Post #24. They were throwing in both games in the 4th quarter with insurmountable leads.
I should correct my prior post in that they did not actually succeed in running up the scores, they only tried to.
Your anti-Dallas bias is showing.
There have been a lot of posts here about how the losing team should be mature enough to handle this. What about the winners? The Vikings are also grown men. I can understand pee-wee, high school, or even college players getting swept up in the emotion of a big victory. Sportsmanship is a learned virtue. I expect adults to have enough honor to not go out of their way, and to take joy in adding to someone else’s humiliation.
You won’t get either of those.
November 8, 2009: Dal 20 Phi 16 - Dallas scored 10 points in the 4th to take the lead and win the game. Final Cowboys score a TD at 08:04 in 4th.
January 3, 2010: Dal 24 Phi 0 - Dallas scored 0 points in the 4th quarter. Final Cowboys score a TD at 5:46 in 3rd.
January 9, 2010: Dal 34 Phi 14 - Dallas scored 0 points in the 4th quarter. Final Cowboys score a TD at 5:33 in 3rd.
2008
September 18, 2008: Phi 37 Dal 41 - Dallas scored 10 points in the 4th quarter.
December 28, 2008: Dal 6 Phi 44.
On preview - ah, I see he’s going with the “I’ll just redefine ‘running up the score’ to weasel out of yet another loss. I sure wish people would stop running up the score on me in sports threads” argument.
So let me get this straight. With 8 minutes left in a blowout, the Cowboys mounted a clock-killing 6+ minute long drive that resulted in no points, and that’s evidence of trying to run up the score?
I don’t think you understand the concept of running up the score, though you’re on perfectly defensible ground saying you’re not bothered by it. Just be aware that you don’t actually know what “running up the score” even means.
I give you the 1985 Bears, and the “Super Bowl Shuffle”, and thereby call bullshit.
Personally, I see nothing intrinsically wrong with what the Vikings did here, just as I saw nothing intrinsically wrong with it when the Patriots did it. They won’t let you leave the field until the clock reads all zeroes, so you might as well use that time in whatever way you figure will best benefit your team going forward.
But here’s the thing I wonder, and it has nothing to do with “football gods” or whatever stupidity Gregg Easterbrook copied and pasted for today’s column: weren’t the Vikings worried at all about leaving Favre in the game at that point? I mean, I’m not condoning this or suggesting that it would be acceptable, but… football players are large, strong, and in some cases prone to impulsive acts. In the fourth quarter of a hopeless cause, watching a 40-year-old quarterback enjoy his own personal glory at the expense of your own dignity… what’s to stop some second-string linebacker from going helmet-to-helmet a second or two after the ball is gone, and sending Favre to the DL? Is it really wise to risk it?
Maybe the argument there is that the Bears had a dynasty caliber team but only managed 1 ring and only 1 Super Bowl appearance. The argument can be anything you make it, I guess.
Or that they will forever have to bear the burden of being in the music video for “The Super Bowl Shuffle”.
As bad as it is, it’s still better than some other team videos, such as “Ram It” and “Christmas in Dallas.”
Clearly running up the score. It’s a mildly fucked up thing to do. I don’t care much either way since it isn’t incredibly egregious, but all the bullshit flying around has tempted me at last. Favre vs. the Cowboys; how can anyone win?
The damning (such as it is) piece of evidence here against the Vikings isn’t the 4th and 3 playcall. You have to run something. Play-action is a little bit of a fuck you to the other team, but oh well. The real problem to me is that on second down from the Cowboys 37 the Vikings were throwing the ball. You run one play down in the end zone to get a score, eh, as Bill Belichik said “What do you want us to do, kick a field goal?”. When your drive is split 50/50 run vs. pass, that’s a dick move.
Favre’s never given a shit about having any respect for his opponents (or his teammates for that matter), though, so it shouldn’t be much of a surprise, and anyway, it wasn’t really that big a deal.
Further, I’m an Eagles fan. The Cowboys did everything they could to avoid running up the score against the Eagles, just as the Eagles did when the roles were reversed. The Cowboys could have scored on 3 out of 4 drives in the second half of that game. Most NFL teams go out of their way to avoid it.
You’re right. The much safer play there is to run a blind play-action with your 40-year old quarterback so he can float the ball over three rushing linemen whose seasons are over and who are infuriated that you’re extending the game to score against them again. Certainly slamming the ball into the A gap with a backup in that scenario is an unjustifiable injury risk. Jesus.
LT2’s “Electric Glide” (warning: seizure-inducing).
This wasn’t just a professional football game, this was a professional football PLAYOFF game where if you lose, your season is over. Zero-sum. MAYBE some argument could be reasonably made during a relatively “meaningless” regular season game that the Vikings were running up the score, though even then it would be pretty sour grapes.
But this was a winner-takes-all NFL playoff game. A team must go for the jugular in such a situation. There is no room for mercy. The players and coaches understand that (or should) even if the fans and the press don’t.
I don’t buy this whole “it was impossible for Dallas to win” thing. It WAS possible. Just because it never happened before doesn’t mean Dallas couldn’t have been the first team to ever come back from such a deficit with just a few minutes on the clock.
I still don’t understand this concept. For example, the 49ers clearly ran up the score in douchebag fashion against the Chargers in the Superbowl.
I’m not exactly sure what you are getting at. I’ll just say that the Super Bowl is different because you don’t have to win to advance. Both teams seasons are over after the Super Bowl.
Again–I’m not sure if that addresses what you were trying to say—it’s just a thought.
If the losing team, against all common sense, continues to call time outs, and drag out the game to the last second, even down 3 scores with 3 minutes left, then fuck 'em. I may not tell my team to go for the throat, but I’ll play the game out, and only kneel down if it will run the clock to zero.
Joe
ILMVI, that only makes any sense at all if what the Vikings did was actually their best road to ensuring a victory. In opponent’s territory with under 5 minutes left, throwing is clearly not the way to do that. So excusing it as a simply winner-take-all approach doesn’t cut it for me any more than it would have if they had thrown for a score with ten seconds left. The mathematically sound way to ensure the win was to keep the ball for as long as possible. They scored and gave it back instead.
It was 4th and 11. They had to go for a first down, touchdown, or kick a field goal. Or they could have run a running play and likely given up possession on downs. If you can reliably go for 11+ but not score a touchdown inside the red zone, great, but getting a touchdown at that point is certainly a possible outcome. Most likely Dallas was getting the ball after that play no matter what.
It’s been pointed out repeatedly in this thread that it was 4th and 3.
4th and 3 from the 11, but that’s still close enough to the goal line that it’s kind of dumb to expect a team to only try for a 1st down, but make sure they stay out of the endzone.