature of "sportsmanship" doesn't fit into professional athletics.

[Jas_lov]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, in the Falcan'ts situation, they got a clear indication of which QB ought to be starting.
And to some extent they got a pretty good look at which players will quit and which ones kept going until the very bitter end.

They took Harrington out after he had just won two games in a row! With the Falcons! I don't understand why he was taken out in the first place, but I don't follow the Falcons that closely. And I think they'd get a better look at which players are still trying if the other team left their starters in there and were still playing hard!

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I realize we've gotten away from it in this day and age, but it's called sportsmanship. Coaches usually tried to avoid humiliating the other team by piling on the points if they could help it.

I'm completely with you here. No matter what level the game is being played at.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'm completely with you here. No matter what level the game is being played at.

If it's any consolation, the Dolphins are great sports.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

They took Harrington out after he had just won two games in a row! With the Falcons! I don't understand why he was taken out in the first place, but I don't follow the Falcons that closely.

Don't feel bad, hardly anybody follows them all that closely at this point.

As for the Leftwich in/Harrington out deal, that's been the matter of at least a little speculation as to whether that was Petrino's call. Remember, it was Arthur Blank who signed Leftwich to a contract larger than Harrington's and once he had (theoretically) learned enough of the playbook, boom, he's annointed as the starter.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I realize we've gotten away from it in this day and age, but it's called sportsmanship. Coaches usually tried to avoid humiliating the other team by piling on the points if they could help it.

I still don't think this is true. As I mentioned in previous weeks older teams just like current teams had no problem running up the score when they had the opportunity. It was really rare to see teams just stop trying for a full quarter even when up by an unsurmountable total.

As I showed previously I watched many examples of the 49ers in the 80s trash my Falcons even when the game was in hand (the reason I relish seeing their defeat any chance I get to this day). The same was true of the 72 Dolphins, the 90's vikings teams and even the "classy" Joe Gibbs teams of the early 80s ran up the score many times, including a few times in 1983 when they were one of the highest scoring teams of NFL history...

The -ONLY- difference between what the Pats are doing now and these other juggernauts of their time is that the Pats are just a far superior team and do it virtually every game week in and week out..

The "Classy" Joe Gibbs could only run up the score against the woeful St. louis cardinals or teams like that.. The Pats lay waste wherever they go almost...

So yeah, like I have said plenty of times.. of course they are running up the score, its not their responsibility to not do so... and as long as it is not against my team, I am enjoying watching it tremendously. I really think there are alot of revisionist beliefs being posted regarding the sportsmanship of another era.. The players back then were just as dirty as today.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, in the Falcan'ts situation, they got a clear indication of which QB ought to be starting.
And to some extent they got a pretty good look at which players will quit and which ones kept going until the very bitter end.

Unfortunately, I don't think that really showed us alot.. at this point the answer doesn't appear to be anyone in house despite what management thinks.. I'm so frustrated that I just want them to blow it up and start over again. I've endured about 30 years of frustration so far (roughly since I started getting into football when I was like 5-6), I can handle a few more years now.

I realized this last weekend that the only good Falcons jersey I have left now is a Vick jersey that I refuse to wear. I've been trying to talk my wife into getting me a throw back Steve Bartkowski jersey for Christmas.. no one on the current team really inspires me anymore. The only Bobblehead doll I have left from going to past season Falcons games was my Brooking's doll and since he is a good Tech boy, I'll not forsake him.. Everyone else can just go away at this point.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

They took Harrington out after he had just won two games in a row! With the Falcons! I don't understand why he was taken out in the first place, but I don't follow the Falcons that closely. And I think they'd get a better look at which players are still trying if the other team left their starters in there and were still playing hard!

Its because they want Leftwich to be the man there, they want him to succeed.. Unfortunatly they don't realize that he is not the answer and really no one they have currently is the answer.

[miked]

I almost fell asleep waiting for Leftwich to release the ball. That one play where he took a monster wind up (for a 10 yard route I think) and somebody came in and stripped it, that was him in nutshell. It was awful watching him play. The announcers just kept talking about the line, but if your QB has to bring the ball back and down to his knees, it's never gonna work.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Its because they want Leftwich to be the man there, they want him to succeed..

And we could really get into a gigantic shitstorm here if we were to consider speculating about the reasons they so desperately want him to be the guy.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And we could really get into a gigantic shitstorm here if we were to consider speculating about the reasons they so desperately want him to be the guy.

I personally figured they loved the success they had with Vick's popularity the money he brought in from the city's demographics and feel Leftwich was the best approach to that.. Right or wrong, that is my impression of what they are doing.

Personally I am not making it a black/white issue myself as I think both of them are wastes and aren't the answer regardless of the color. I am just saddened that the organization is clearly making decisions based on fan popularity instead of what makes the most football sense.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I realize we've gotten away from it in this day and age, but it's called sportsmanship. Coaches usually tried to avoid humiliating the other team by piling on the points if they could help it.

I'd have to disagree. There's this story:

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=1053

There's also the 51-0 beatdown Cleveland gave Pittsburg in '89, there's the Bears sending the Fridge out for a meaningless TD in the Super Bowl against the Pats, there was the bears 73-0 win in the NFL championship game in '40, and countless other stories.

The reason this is a story now is because 1.) The Patriots are doing it just about every week and 2.) We're much more aware of these things because of the media.

If anything, sportsmanship is a lot better than it used to be because most coaches are afraid of the inevitable criticism from media and potential bulletin board material that would come from it. Belichick just doesn't give a shit.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And we could really get into a gigantic shitstorm here if we were to consider speculating about the reasons they so desperately want him to be the guy.

Do it. I double dog dare you!

[miked]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And we could really get into a gigantic shitstorm here if we were to consider speculating about the reasons they so desperately want him to be the guy.

Well, one could also speculate that even with Harrington's "amazing" winning streak of 2, they weren't putting buts in the stands. Maybe they feel Leftwich is more exciting, capable of airing it out a little better. With impending blackouts and Dunn's milestone coming up, they are doing whatever they can to try and "win" back the fans. The amazing thing is, they both really suck, so it probably doesn't really matter.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Sportsmanship? I mean what are we talking about here...multimillionaires playing for the fans enjoyment. You think half of the Bills really give a sh*t what the score was? Dunno, they get paid though and move on.

Love of the game? Sure they love playing...would they play for free? Doubt it.

The idealistic nature of "sportsmanship" doesn't fit into professional athletics.

Please... so if people are paid for playing a sport, they can't be respectful to each other? Why is sportsmanship ok for high school and not for the pros? Why don't we have teams go for it on 4th down in high school games so the kids can win by 60? Hey, if the other team can't stop it, then they should just get off the field right?

What is the deal with getting paid means its ok for you to be humiliated? Playing the game with civility and honor should be a goal.

Since they are getting paid, do you also then disagree with taunting penalties?

And I realize that running up the score has happened in the past, but it has usually been called out. It wasn't necessarily considered acceptable, unless there was a good reason for it. I do know that back in the past, you didn't have dancing in the end zone and stuff like that.

[Raiders Army]

If I'm Belicheck and I ride my players hard every week leading up to the game I am telling them that I respect them by telling them to play hard all of the time. I leave them in until the 4th quarter because you never know when they're going to have to play four quarters (see Indy game) and you don't want them gassed. I tell them to play hard every single freakin play no matter what you're up by because I respect them and demand perfection.

I see nothing wrong with that.

[Arles]

Here's a story that just hit the wires:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3119097

NFL officials are investigating whether Green Bay Packers players offered payments to teammates for achieving specific defensive goals.

League rules prohibit teams and players "from offering or accepting bonuses to a player for his or his team's performance against a particular team, a particular opposing player or players, or a particular group of an opposing team."

League spokesman Greg Aiello confirmed the investigation Monday.

ESPN reported that Packers defensive backs offered to pay the team's defensive linemen $500 each if they were able to hold Minnesota running back Adrian Peterson under 100 yards rushing two weeks ago, and another $500 for holding Carolina to under 60 yards rushing as a team on Sunday.

I can't imagine this being that big of a deal. Most NFL players make atleast 500-750K - seems like this is no different than a QB buying his OL rolexes if he wins a certain award (something Marino did throughout his career). It would be one thing if it was for injuring a player, but a simple contest or motivational token bet seems trivial.

Oh well, after the Patriot situation, I'm sure the NFL will take away GB's first round pick next season for this

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Please... so if people are paid for playing a sport, they can't be respectful to each other? Why is sportsmanship ok for high school and not for the pros? Why don't we have teams go for it on 4th down in high school games so the kids can win by 60? Hey, if the other team can't stop it, then they should just get off the field right?

What is the deal with getting paid means its ok for you to be humiliated? Playing the game with civility and honor should be a goal.

Since they are getting paid, do you also then disagree with taunting penalties?

And I realize that running up the score has happened in the past, but it has usually been called out. It wasn't necessarily considered acceptable, unless there was a good reason for it. I do know that back in the past, you didn't have dancing in the end zone and stuff like that.

I honestly only remember two times that running up the score was ever mentioned in the pros, and that was I think in the super bowl with the bears vs the pats, and then the 49ers vs bengals if I remember right.. most of the whole thing about running up the score when I was younger was always about teams doing that in college to try to get higher poll rankings.. and I think most of the huff about that was more due to people's lack of enjoyment of how the polls in college sports worked than anything else.

I honestly think you are remembering things a bit rosier than they really were.. Teams and games used to be quite dirty.. even as late as the early 90s you had Buddy Ryan putting out bounties to his players to try to knock out or injure specific players or coaches of other teams.. I think running up the score pales in comparison to that.

I just honestly think people just didn't make a big deal about it back then.. it didn't happen every week and when it did it was more people being upset at their team for giving up so much.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I honestly only remember two times that running up the score was ever mentioned in the pros, and that was I think in the super bowl with the bears vs the pats, and then the 49ers vs bengals if I remember right..

Uh, no. The 2 49ers/Bengals Super Bowls were both close.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Atocep

If anything, sportsmanship is a lot better than it used to be because most coaches are afraid of the inevitable criticism from media and potential bulletin board material that would come from it. Belichick just doesn't give a shit.

Very good point. People are talking as if the old days of football involved all the players kissing each other on the cheek before a big game or something.

We've gone way, way, way in the other direction. Today, the players have the same agents, were on a different team two years ago, and with very few exceptions, pro "rivalries" are between fans of teams now, not players.

No players or coaches are complaining about the Patriots (except one guy with Washington). The media tried to stir shit up with the Bills yesterday, and to a man, no one had a problem with anything the Pats did. How can something possibly be unsportsmanlike when the other team doesn't have an issue with what you're doing?

I don't this this is really as much of an argument as the media seems to be trying to make it though. The "sportsman" crowd seems the clear minority.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Uh, no. The 2 49ers/Bengals Super Bowls were both close.

Sorry, my mistake. Was the 49ers vs the Broncos


Anyways, my point still stands despite my poor memory!

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by molson

Very good point. People are talking as if the old days of football involved all the players kissing each other on the cheek before a big game or something.

We've gone way, way, way in the other direction. Today, the players have the same agents, were on a different team two years ago, and with very few exceptions, pro "rivalries" are between fans of teams now, not players.

No players or coaches are complaining about the Patriots (except one guy with Washington). The media tried to stir shit up with the Bills yesterday, and to a man, no one had a problem with anything the Pats did. How can something possibly be unsportsmanlike when the other team doesn't have an issue with what you're doing?

I don't this this is really as much of an argument as the media seems to be trying to make it though. The "sportsman" crowd seems the clear minority.

I don't think it is even the media bringing it up anymore. Most of the respectable media personal are actually taking the same side as me on this, that its the other team's job to stop them. Only a select few are being a bit off the wall about it.

I think its primarily people who are fans of the team who don't like seeing their teams get beat up. I understand that is a broad rationalization and I know that there are others who take offense to it just for the act in itself, but I think that those people are actually the minority now. As far as online message boards go its a vocal minority however.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If you are a good sportsman. I realize those are rare today though.

Could you name some "good sportsman" from the early days of pro football so I have an idea what you're about? You know, someone that was truly concerned about the other team's feelings?

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I don't think it is even the media bringing it up anymore. Most of the respectable media personal are actually taking the same side as me on this, that its the other team's job to stop them. Only a select few are being a bit off the wall about it.

I think its primarily people who are fans of the team who don't like seeing their teams get beat up. I understand that is a broad rationalization and I know that there are others who take offense to it just for the act in itself, but I think that those people are actually the minority now. As far as online message boards go its a vocal minority however.

While I disagree with ISiddiqui, he does make a valid point and that point has been the basis for the argument who argue for his side. What is the difference between the pros and the other levels of football? Missouri and Kansas play this weekend. Both teams have players on scholarships(often called a form of payment) and both coaching staffs are filled with paid professionals. If one team is up 49-10 and go for it on 4th down and 2, isn't still the other team's job to stop them? They got the same opportunity to practice. I am sure they recruit some of the same players. However, there is no doubt that coach would be skewered for poor sportsmanship. We would expect that coach to do whatever he could to keep the score respectable.

Oh yeah, please don't tell me the coaches are supposed to be worried about the college players' feelings.