Monday, November 19, 2007
Being the bully (no Ultimate content)
Disclaimer: My two favorite teams are the Redskins (remember 52-7?) and Indianapolis. I have argued (and continue to argue) for Manning in the endless Manning vs. Brady debates. I pretty much hate the Pats, although I certainly admire them.
So... the 10-0 Patriots are running up the score. Everybody's favorite Monday morning water cooler topic, it seems. So, what up?
Firstly - the argument that they are running up the score because "you gotta play your starters for three quarters" is bullshit, plain and simple. Belichick is a very smart guy and has a well documented history of behaving in unconventional ways (going for it on 4th all the time, drastically differing schemes for different games, using players both ways, using more starters on special teams, et cetera) and would have absolutely no problem rolling out the second string in the third quarter if that was what he thought was best for his team.
Furthermore, there's an obvious reason why he should roll out the reserves - injuries. You have to look no further than the arch-rival Colts, whose chance to derail the Patriots year of destiny seems to have shattered along with Dwight Freeney's midfoot (and a tidal wave of other injuries). They looked nearly as spectacular as the Patriots when they were dismantling Jacksonville 5 weeks ago, but now they are playing a 6th string tackle and can barely eke out victories against average teams. Injuries are a fact of life in the NFL, and aside from a few relatively unimportant players, the Patriots have skirted them so far. The earlier you get your key guys off the field, the less risk you incur.
Add to the concern that, if anything, the risk of injury is even greater in a blowout. It's easy to imagine a Jets defender diving into Randy Moss's knees when he makes a catch with a 40 point lead. (And holy crap, what a shit storm that would cause.)
The reality, which seems blatantly obvious to me, is that Belichick and the Patriots have made a conscious decision to run up the score, in spite of at least one very good reason to not do so. The question then becomes, why did they make that choice? As I see it, there are two reasons, one for the other team, and the other for the Patriots.
1) Intimidation. It works, plain and simple. It's psychological warfare. Not for the game they are playing, which is already effectively over, but for the next game and the game after that. Most teams have already lost the game in their minds when they take the field against the Pats. They aren't playing to win; they just don't want to be embarrassed. It's an extra edge, and if there's anything we know about Belichick, it's that he is always looking for an extra edge, no matter how much of an edge he already has.
2) The legacy. These Patriots want all the records. They want Brady to shatter (not just break, but shatter) Manning's TD record and passer rating record. They want Moss to break Rice's receiving TD record. They want to break the record for most points by a team in a season. They want to break the record for average margin of victory. They want to be the first team to go 19-0.
Here's the thing: why the heck not? Why should they settle for winning games by 20, resting the starters and losing their last game, and just taking home the title without extra fanfare? If you had already won 3 titles in the last six years, and you had a chance to put a giant stamp on the history books, so that nobody would EVER forget to mention your team when they discussed the all-time greats, then why wouldn't you? Why should they feel bad about this?
I know that if I was a Pats fan, I'd be loving every garbage time toss to Moss. I know that I wish Peyton had piled on another 10 TDs on his record in 2004. If you don't think he could have, look at the game logs. Only 1 of the 49 could be reasonably considered a garbage time throw. He didn't play the second half in the blowouts. I guess he really didn't care about the individual stuff that much. But these Patriots, as a team, clearly do. They consider the numbers to be part of their legacy.
Belichick, a football history buff himself, recognizes this and plays into it. He does pull the starters, but only after they have put the exclamation point on the game and he's past the point of having even the slightest argument that they're not running up the score. There have been some pretty hilarious press conferences this year where Belichick has tried to argue that they weren't piling on.
I guess this is really the only thing about the situation that annoys me (other than the fact that it's a team I generally root against) - the denials and the fact that they are taken seriously. I wouldn't expect Belichick to do anything other than dodge the question, as that's the best way to minimize scrutiny. I just don't know why the media either questions whether they are running up the the score (they clearly are), or questions why they are (the two reasons above).
I think both of the reasons they are running it up invite criticism - nobody likes a bully, and you're "supposed" to only care about winning as oppose to stats. But again, if I were a Pats fan, I'd be loving it.
So... the 10-0 Patriots are running up the score. Everybody's favorite Monday morning water cooler topic, it seems. So, what up?
Firstly - the argument that they are running up the score because "you gotta play your starters for three quarters" is bullshit, plain and simple. Belichick is a very smart guy and has a well documented history of behaving in unconventional ways (going for it on 4th all the time, drastically differing schemes for different games, using players both ways, using more starters on special teams, et cetera) and would have absolutely no problem rolling out the second string in the third quarter if that was what he thought was best for his team.
Furthermore, there's an obvious reason why he should roll out the reserves - injuries. You have to look no further than the arch-rival Colts, whose chance to derail the Patriots year of destiny seems to have shattered along with Dwight Freeney's midfoot (and a tidal wave of other injuries). They looked nearly as spectacular as the Patriots when they were dismantling Jacksonville 5 weeks ago, but now they are playing a 6th string tackle and can barely eke out victories against average teams. Injuries are a fact of life in the NFL, and aside from a few relatively unimportant players, the Patriots have skirted them so far. The earlier you get your key guys off the field, the less risk you incur.
Add to the concern that, if anything, the risk of injury is even greater in a blowout. It's easy to imagine a Jets defender diving into Randy Moss's knees when he makes a catch with a 40 point lead. (And holy crap, what a shit storm that would cause.)
The reality, which seems blatantly obvious to me, is that Belichick and the Patriots have made a conscious decision to run up the score, in spite of at least one very good reason to not do so. The question then becomes, why did they make that choice? As I see it, there are two reasons, one for the other team, and the other for the Patriots.
1) Intimidation. It works, plain and simple. It's psychological warfare. Not for the game they are playing, which is already effectively over, but for the next game and the game after that. Most teams have already lost the game in their minds when they take the field against the Pats. They aren't playing to win; they just don't want to be embarrassed. It's an extra edge, and if there's anything we know about Belichick, it's that he is always looking for an extra edge, no matter how much of an edge he already has.
2) The legacy. These Patriots want all the records. They want Brady to shatter (not just break, but shatter) Manning's TD record and passer rating record. They want Moss to break Rice's receiving TD record. They want to break the record for most points by a team in a season. They want to break the record for average margin of victory. They want to be the first team to go 19-0.
Here's the thing: why the heck not? Why should they settle for winning games by 20, resting the starters and losing their last game, and just taking home the title without extra fanfare? If you had already won 3 titles in the last six years, and you had a chance to put a giant stamp on the history books, so that nobody would EVER forget to mention your team when they discussed the all-time greats, then why wouldn't you? Why should they feel bad about this?
I know that if I was a Pats fan, I'd be loving every garbage time toss to Moss. I know that I wish Peyton had piled on another 10 TDs on his record in 2004. If you don't think he could have, look at the game logs. Only 1 of the 49 could be reasonably considered a garbage time throw. He didn't play the second half in the blowouts. I guess he really didn't care about the individual stuff that much. But these Patriots, as a team, clearly do. They consider the numbers to be part of their legacy.
Belichick, a football history buff himself, recognizes this and plays into it. He does pull the starters, but only after they have put the exclamation point on the game and he's past the point of having even the slightest argument that they're not running up the score. There have been some pretty hilarious press conferences this year where Belichick has tried to argue that they weren't piling on.
I guess this is really the only thing about the situation that annoys me (other than the fact that it's a team I generally root against) - the denials and the fact that they are taken seriously. I wouldn't expect Belichick to do anything other than dodge the question, as that's the best way to minimize scrutiny. I just don't know why the media either questions whether they are running up the the score (they clearly are), or questions why they are (the two reasons above).
I think both of the reasons they are running it up invite criticism - nobody likes a bully, and you're "supposed" to only care about winning as oppose to stats. But again, if I were a Pats fan, I'd be loving it.
