Who's watching Colts-Patriots???

[nick]

Lemme ask you guys this...just cause it pertains to my fav team and cost my fav team a title maybe (not punting). When Pete Carroll ran the ball on 4th and inches and had his best player off of the field and didn't get it he got a lot of shit.....esp from a ton of people in this league, yet BB does it and its ok? I never second guessed Pete but thats because nobody was stopping VY that night. On the other hand Manning did not look sharp and I think thats what you go off of, and I think you put the game in the hands of your defense. I dunno just using another example, except obviously it was a little bit bigger of a game at that time.

He gets paid the big bucks to make those decisions and of course if he makes it he is a genious...hined sight is always fifty fifty.

20/20

[trendon]

Who is ... Barbara Walters?

I'll take People Who Are Better Than Nick for $400.

[packsyD22]

I should stop using cliches, I always spell them wrong or word them wrong.....so embarassing.

[trendon]

Well, also, it is hindsight; one word. No biggie. You could be a loser like me and not only get dictionary.com's Word of the Day mailed to you, but you can have a filter set up for it so it goes to one folder in your inbox.

Or you can just be a normal person.

[USMarine7t]

Who is ... Barbara Walters?

I'll take People Who Are Better Than Nick for $400.

Who is ... Trendon Lynch?

I'll take "People Who Can Make My Day With Just One Post" for $400 Alex.

[nick]

Who is ... Barbara Walters?

I'll take People Who Are Better Than Nick for $400.

Who is ... Trendon Lynch?

I'll take "People Who Can Make My Day With Just One Post" for $400 Alex.

hater

[trendon]

Who is ... Barbara Walters?

I'll take People Who Are Better Than Nick for $400.

Who is ... Trendon Lynch?

I'll take "People Who Can Make My Day With Just One Post" for $400 Alex.

hater

Big Hugz!

[nick]

Who is ... Barbara Walters?

I'll take People Who Are Better Than Nick for $400.

Who is ... Trendon Lynch?

I'll take "People Who Can Make My Day With Just One Post" for $400 Alex.

hater

Big Hugz!

eat shit.

[shel311]

TrendonSo we're saying 55.7 percent, huh? That's the success rate for a road team playing its biggest rival, in a deafeningly loud dome, coming out of a timeout -- a timeout that allowed the defense to get a breather and determine exactly how to stop the obvious five-receiver spread that was coming because the offense's running game sucked -- along with that same defense getting extra fired up because it was being disrespected so egregiously/willfully/blatantly/incomprehensibly. I say lower. By a lot.



Statistics can't capture the uniqueness of a particular moment, and in this case -- with the Pats self-combusting, with a sure victory suddenly slipping away, with the crowd going bonkers, with a fired-up defense gearing up to stop them, with an obvious play looming (a short pass), and with everything happening during a drive that was already so disjointed that they had called two timeouts -- I find it really, really, REALLY hard to believe they would have completed that play 56 times out of 100 times with how they lined up. They spread the field with five receivers, eliminating any chance of a run. The Colts brought pressure -- happily -- ensuring a quick pass and a short field (so Indy's D-backs could hug the line of scrimmage)
, Bill Simmons says you suck!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... cks/091120

Among a few other good points:

But Indy had already started and completed two long touchdown drives in the fourth quarter against a good defense. Had the Patriots punted, Indy would have had to pull off a third long touchdown drive to win the game. I asked Peter Newmann to research the number of times a team started and completed three touchdown drives in the fourth quarter to erase a double-digit deficit and win an NFL game since 2005. Here's how the list looked before that fourth-and-2 call.

2005: 1
2006: 2
2007: 0
2008: 1
2009: 0

In 78 weeks of football dating back to 2005, it happened a whopping four times. Four! If you're playing the statistics card, why not play that one? By punting, the Patriots would have been asking Peyton Manning to pull off something THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN EVEN ONCE EVERY EFFING SEASON.

So we're saying 55.7 percent, huh? That's the success rate for a road team playing its biggest rival, in a deafeningly loud dome, coming out of a timeout -- a timeout that allowed the defense to get a breather and determine exactly how to stop the obvious five-receiver spread that was coming because the offense's running game sucked -- along with that same defense getting extra fired up because it was being disrespected so egregiously/willfully/blatantly/incomprehensibly. I say lower. By a lot.



Statistics can't capture the uniqueness of a particular moment, and in this case -- with the Pats self-combusting, with a sure victory suddenly slipping away, with the crowd going bonkers, with a fired-up defense gearing up to stop them, with an obvious play looming (a short pass), and with everything happening during a drive that was already so disjointed that they had called two timeouts -- I find it really, really, REALLY hard to believe they would have completed that play 56 times out of 100 times with how they lined up. They spread the field with five receivers, eliminating any chance of a run. The Colts brought pressure -- happily -- ensuring a quick pass and a short field (so Indy's D-backs could hug the line of scrimmage)

[trendon]

\I asked Peter Newmann to research the number of times a team started and completed three touchdown drives in the fourth quarter to erase a double-digit deficit and win an NFL game since 2005.

Aside from all of the other talk we've had in this thread, that is a ridiculous fucking statistic and is so apples-to-oranges that I am not even sure if we are even talking about food, let alone fruit, anymore.

Factoring in previous touchdown drives while trying to determine what will happen on the next drive is akin to looking at the LED board next to the roulette wheel and using past data to figure out which number is going to come out next. It doesn't matter at all.

Insted, Mr, Newmann should do two things:

1) Remove the extra 'M' from his name.
2) See how many times a Manning-led Colts team drove 70 yards in 120 seconds.

The call was correct. That spot was not correct; he still had his feet planted when he stopped juggling the ball. The play call was awful. The egregious use of timeouts is what sank them.

The only anecdotal way you can look at it is if you count timeouts. They had none because they played like buffoons in the second half. Had they had at least two timeouts, you punt even if the odds say go for it.

On another side note, I find it amusing that a few people that I know are against NFL overtime because it "only allows one team a chance" (ignoring the fact that the defense is on the field) were so anxious to deride this call because of the Patriots' defense. Kinda amusing.

I don't care if it were the Detroit Lions, when you hand the ball to the other team, THEY are in control.