Ah, the “everyone hates us cause we’re us” Massachusetts sports attitude. Trust me, no one would criticize them for kicking the FG. It’s what you do in that situation, especially if you are playing to keep yourself sharp.
I’m in the camp of keep playing to score. Keep going for it. I am not a Pat’s fan and I turn the game off at the half, but no sense in not going for it. This isn’t little league.
Jim
I disagree. I honestly believe that there are critics this season that would find reason to harp on anything the Pats did in that situation. Such is life, I certainly don’t think Belicheck cares. The only real answer is to prevent them from scoring.
Of course it’s up to them. But from the standpoint of trying to win future games, it’s stupid. I don’t think running up the score is immoral, I think it’s generally not smart and a little crass. It’s way further down the scale.
Running backs? Please. They’re easily replaced. Brady and Moss aren’t. And losing Brady would cripple the team.
Belichick tried to pull that canard a few weeks ago. Nobody’s buying it. I’ve never heard anybody criticized for kicking a field goal with a big lead.
It’s not even apples and oranges - in a sport without a time element it just doesn’t work as a comparison. In football, whether you win 42-10 or 56-10, you win after 60 minutes. In tennis, you don’t win until a set until you get six games (unless you need seven). Even then, tennis players sometimes lay back a little bit once they have a service break. Although that’s about conserving energy for their own serve, not really a sportsmanship thing.
Well as long as you believe it, even when no one ever criticizes it.
I honestly think running up the score is a good move psychologically. It puts the next opponent into the mindset of playing to not be embarassed instead of playing to win. It also means that you get to see exciting football past the point the game has been decided, which can only be a good thing from a disinterested viewer.
This team and this season is right at the top of the most stunning things I have ever seen in sports and of course I want it to continue.
Teams have blown 4-touchdown leads in a half before. It’s possible. The Patriots were not yet in a position to stop playing smart football.
So the question is, was it smart football? Look, you’re obviously not going to punt at the 3-yard line. So the issue here is not running up the score; it’s which makes more sense, running up the score another 3 points or maybe running it up another 7 but maybe giving the other team horrible field position. On the 3-yard line, unless that’s a critical 3 points, going for the touchdown is almost always the correct play, since pinning the opposition on their goal line early in a half has a very high probability of paying off. Now, if they’d gone for it from, say, the 16-yeard line, I’d agree it would appear as if they were showing off. At the 3-yard line, though, the calculus is different; your chances of scoring a touchdown are excellent and even if you don’t you’re handing the opposition what is likely a terrible start to their possession, as opposed to a kickoff.
It seems to me that laying back with half the game yet to play, more or less, is much more unsportsmanlike than continuing to try to ensure you’re going to win the game.
One rationale I’ve heard, and that makes sense to me: Belichick plays hard even when the Pats have an unbeatable lead because one of these days they’re going to be playing a close game and He wants his team to be practiced and in shape for two-minute drills and games where every play counts. The Pats are a great team in a shitty division, but it’s no accident that when they play another great team like the Colts they’re able to pull out close games.
As far as morality goes, it’s the NFL not high school. If some well funded high school team (or even college team) is playing a little school with no real program running up the score is a shitty thing to do. But in the NFL you’re getting paid. If you’re not good enough to keep from being beaten by fifty points, suck it up. And I say this as a 'Skins fan.
Well, technically yes, but if this page is accurate, a lead of 28 points or more has only been overcome twice in (American) professional football history. Not sure about the CFL.
In December 1980 San Francisco came back from a 35-7 score to beat New Orleans 38-35, and in January 1993 Buffalo overcame a 35-3 deficit to beat Houston 41-38. That Buffalo comeback included 28 points in the third quarter alone!
Those stats go back over half a century, so that two 4-touchdown comebacks in 50 years of games.
I agree with all that.
Most of my beliefs (they’re professionals, no free rides, 28-point lead not insurmountable, stupid to punt on opposing 3, Federer needs 6 games no matter what) have already been mentioned, so let me just expand this discussion a bit.
There’s a colossal disparity at the high school level. You have squads full of future major leaguers and squads full of inept, clumsy, unathletic kids who aren’t even going to pretend they can make it in college. There are going to be mismatches. And since the vast majority of these athletes haven’t developed an adult’s maturity yet, they need to learn proper sportsmanship. So it’s a great idea, indispensible, in fact, to prevent running up the score. Every high school league worth a damn already knows this, however (and they also know full well that some jerkish coach is going to buck the system), so they have plenty of rules in place to keep things from getting too out of control…cutoffs, time reduction, etc.
At the college level, the real problem is that a Division 1-A powerhouse is allowed to put a Divison 2* creampuff on the schedule in the first place. At this point, the only choices are to be completey honest about about this cowardly action and blow the poor opponent out, or show a tiny measure of compassion by holding back once the lead is clearly insurmountable. In either case, the damage sportsmanship-wise has been done.
In all, running up the score can be a problem, but the vast majority of the time it isn’t, and at any rate there are lots of things in this sport far more worthy of our ire.
- Note I said Division 2, not Division 1-AA. That’s because Division I-AA is part of Division I…slightly weaker overall, perhaps, but still Divison 1…and is not a creampuff division. And the team that won the championship for said division twice in a row is ABSOLUTELY no creampuff. All right?
Why take the chance on a third? Their opponents aren’t going to stop trying to score. Why should the Pats?
I’m a Ravens fan and a former linebacker, and I love defensive football. Still, the Patriots’ offense is a thing of beauty. They’re the best football team I’m ever had the pleasure of watching, and I hope they never let up they’re forced to.
Never said they should.
Exactly. No game is ever over at halftime; if one team can do it in the first half, the other can do it in the second.
I’d interpret that fact differently: The fact that it’s happened, if only twice, shows that shows that such a comeback is possible, and the Patriots were right to keep playing hard.
If they’d gone for it on 4th-and-1 with a 50-point lead and 10 seconds left in the game, I’d be disgusted. Doing it on their first possession of the second half just shows that Belichick has confidence in his team (with good reason).
EDIT: mhendo, on re-reading, I see your position more clearly. I think we’re on the same page here.
First off, the play in question was the FIRST PLAY of the second half. I agree that’s WAY too early to be putting the baseball hat on.
I think every player should put forth 100% on every play. If you score, you score. With that being said it’s the coach’s job to think about long term success. Randy Moss is much less likely to tear an ACL when he’s sitting on the sidelines and Belichek would be the laughing stock of the NFL if one of his stars went down when they were already up by 40+ points.
Just put some scrub in there and run the ball. Pass to try to keep the drive going, but just run the clock out and go home.
In rugby union, this is more or less exactly what happens. If you’re awarded a penalty kick within range of goal you can either kick for goal for a fairly certain 3 points, or kick to touch, allowing you a lineout very close to the try line and thus a slightly reduced chance of getting a bigger 7 point haul.
If a team is leading narrowly, it’s expected that they’ll go for goal, especially if the 3 points will take them more than two scores ahead of their opponent. Up 35-7 (and rugby union has pretty similar scoring to NFL, so it’s pretty comparable), there’d be almost no question that you go for the try. Kick for goal, and the crowd are going to be pissed, and will let you know it. Especially just after half time.
OTOH, there’s no real tradition in English sport of deliberately not beating your opponents too badly (maybe because we don’t get the opportunity all that much :)). And certainly not against opponents who are nominally of the same standard as you - I could understand a pro team going easy on a college team, were they to play each other for some reason, but the idea that professionals shouldn’t try as hard as they can to beat other professionals just strikes me as odd. Particularly, as pointed out, when there’s a stadium full of paying spectators and half a match left to play.
I’m kinda torn here. On the one hand I saw an interview with Brady a few weeks ago and he said, in essence, when I’m having a bad day no one says, hey, the defense should let him hit a few of those passes. I just come out and say I have to get better next week. And I agreed with him.
On the other hand, I few years ago I remember the Steelers were kicking hell out of their opponent and rather than run it in they took a knee. And I thought that was classy.
Taking a knee in the third quarter? I think that would be more embarrassing for the opposing team than the Pat’s scoring.
LOL. You are right, thanks for spotting it. Of course it was the end of the forth quarter. You are a brilliant analyst of posts.
I was at the playoff game when Buffalo came back to beat Houston in overtime for the win. It was a hell of a game.
That was with Jim Kelly slinging to Andre Reed and Thurman Thomas running. The Bills were a team to fear then. This year (decade?) not so much.
I’m all for running up the score when you can against 29 of the teams in the league, just not like last night. 
psst, it was Frank Reich…