Well, as Belichick pretty much said in the press conference, if they kick the 25 yard field goal they’re a 99% chance to add on three more points. If they go for it, it should be at least 50/50 they get no points, and thus not running it up. He’s giving the defense a chance to stop the points by going for it, a field goal is pretty much a lock from that distance.
Now we start tunning into “unwritten rules” and “etiquette”.
Because the 72 Dolphins are the only ones right now. If the Pats do it too then they’re not “special”, but the Pats would be one of two teams to go undefeated. The celebration wouldn’t make any sense anymore.
-
I never make a big deal out of supposedly insulting spreads in the NFL because at least 95% of the time, they’re right on the money. And remember, spreads are based entirely on public perception, not how good or bad the teams really are. You know Florida State is going to demolish Random Early Season Cupcake College, so the line reflects that. You can’t be certain the Patriots are going to roll over the Bills. Doesn’t mean it’s not going to happen.
-
IMO, the really screwy thing about the constant debate over the '72 Dolphins (other than that was pretty much the only era in the history of the franchise where they weren’t either colossal disappointments or outright doormats) is that they played a 14 game regular season. There’s a world of difference between 14-0 and 16-0, let alone 17-0 and 19-0. Furthermore, 17-0 is the equivalent of 18-1, which has already been accomplished IIRC at least twice…why don’t those teams ever get any consideration?
Yes, 17-0 was a great accomplishment. No, it’s not the only great NFL accomplishment in history. Yes, I say 15-1 and 18-1 are the equivalent, and you’ll never convince me otherwise. Yes, I’m as tired of hearing about the '72 Dolphins as everyone else.
Maybe Shula and Belichick will toast each other.
I will savor every point scored on the Eagles. May the Pats score a million. Oh, how I loathe the Eagles.
It takes a special kind of asshole to meet at your house and have champagne over a sports record, no matter how much you love football, especially at age 65. That’s what made me think Hank Aaron was such a loser for acting pissy about not be “mr home run king” anymore, steriods or not.
According to ESPN, this is the highest point spread since 1976 and the highest ever not involving an expansion team.
I’ve been saying NE will have to be 35 point favorites against the Jets in week 15 for me to not continue betting the Pats. I can’t see them being higher than 30 in reality.
I think the line has *everything * to do with what the Vegas casino consortium thinks will bring in equal dollars on both sides of the wager. It isn’t a prediction about the game’s result; it’s a prediction about what bettors as an aggregate will predict about the game’s result.
And oh yeah, this is the pros. The entertainment industry. Scoring is entertaining. Running plays to kill the clock are *not * entertaining. Teaching adolescents about good sportsmanship in games that don’t really matter is not what it’s about at that level - they’re grown men, and it *does * really matter, financially if nothing else. If you don’t want the other team to score so much on you, then you’d better quit whining and find a way to stop 'em.
This “running up the score” shit ranks right up there with Filmgate. It’s mere jealousy from other less-intelligently-run franchises, and their fans, who have accomplished less within the same constraints as the Patriots. Teams that will be playing golf in January, that is.
Right. This premise is always implicit in any discussion about betting lines.
I’d be willing to let all debate on whether or not the Pats are running up scores end on the results of that game alone. To hell with anything else they’ve done this year. If they’ve ever an impetus to punish someone, it’ll manifest itself most obviously on Sunday, Dec 16th from 1:00 to 4:00.
I hope we get the game down here because that’s gonna be some serious grudgeball.
I’m agnostic towards “running up the score”. It’s within the rules of the game, although it simply may not be a very wise thing to do. Let’s just wait and see whether it comes back to bite Belichick and Brady.
But cheating isn’t within the rules, obviously. I’m not sure how you’re making this connection. Are you referring to Mangini ratting them out? Whatever his reason, that doesn’t change the fact that the Patriots were cheating…and since the Pats won each of their Super Bowls by 3 points, it’s safe to say that a little bit of (illegal) help from the videotape could have helped them win at least one of them, or even all 3.
It’s also “safe to say” that Lawrence Taylor sending a quartet of roofie-wielding prostitutes to Scott Norwood’s hotel room could have helped the Giants win the Super Bowl in 1990. It’s safe to say almost literally anything could have affected the course of any game that’s ever happened. As long as you don’t pretend like you have any evidence that it actually did in this particular case, I guess you’re “safe to say” whatever you please.
And I’m guessing that the Patriots might win that Jet game 73-0, which would then be a record-setting drubbing. And I - a Giants fan - will be delighted to see it happen.
Really? This always seemed harmless to me, and not at all directed at the team who just lost their undefeated streak. Rather, to me, the toasting it was directed back at their own accomplishments of 1972 living on.
Never did understand why this ever bothered anyone.
What has Manning ever done to come in lower on the “class rankings” behind Favre and Brady? Peyton Manning is the picture of class, I would think?
I can only think of two knocks, one of which doesn’t even involve Peyton:
-
The “idiot kicker” quote from a few years ago. Super-minor as athlete transgressions go (if you can even call it a “trangression”) … and not directed at another team.
-
The flap between dad Archie Manning and the Chargers over drafting Eli Manning. Doesn’t reflect on Peyton at all, IMHO.
Where can I find this violation in the NFL Rule book?
True, I suppose you could defend Ben Johnson and Barry Bonds in the same way. Heck, the steroids could have even slowed down Johnson and reduced Barry’s home run count. Who knows for sure?
Let’s see, the Patriots’ 1st Round draft pick was taken away by the league. That’s a big, big deal. And then the league apparently destroyed the evidence. That should be enough evidence to question the validity of all 3 championships, especially because they squeeked by in all 3 of them.
And just because they’re dominating teams in an unprecedented fashion this year doesn’t change history.
I’m just glad that the bounty story is about the Packers; if it were the Patriots being investigated by the league for bounties, the avalanche of righteous indignation would be intolerable.
Setting aside the issue of running up the score, I think 22 would still be a reasonable spread for this game.
There is evidence that the Patriots, in one game that was not the Super Bowl, videotaped the defensive signals of another team, an illegal act for which the team was duly punished by the NFL.
Every single person with a working knowledge of football who has commented on this act has maintained that: (1) virtually every NFL team engages in these and similar misdeeds; and (2) moreover, and frankly therefore, the act in question doesn’t constitute any significant competitive advantage.
And, in two of the three Super Bowls in question, the Patriots didn’t even *play * their Super Bowl opponents during the regular season, which means they couldn’t possibly have benefitted in those games from videotaping the signals of their opponents.
There is no evidence that videotaping of defensive signals played any role at all in any of the three Patriots’ Super Bowl victories (as there most certainly IS evidence that steroids played a role in Barry Bonds’ home runs). To maintain that there is to have reached your conclusion long before learning, and without regard to, the actual facts.
Let’s look at the Pats’ margins of victory. They’ve won by:
46 (@ Buffalo)
45 (home, v. Redskins)
31 (home, v. Buffalo)
24 (@ Jets, home v. San Diego)
21 (@ Bengals, @ Cowboys, @ Dolphins)
17 (Browns, at home)
4 (@ Colts).
Why wouldn’t they be favored by 22 when hosting the Eagles?
Manning’s been known to throw his offensive line under the bus after a sub-par game by the entire Colts team, including their vaunted QB. The classic example is from a press conference a couple of years ago after being eliminated from teh playoffs by the Steelers: “I’m trying to be a good teammate here… lets just say we had some problems with protection.”
Ever see Brady or Favre blame their teammates for a postseason loss?