What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

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!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

pirate said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

pirate said:
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.
Click to expand...
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).
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

pirate said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

ScoobyDoo said:
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.
Click to expand...

The Cowboys scored seven points in the entire second half of that game. But please, make yourself look more foolish.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Terrierbyassociation said:
The Cowboys scored seven points in the entire second half of that game. But please, make yourself look more foolish.
Click to expand...

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

pirate said:
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.
Click to expand...


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

pirate said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Scarlet said:
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. :)
Click to expand...

Scarlet, I said this last night and I will say it again...I love you :)
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Scarlet said:
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. :)
Click to expand...

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

Handyman said:
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. :D
Click to expand...

You guys complain about an offensive PI that happened what, 30 years ago? Trust me, you'd find a way to find time to complain about another team running up the score on the Vikings.

IIRC some of you still whine about 41-0! :D
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Its official. CHA and I will be in attendance next Sunday. Flights have been booked.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Terrierbyassociation said:
You guys complain about an offensive PI that happened what, 30 years ago? Trust me, you'd find a way to find time to complain about another team running up the score on the Vikings.

IIRC some of you still whine about 41-0! :D
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that I was in middle school at the time, but the endless parade of "Gary Anderson sucks!" that I heard from classmates in January of 1999 still amuses me.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Keep in mind that I was in middle school at the time, but the endless parade of "Gary Anderson sucks!" that I heard from classmates in January of 1999 still amuses me.
Click to expand...
most people I know blame Dennis Green for being a sucky coach, not Gary.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

Interesting. The Colts would not be playing the Jets this week if they had played hard and beat them at the end of the regular season.
 
Re: NFL 2009 Thread #3: The Quest for Perfection

JF_Gophers said:
Interesting. The Colts would not be playing the Jets this week if they had played hard and beat them at the end of the regular season.
Click to expand...

It's why I am rooting for the Jets. If the Colts hadn't raised the white flag, the Jets couldn't even make the playoffs. For the integrity of the league I would like to see karma hit the Colts in the junk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top