I’ll agree with this as well - a touchdown is the lesser of the two evils in this situation. I also wonder what poses a greater overall risk. A kicker is always susceptible to injury on punts and field goals - but is everyone else at a lesser risk (during a field goal - punts put the returner at a much higher risk as well)?
I think it’s hilarious that the people getting worked up about this need to change all the details to persuade people to their side. It wasn’t ‘seconds’ left in the game. It wasn’t ‘long’. The cowboys weren’t ‘standing around’. They obviously had a run blitz called. If you look at the video Munch was kind enough to link, the Cowboys had 10 men in the box at the snap. 2 dropped back into coverage, leaving a 8 man rush.
So, given the parameters of the poll, I voted for the first option, because the poll really didn’t have anything to do with the Vikings vs Cowboys.
This is where I come down on it, too. Going for the first down there is a lower-percentage play than the field goal. It’s the opposite of running up the score, provided the defense does its job. And if they don’t, they have no right to complain. It’s on them, not on the Vikings, who could have rubbed it in by taking the high-percentage 3 rather than the lower-percentage 6. Instead, they chose to give the Cowboys the opportunity to hold them to nothing.
I dont think it’s unsportsmanlike to score points ever in professional sports. Sure it’s a little demeaning or humiliating or whatever to the scored-upon, but I’m sure they’ll get over it as they sit in their giant mansions, next to their pools, while their house girl buffs their bunions or whatever.
That is to say, they’re pros. They get paid to stop the other team from scoring. If they can’t do that … tough shit for them.
Now if this were schoolboy football or something, it would be a different story.
Agreed.
I’m pretty sure that Easterbrook will say something about it.
And I’m going to preaface this by saying I’m neither a Vikings nor a Cowboys fan.
My oppinion is that it is a dickish move. It’s not super dickish, but it’s still dickish to run up the score in any case. Dallas hadn’t scored since their field goal early in the game and the Vikings were in control basically the whole game. Brett Favre throwing another TD so he can jump up and down with his boyish grin is total BS. I know he loves the game, woop dee doo.
Now that being said, it’s the Cowboys job to stop the other team and they did a craptacular job of doing that, so going to the other coach and whining is pretty lame.
Many of you don’t seem to be aware of how NFL games are played. In that situation, the normal thing that most everyone does is run it up the gut on 4th and turn it over on downs. That’s just what’s done, period. Anyone arguing that this isn’t how it’s done or that it shouldn’t be how it’s done maybe isn’t as knowledgeable about the NFL as they think they are.
Because that is the clear standard, passing in that spot is viewed as a dick move. That’s why the Patriots got grief in 2007, but at least they could say they almost never ran and passing was their conservative play. The Vikings can’t even call on that weak defense. What they did was an unsportsmanlike dick move.
It is perfectly legitimate and defensible to not have a problem with unsportsmanlike dick moves. For example, Dio can totally say they’re professionals so it doesn’t matter. Totally fine. What you cannot do is deny that it’s an unsportsmanlike dick move. Because it clearly is.
It’s not a dick move. They’re just doing their jobs.
I defended the Patriots doing it too, by the way. I’m actually a big supporter of teams running up scores. I wish it would happen more often.
This is the weirdest thing I’ve ever seen. Why in the world would you spoiler a sporting event? Anyone who hasn’t seen it and is trying to avoid knowing the final score is going to stay so far away from this thread it’s not even funny. They wouldn’t even open up this forum, much less this thread.
Anyway, I could not answer your poll because multiple options are clearly unsportsmanlike and you didn’t allow multiple choices. Picking one therefore involves tacit approval of an unsportsmanlike practice.
Yep, I know. You and I were the only Patriot defenders on the board back in 2007, though I only defended against the “cheating”.
Running up the score is absolutely a dick move, but you have been consistently in favor of it so it’s all good. That’s why I explicitly mentioned your position and that it is a legitimate one.
I just think that paid professionals should never stop playing hard.
I’ve been watching football for about 20 years or so, and I think you’re full of bullshit. Most teams would kick a field goal in this situation, but that would have put them at risk of being accused of ‘running up the score’, too. There’s just not enough data to make any sort of conclusion on what teams do on 4th down, in the red zone, while blowing another team out, in the playoffs.
Sure there is. Just go look at the play-by-play on nfl.com for blowouts. I just did that very thing in the NFC North thread to prove this exact point.
I’m a Cowboys fan that doesn’t think it was unsportsmanlike. The offence earns the right to control the ball. If they want to run it, pass it, kneel it, kick it, run out the clock, save the clock, etc., it is their choice. Now whether or not it was a good decision is a different question. I would have kicked, putting the game out of range even for a miraculous comeback, avoiding a runback interception, taking my quarterback out of the game to avoid injury, and disheartening the Cowboys so they would just let the clock run out. I can see some merit in arguing for going for it with a pass, and going for it with a run, but I don’t think they are a smart as a field goal.
There are some situations in NFL that I would consider unsportsmanlike (not playing to win for instance), but running up the score isn’t one of them. These are professionals who earn unearthly sums of money; our society treats them like gods. The least they can do is play a full game. With salary cap, trading rules, and a controlled draft, the NFL is the most fair professional sports league in the world in terms of talent distribution. If you get creamed you deserve it. If you can manage a 77 point blowout you deserve to bask in the glory of a dominant performance.
While football is a team sport there is an individual element to it too. Even in the face of a humiliating loss a player should strive for great personal performance. An interception or sack on that play for instance would have been a credit to the player and the team, a consolation for the fans. Play for pride, don’t give up.
In a way the Vikings were in a no win situation. No matter what they did in that situation, a portion of fans would complain that it was bad sportsmanship. And it wouldn’t have been, no matter what they did.
The Cowboys had no timeouts during the Vikings last touchdown drive. Of course the Cowboys used timeouts on the previous drive, because there was still over six minutes left in the game. (Cite)
This is a valid objection, though, in that if the Cowboys had used timeouts on that last drive that would have definitely been a dick move on their part, and the proper response for the Vikings would absolutely have been to punch it in. That’s not what happened in this game, though.
Just the fact that Favre was on the field at all was unusual. Normally you pull your premier starters and let the backups bat cleanup.
Let’s just say we disagree on your premise and leave it at that.
Which part, the “isn’t” or “shouldn’t”? Because I’ve provided facts that back up the “isn’t” part.
People here, in rational discussion, have argued this matter both ways, and the arguments are good. People have a legitimate difference of opinion. Some people think it’s unsportsmanlike and some people don’t. I don’t think the people in the former camp are whining, cry babies, or sore losers.
I’m not sure why Brooking is being accused of that. Nobody was whining about “getting their ass kicked” or losing the game. Overall, Dallas got a beatdown, fair and square, and from what I can see, the Cowboys gave post-game props to the Vikes for the win. Brooking was simply voicing objection to a perceived unsportsmanlike coaching decision on a single play, not crying about losing.
What I find funny is that if the Packers had handed off and the player ran the ball in for a TD not a single frickin’ person wouls accuse the Vikes of running up the score, but they would lambaste the Cowboys for giving up. But throw a pass and folks complain.
Seriously, the Cowboys lose 27-3 or 34-3 and they feel disrespected? It’s laughable in my book. These are grown men fer crissakes, maybe concern yourself with your performance throughout the whole of the game and stop worrying about having your feelings hurt.
And for the record, I hate the Vikings.
I’m not sure I understand why you find that funny. One is trying to put someone out of their misery and get to the lockerroom as quickly as possible at the end of a blowout. The other is trying to prolong a game and run up the score to embarass your opponent.