NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

[LynahFan]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

There is a couple reasons I'd give Indy the nod in their match-up with the Jets.

1) They are at home
2) Peyton Manning
3) They just played and beat this exact team last week (Ravens)

Perhaps this is covered under your point #2, but I don't think you beat the Colts by keeping it close and hoping for an opportunity at the end. I can't find any stats, but the number of points Peyton has put up in the last 2 minutes of a half is ridiculous - over 40 game-winning drives in the 4th quarter, etc. The Jets need to figure out how to be ahead by at least 2 scores with 10 minutes remaining to have a decent shot at the win. If it's a 1-score game with 10 minutes left, the smart money is on the Colts every time.

As your point #3 mentions, that's what the Ravens did this week - hung around in the first half, and then before they knew it, Peyton put up 14 points in the last 2 minutes of the first half to put the game away.

Edit to add: Out of nerd curiosity, I checked. Ignoring the two "pulled starter" games this year, over the last 2 seasons, the Colts are 9-4 when losing with 10 minutes to go. The only game where they were losing by more than 10 points was to Green Bay last year - losing by 20 and they lost. So when they're losing by less than 10 points with 10 minutes to go, they are 9-3 over the last 2 seasons. That's pretty incredible - how many teams have gone .750 over the last two seasons, period?

[walrus]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Edit to add: Out of nerd curiosity, I checked. Ignoring the two "pulled starter" games this year, over the last 2 seasons, the Colts are 9-4 when losing with 10 minutes to go. The only game where they were losing by more than 10 points was to Green Bay last year - losing by 20 and they lost. So when they're losing by less than 10 points with 10 minutes to go, they are 9-3 over the last 2 seasons. That's pretty incredible - how many teams have gone .750 over the last two seasons, period?

Which is why Belicheck went for it on 4th an 2 against the Colts. Give the ball to Peyton and he can move it down the field. If the Jets can keep Peyton off the field, they can win. I don't think their offense is that good so Indy wins. The other choice is to get to Peyton, haven't seen a team do it yet so....

[gregg729]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Because there's no way - NO WAY - that a feisty Jets team could ever beat a Colts team with a legendary quarterback in a championship game.

Well played. Do you guarantee that, Broadway?

[Scarlet]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Hee! Watch your back Wade!!!

And the Jets are going to win the Super Bowl.

[pirate]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The whole Vikings v Brookings thing is interesting to me in that it brings up a lot of "so stop em" responses. Sure it is the NFL and they are getting paid, they are adults etc. but I don't agree with scoring in a lopsided game just to run up the score. If they could have stopped them then it wouldn't have been lopsided.

Mind you, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Cowboys get soundly beaten. But, unless there is a score to settle I don't see why the Vikings go for the TD that late. If there is bad blood, or a previous score to settle then I understand that sometimes those things are the way to address it.

Steal a base in the 8th up by 6 runs and your next batter takes one in the ribs. That makes sense to me. Throw it at his head and we have a new problem. Cheap shot our QB in a lopsided game and we'll score one more TD for good measure. If we go for two I understand you trying to break our kicker's leg on the ensuing kickoff.

But, if the game is not in question and one side isn't doing anything 'wrong' (and I'm not sure how wrong calling time outs really is - annoying yes, but not really a reason to do something for retribution) then go through the motions, run down the clock and take the win.

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The whole Vikings v Brookings thing is interesting to me in that it brings up a lot of "so stop em" responses. Sure it is the NFL and they are getting paid, they are adults etc. but I don't agree with scoring in a lopsided game just to run up the score. If they could have stopped them then it wouldn't have been lopsided.

Mind you, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Cowboys get soundly beaten. But, unless there is a score to settle I don't see why the Vikings go for the TD that late. If there is bad blood, or a previous score to settle then I understand that sometimes those things are the way to address it.

Steal a base in the 8th up by 6 runs and your next batter takes one in the ribs. That makes sense to me. Throw it at his head and we have a new problem. Cheap shot our QB in a lopsided game and we'll score one more TD for good measure. If we go for two I understand you trying to break our kicker's leg on the ensuing kickoff.

But, if the game is not in question and one side isn't doing anything 'wrong' (and I'm not sure how wrong calling time outs really is - annoying yes, but not really a reason to do something for retribution) then go through the motions, run down the clock and take the win.

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

I didn't see the Cowboys apologizing to the Eagles who basically had quit by halftime. But, you go ahead and think what you want.

[JF_Gophers]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

Then why play the last 2 minutes? Or even last the last 5 in this games case. Just call the game via 10-run type rules.

Either its a 60 minute game or its not. If you are in the Pros then expect your opponent to play hard the entire time. Even if it means you get embarrassed.

I wouldn't condone that behavior in college where not all teams have the same resources (like La-Monroe vs Alabama).

[redwing77]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The whole Vikings v Brookings thing is interesting to me in that it brings up a lot of "so stop em" responses. Sure it is the NFL and they are getting paid, they are adults etc. but I don't agree with scoring in a lopsided game just to run up the score. If they could have stopped them then it wouldn't have been lopsided.

Mind you, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Cowboys get soundly beaten. But, unless there is a score to settle I don't see why the Vikings go for the TD that late. If there is bad blood, or a previous score to settle then I understand that sometimes those things are the way to address it.

Steal a base in the 8th up by 6 runs and your next batter takes one in the ribs. That makes sense to me. Throw it at his head and we have a new problem. Cheap shot our QB in a lopsided game and we'll score one more TD for good measure. If we go for two I understand you trying to break our kicker's leg on the ensuing kickoff.

But, if the game is not in question and one side isn't doing anything 'wrong' (and I'm not sure how wrong calling time outs really is - annoying yes, but not really a reason to do something for retribution) then go through the motions, run down the clock and take the win.

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

I'm not going to defend the Queens and class, but hey....

It's all in perception. How are the media portraying the Cowboys? They've done nothing since Aikman retired really... but yet the media still calls them "America's Team." They get TV shows, countless air time at the snap of Jerry Jones' fingers.

They are an ARROGANT team with an ARROGANT owner. I can honestly say they out-ARROGANT their fanbase!

Not that Childress sent them out there one last time to rip it to them good, but it really is a "If you don't want them to score, STOP THEM." Type situation.

Isn't it interesting that the more arrogant the team, the louder they cry when they're thoroughly embarrassed in a big game?

We can debate classiness til next season and I really won't care what is decided. However, to the arrogant organizations should come ample ways to shut them the hell up. The Vikings did just that.

Suck it, Brookings.

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

I didn't see the Cowboys apologizing to the Eagles who basically had quit by halftime. But, you go ahead and think what you want.

The Cowboys scored seven points in the entire second half of that game. But please, make yourself look more foolish.

[redwing77]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The Cowboys scored seven points in the entire second half of that game. But please, make yourself look more foolish.

So you're saying that the Cowboys couldn't score more than 7 points on a team that quit at halftime?

No wonder the Vikings had it so easy.

[Scarlet]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The whole Vikings v Brookings thing is interesting to me in that it brings up a lot of "so stop em" responses. Sure it is the NFL and they are getting paid, they are adults etc. but I don't agree with scoring in a lopsided game just to run up the score. If they could have stopped them then it wouldn't have been lopsided.

Mind you, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Cowboys get soundly beaten. But, unless there is a score to settle I don't see why the Vikings go for the TD that late. If there is bad blood, or a previous score to settle then I understand that sometimes those things are the way to address it.

Steal a base in the 8th up by 6 runs and your next batter takes one in the ribs. That makes sense to me. Throw it at his head and we have a new problem. Cheap shot our QB in a lopsided game and we'll score one more TD for good measure. If we go for two I understand you trying to break our kicker's leg on the ensuing kickoff.

But, if the game is not in question and one side isn't doing anything 'wrong' (and I'm not sure how wrong calling time outs really is - annoying yes, but not really a reason to do something for retribution) then go through the motions, run down the clock and take the win.

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

So, what were you thinking would be the best case scenario here? They were close enough for a field goal. The Vikings kick that and the score goes up three rather than seven points. At that point, what's the difference? It was 3rd and whatever. What do the Vikings do there? take a knee? That is way more insulting, IMO. I was actually saying to the TV, they a) should go for it rather than a FG and b) they were close enough to try for the end zone - why not? If they just tried to convert and made the first down, they still had the ball down there and probably would have scored anyway.

Now, had they decided to go for a 2-point conversion, that would have been a bit much.

[Handyman]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

The whole Vikings v Brookings thing is interesting to me in that it brings up a lot of "so stop em" responses. Sure it is the NFL and they are getting paid, they are adults etc. but I don't agree with scoring in a lopsided game just to run up the score. If they could have stopped them then it wouldn't have been lopsided.

Mind you, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Cowboys get soundly beaten. But, unless there is a score to settle I don't see why the Vikings go for the TD that late. If there is bad blood, or a previous score to settle then I understand that sometimes those things are the way to address it.

Steal a base in the 8th up by 6 runs and your next batter takes one in the ribs. That makes sense to me. Throw it at his head and we have a new problem. Cheap shot our QB in a lopsided game and we'll score one more TD for good measure. If we go for two I understand you trying to break our kicker's leg on the ensuing kickoff.

But, if the game is not in question and one side isn't doing anything 'wrong' (and I'm not sure how wrong calling time outs really is - annoying yes, but not really a reason to do something for retribution) then go through the motions, run down the clock and take the win.

I won't use the word class, as it is beaten to death already but the "so stop em" response doesn't do it for me...everybody should be trying to get through the last 2 minutes without an injury, not trying to stop a team from scoring in a blowout.

If the Cowboys wanted the game to end they should have let the time run and stop playing like the game was still in doubt. Pull your starters and stop using timeouts. What is the point of leaving in Romo and Co. unless you think there is the slightest possibility you might win. Well, if you aren't going to wave the white flag no one is going to do it for you. (and this goes for the D too...pull them out, show the Vikes you concede and they will most like just let the game go)

Whining about class or running up the score is the mantra of the loser. Why should the Vikings care about whether or not it hurts the fragile eqos? I have seen every team I support get the score run up and I dont whine like a two year about it like some in the media and Crybaby Brookings did.

Well whatever, the whole world can think they are *******s the Vikings won the game in the end THAT is what matters.

[Handyman]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

So, what were you thinking would be the best case scenario here? They were close enough for a field goal. The Vikings kick that and the score goes up three rather than seven points. At that point, what's the difference? It was 3rd and whatever. What do the Vikings do there? take a knee? That is way more insulting, IMO. I was actually saying to the TV, they a) should go for it rather than a FG and b) they were close enough to try for the end zone - why not? If they just tried to convert and made the first down, they still had the ball down there and probably would have scored anyway.

Now, had they decided to go for a 2-point conversion, that would have been a bit much.

Scarlet, I said this last night and I will say it again...I love you

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

So, what were you thinking would be the best case scenario here? They were close enough for a field goal. The Vikings kick that and the score goes up three rather than seven points. At that point, what's the difference? It was 3rd and whatever. What do the Vikings do there? take a knee? That is way more insulting, IMO. I was actually saying to the TV, they a) should go for it rather than a FG and b) they were close enough to try for the end zone - why not? If they just tried to convert and made the first down, they still had the ball down there and probably would have scored anyway.

Now, had they decided to go for a 2-point conversion, that would have been a bit much.

Passing on 4th down up big late...I say what they should have done is run the **** ball. If they still scored a td, whatever. IMO kicking the FG is even more insulting because you're putting 3 points on the board you don't need. But passing on 4th down late in the game seems a bit sketchy.

But don't worry, Vikings fans complain with the best of them. If the Saints do it to them all these Vikings fans will either be quiet or have a selective memory over what happened the previous week.

[Handyman]

Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

If the Saints run it up on the Vikes no one will complain about it they will be too busy calling for Chilli's head, blaming Brett Favre/AP, whining about how Bud Grant never won the big one, blaming Chilli some more...etc.