PDA

View Full Version : Running up the score:Classless or just modern NFL?


CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 06:55 AM
A discussion iíve had with some people about running up the score, centered around Manning. I just want to know how you folks think about this?

My opinion, which is up for discussion, is that P. Manning and his Colts are classless. I think that Manning has shown his true face. He runs up the score for ego-reasons, is a me- first player and shows that in his onfield behavior and his decision to force his recent contact.

(Caution:Iím not here to argue/diminish Mannings abilities as a QB, his achievements, on-field vision... . Heís technically one of the best QBís in the NFL .THAT isnít the topic.)

1) Manning has run up the score against weak and/or beaten teams like Houston, Tennessee, Chicago, Detroit. He stayed on the field longer than he had to (cause the games were won by any means), but he kept playing for more: More Td passes on his way to Glory and a record. Also he wanted to present himself as a legend on National TV against Detroit in the late Thanksgiving game. Doing that he offended the Detroit Lions and exposed them bitterly.
2) Pay-me-a-ton of money Manning has forced the Colts into cap difficulties. That he takes the money is his right, probably he also earns it. But it shows his priorities, if you take this into account:
3) His persecution of a record exposes him to the threat to get injured. Success in one regular season game brings only ONE win, even if you win an otherwise meaningless game by 40. Itís just one win. Going after the record is selfish and puts your interests over the team. Was the same with his contract.

He clearly ignores Ė like Dungy - the unwritten rule of NOT running up the score.

Is Manning really in Need of that additional garbage TDís against Houston, Detroit, or Chicago? (he wasn't getting many more, BTW) None of them is a bitter rival, or a competitor for the division crown.




To reply to the most regular remarks before they come up:

1)You shouldnít do always, what you could do. This thought is flawed from the start.

2) Also I donít agree, that just because itís only a sport, offending your opponent is acceptable or even something to support.

4) CAN he do it? Yes, as we have seen, but itís not his ability that I question. Is it o.k. or more respectable because he can do? No, not to me. Style matters more than records imo.

Thatís my view why Manning Ė or anyone else - shouldnít act like he has done.

Feel free to elaborate. Iíll answer asap.

WWJD
12-06-2004, 08:13 AM
My first thought is teams should play some defense.

My second thought is Peyton will break alot of records before he is done.

My third thought is isn't there another thread or two about this very same topic?

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 08:37 AM
My first thought is teams should play some defense.

My second thought is Peyton will break alot of records before he is done.

My third thought is isn't there another thread or two about this very same topic?

First: Running up the score can only happen cause a defense can't stand their ground. That's nothing unusual or special. Happens at least once in a week. Interesting is, what the winning team does with it's lead?

Second: That's just not the question here, although you could/will be right.

Third: Some threads are including this in this section, or talking about Ne or Phi yesterday, but it is spreaded or buried under a lot of other threads (in the Bull's pen section i clicked through to page 9)

ALSo, i don't want to review every play of the Houston-Indy game. It's just an example for that style-less way of running up the score, that seems to get common.

txhoosier
12-06-2004, 08:47 AM
I will have to disagree with you on the statement that Manning and Dungy are classless. They are 2 of the classiest people in the league today.

No lead is insurmountable...the Colts know that, having staged one of the greatest comebacks in NFL History last season in TB.

My question to you is...would you be this upset if it had been any other team but the Texans that the score was "run up" as you put it? (even thought the last 2 scores against the T's were by the Indy defense...)

I have already posted a couple of points about the T's game on the other thread, so I won't re-hash them here.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 09:04 AM
I will have to disagree with you on the statement that Manning and Dungy are classless. They are 2 of the classiest people in the league today.

I thought of Dungy the same way until that game. I'm not sure anymore about him since the Texans Game (only) in regard of running up the score. He is a very good coach and probably a classy person in the community, coaching... But in that one point i still disagree.

No lead is insurmountable...the Colts know that, having staged one of the greatest comebacks in NFL History last season in TB.
Do you really thought they would come back? Are they comparable to that Colts team last year? Both times no.

My question to you is...would you be this upset if it had been any other team but the Texans that the score was "run up" as you put it? (even thought the last 2 scores against the T's were by the Indy defense...)

Yes! I'm a not a fan of the Texans first. I just was upset about that game and looked for comparable games and so on. It' s just that it doesnt fit with the person that we can see in all the advertisements and being the poster boy of the NFL. He says the right things all the time. But the guy on the field seemed not to be the (self-)presented Manning. And he isn't in need to throw some more to get a record that way. If you tell me Manning is deserving a ring in his career once i would probably agree with you. Then let' see him act like that and not run up the score to get a record a bit earlier he will get anyway. Or get injured doing something that stupid.

txhoosier
12-06-2004, 09:17 AM
I thought of Dungy the same way until that game. I'm not sure anymore about him since the Texans Game (only) in regard of running up the score. He is a very good coach and probably a classy person in the community, coaching... But in that one point i still disagree.
So, you think that Dungy is a class act, and one "incident" in your opinion has made you re-think your entire view of a person?

Do you really thought they would come back? Are they comparable to that Colts team last year? Both times no.
actually, yes. They showed great resolve when beat down by the Vikings earlier in the season, and this is a talented team in Houston. They don't always play like it, but they have the capability.

Yes! I'm a not a fan of the Texans first. I just was upset about that game and looked for comparable games and so on. It' s just that it doesnt fit with the person that we can see in all the advertisements and being the poster boy of the NFL. He says the right things all the time. But the guy on the field seemed not to be the (self-)presented Manning. And he isn't in need to throw some more to get a record that way. If you tell me Manning is deserving a ring in his career once i would probably agree with you. Then let' see him act like that and not run up the score to get a record a bit earlier he will get anyway. Or get injured doing something that stupid.
Again, you are saying that you think someone is of high class/caliber, and yet you won't give them the benefit of the doubt that there was something else going on that you don't know about?

We let emotional media like Randy Cross get us all upset when they start talking. Even the other announcer was trying to tell Randy that he might be wrong...but Cross was adamant. Wasn't he a D lineman? I think he was taking it personally...even though he wasn't on the field. IMO, I lost more respect for Randy Cross and his emotional tirade than I did for Payton and/or Dungy. Both are still class acts IMO.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 09:40 AM
So, you think that Dungy is a class act, and one "incident" in your opinion has made you re-think your entire view of a person?


I have Dungy in higher regard than some of his fellow coaches in terms of capabilities. One thing that impressed me about him and let me have a good "picture" bout him was his classful way of leaving Tampa, although they mistreated him. I'm sure they would have won the SB also with Dungy as Coach. Afterwards he could adjust to a totally different style of team and handled all his duties very well. Only positive things so far.

This running up the score couldn't be seen in Tampa and for a reason, as you know. I' ve never remarked something like that under Dungy in Indianapolis as well. The One incident is a very big one imo. It's a difference maker. How do see, how do you respect, how do you handle your opponent? Isn't that enough to think twice about that behavior? My words were probably harsh choosing "classless".

It's just football, probably you're right and nobody should get too emotional about a blowout loss and the different perspectives. it's just that it isn't necessary to put in the finger and turn around four times more without need. The perception about the need at least is different, as i' ve learned.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 09:45 AM
IMO, I lost more respect for Randy Cross and his emotional tirade than I did for Payton and/or Dungy. Both are still class acts IMO.

(I don't want to offend you nor do i want to challenge your perception about Manning and Dungy, BTW)

Would you have replaced Manning and Edge at the beginning of the fourth Quarter?

WWJD
12-06-2004, 09:46 AM
I think Randy Cross was an offensive lineman.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 10:49 AM
The NFL uses points differential, ie. points scored minus points against, to help determine overall regular season order-of-finish and playoff seeding. If IND and SD for example both finished 12-4, the team with the greater differential would get the higher seeding. So, for practical purposes, you should run up the score any chance you get, unless you have no hope of making the playoffs.

Strength of victory would be down to the fourth tie-breaker and only would be taken into account, if it was an opponent of both teams, respectivley SD and Indy.

Two Clubs
1. Head-to-head, if applicable.
2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
4. Strength of victory.
5. Strength of schedule.
6. Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
7. Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
8. Best net points in conference games.
9. Best net points in all games.
10. Best net touchdowns in all games.
11. Coin toss.

http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakers


The tie-breakers are first head to head.
Sd and Indy will play in week 16. Means the first tie breaker is enough if needed at all

txhoosier
12-06-2004, 11:01 AM
(I don't want to offend you nor do i want to challenge your perception about Manning and Dungy, BTW)

Would you have replaced Manning and Edge at the beginning of the fourth Quarter?
Yes, I would have...I would have allowed Manning to get one pass after the first INT, and then pulled him. But I would have given Sorgi and the rest of the backups green light to throw down the field if that's what the D was going to give you.

Edit...I just wanted to thanks for being able to have a conversation in which we disagree yet still be civil to each other. This is very different from the other boards I'm used to.

Youngstown Colt
12-06-2004, 11:22 AM
Do you really thought they would come back? Are they comparable to that Colts team last year? Both times no.
ok, then. do you really think this colts defense is comparable to that tampa defense? i dont think so.

maybe you didnt notice what tennesees BACKUP QUARTERBACK and SECOND WIDE RECIEVER did to the colts in one quarter yesterday. 24 points!

I will say this once again: the people on this board can keep complaining that manning and dungy are classless because your defense couldnt do its job, and the rest of the world will continue to not care.

Fiddy
12-06-2004, 03:18 PM
No lead is insurmountable...the Colts know that, having staged one of the greatest comebacks in NFL History last season in TB.Thats why I dont mind scoring more TDs after you have your oppenent down, especially in the Colts situation because their defense is really bad.

And people in Houston should no that no lead is safe: 35-3 :thud:

Speedy
12-06-2004, 03:51 PM
I'm of the mindset that you play your game for 60 minutes. If Manning's in the game, you keep playing the way you play.

My only concern is, in a blowout, why is Manning in the game?? And that goes for any team with a big lead not just Indy. IMO, get your backups in there to get some snaps under their belts. It just makes you that much better in case there is an injury. And to have a guy like Manning injured in a game they're leading by 4 TD's in the 4th quarter is just stupid.

Get the backups in there, and if they're running it down the field and running up the score, oh well. It gives them that much more confidence should they ever have to play because of an injury.

cob
12-06-2004, 04:51 PM
New to this forum, but since I've seen so many posts on this topics I figured I'd add my .02...

First off, I disagree that Manning and Dungy are classless. That doesn't match everything else I've seen, read, and heard about these guys. I don't think either of them have any interest in padding stats.

But suppose for a minute it was true, and Manning wanted to stay in the game, pad his stats, and run up the score. Do you actually think Colts' GM Bill Polian and owner Jim Irsay would allow their franchise, extremely expensive quarterback to stay in the game, and risk getting injured, in a season in which it appears the Colts should win their division and have a legitimate shot at the Super Bowl? Even if Dungy and Manning wanted to do it, there's no way they'd be able to - not if Dungy wants to keep his job. So the entire idea of this being a personal, stat-related thing doesn't make sense.

Actually, at the time of the Texans game, I was somewhat PO'ed to see Peyton in the game in 4th quarter - couldn't figure out why he'd be in there and risk getting injured. But in retrospect, I think I understand what the team was thinking. You need to look at it in the context of the Colts' schedule at the time:

1) They were in the 2nd game of playing 4 games in 18 days, coming off a short week after a Monday night against Minn, in which the defense spent most of the time on the field.

2) Their next two games were on the road, one outdoors in Chicago, the following Thanksgiving day in Det. Chicago's defense had been pretty good all year, and what offense they have is a running game, meaning the Colts' defense was likely to spend a lot of time on the field the following week as well.

3) The Colts offense scored pretty quickly against the Texans, so the Colts' defense had already been on the field a lot that day.

4) The Colts' defense in general, and DBs in particular, had been pretty beat up all year (starting 2nd and 3rd stringers in some postions every game).

5) This was a critical 4 game stretch for the Colts after losing 2 in a row to Jax and KC - they needed to win all 4 to get back up in the division and hopefully out of a tie with Jax.

So what do I think was going on? That's easy...Dungy was trying to give the Colts' DEFENSE a rest and keep them off the field as much as possible, particularly the DBs, so they'd be in better shape for the next 2 games. So the point of having Manning in there was not to run up the score, but to give the defense a break by holding the ball longer. If Dungy pulls Manning and puts backup (and rookie) Jim Sorgi in, the Colts are not going to hold the ball long; it would be 3 and out every time...meaning the defense is on the field getting beat on, particularly the DBs as the Texans feel obligated to throw and make a game of it (if you have any doubts that the Colts would have gone 3 and out every time with Sorgi, just look at his stats for the year. I think they've let him throw less than 10 passes, and at the time of the Texans game I'm willing to bet that he'd thrown none). Coming off a short week, and with two more games in the next 11 days, I think all Dungy was doing was trying to keep his defense as fresh as possible to give the Colts the best shot at winning the next 2 games.

As for why that changed in the Bears game when Manning did get pulled after the 3rd: the Bears have no pass offense, so at that point of the game, with Bears passing to try and mount a comeback, the Bears were as likely to go 3 and out as the Colts were. Further, the Colts were running well on the Bears that day, and could actually moved the ball on the ground. In the Texans game, you guys were playing 8 in the box in the 4th quarter, meaning the only way the Colts could hold the ball was to pass. If the Colts have to pass, Sorgi isn't the guy to do it.

Finally, as for why the scores get run up until the end of the 3rd quarter - you need to try to get an insurmountable lead going into the 4th in order to pull people. In my mind, that needs to be more than 30 points. A lot of teams can score 28 points in a quarter. So I think you need to be up by about 5 touchdowns at the start of the 4th before you start pulling people. If you don't, you end up like Tampa Bay watching the Colts come back from 21 down in 4 minutes.

I don't think any teams have run up the score or attempted to pad stats this year. Even the Eagles yesterday could have done much more to the Packers, but they settled for FGs instead of going for touchdowns. I think if I were Philly I would have pulled McNabb, but that's their risk to take.

disaacks3
12-06-2004, 07:14 PM
cob - Kudos to you for a well-though-out argument. Even though I may not agree with some of your hypothesis, it was definitely something to think about.

I've only got two real disagreements with you, so here goes:

1) Your argument is that Polian/Irsay wouldn't let Dungy keep Maning in if there was a risk, that they wouldn't let him do it just to "pad stats".

I counter that the opposite must have been true, otherwise, why was Manning in the game w/ a 35-point lead? Lord knows, it wasn't just Randy Cross that thought it was insane to risk your investment (Manning) in a game that was clearly over. IMHO, the only "reason" that makes sense is the pursuit of the aforementioned "record" and that Dungy assured Polian/Irsay that Manning was in no "danger", due to the Texans complete lack of a pass rush. I think that public backlash over that decision, much of it coming from loyal Colts fans (who'd like their QB to live till the SuperBowl), has given Dungy pause in keeping him in late since.

2) Your argument is that they kept Manning in the game to "rest" the defense..

If that's the case, you'd be mixing up the play-calling, making sure all receivers stayed inbounds after receptions, etc. The tape of the game doesn't bear out that argument at all. It looks just like a pass-happy attack aimied at getting more TDs for the QB....in this case Manning.

As for the 3-and-outs the Colts backup QB has on his stat sheet... I feel that's probably more a byproduct of the play selection (ie - let's just run it and keep the clock moving) than his potential ineptness at the position.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 08:22 PM
Interesting thoughts. Let's go, to sum it, I agree with the points made by disaacks3.

But suppose for a minute it was true, and Manning wanted to stay in the game, pad his stats, and run up the score. Do you actually think Colts' GM Bill Polian and owner Jim Irsay would allow their franchise, extremely expensive quarterback to stay in the game, and risk getting injured, in a season in which it appears the Colts should win their division and have a legitimate shot at the Super Bowl? Even if Dungy and Manning wanted to do it, there's no way they'd be able to - not if Dungy wants to keep his job. So the entire idea of this being a personal, stat-related thing doesn't make sense.

What do you expect to happen?: Polian coming down to the sidelines and pulling Manning himself from the field? To complain openly that his Head coach made an error? Or even firing the head coach who is leading them into the playoffs actually, to leave the team headless? No way. Probably a change could be seen in the next game they're leading that much, just a thought.

You're saying, Colts defense was tired after Minn and Texans game working a lot and having a intense game against running team Chicago, with a lot of 4 games coming in less than 3 weeks.

The best thing about giving your defense a rest would be short and intermediate passes, mixed with some runs or only running, if you are able to. Run the clock, if you have the lead late. Don't throw for 40 yards, if you want to rest your defense.

The quality of the defenses in that 4 game stretch was not very good, regarding their stats. Detroit, Chicago and Texans haven't the depth to defend against the 3 WR sets the Colts love. Don't forget about Pollard and Clark and a super quick pass release of Manning as well. The Colts offense put up points very easily against all of them, as it seems.

So if Scoring isn't in question with your starters, how did the Colts do on the defensive side?: Chicago as an example was self destructing all day: Fumbles, Int and so on. Indy def was looking great against an overmatched Krenzel. With leading 27-3 at halftime they forced him into an agressive passing attack that he isn't capable of nor the Chicago offense. I never had the impression that Houston, Detroit or Chicago would have had a chance to come back or even close.

Please compare their average score against the differential at that "specific time", where i would have pulled Manning in each of that games. The average score over the season of Detroit (18.2), Chicago (16.3) and Houston (19.7) was matched way earlier. And please, if they should score more than usual (in a full game!) surprinsingly in one quarter, then bring in Manning again, if they should close in on 14 points.

Tennessee needed two successful and in that situation unexpected row of onside kicks to put up points. It's something very rare and even that stopped after 1 quarter. They had used their powder and were giving up later on.

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
12-06-2004, 08:23 PM
Who cares if they run up the score. If they don't like it, then try playing some defense.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 08:37 PM
I would compare it to a boxing match, with the difference, that the ref in the ring can stop the fight after it's over.

Boxers don't have to go over the full distance, contrary to Football.

Although you can give your opponent some hard blows and knock him off, you don't beat him up anymore after he went down and out. A football defense/offense/team can be down as well although still standing. But they simply can't do anything about it anymore that makes a difference.

Perhaps not a perfect comparison, but it illustrates my perspective.

infantrycak
12-06-2004, 08:52 PM
Who cares if they run up the score. If they don't like it, then try playing some defense.

Not directed solely at you but to all those who use this trite response whenever this topic comes up. The original question was about whether it is classy or good sportsmanship to run up scores. The likes and dislikes of the opposing team are completely irrelevent to that discussion. The question is entirely about the decision making of the team in the lead. Not running up scores has been considered good sportsmanship (and good management by not risking top players and getting backups playing time) for a long time. Hard to teach kids to be good sports when their examples don't follow the same ideas.

CrumplerFan
12-06-2004, 09:03 PM
This one liner is a killer.

I have doubts from time to time, that sportmanship is still a (large) part of the NFL.

cob
12-06-2004, 10:07 PM
1) Your argument is that Polian/Irsay wouldn't let Dungy keep Maning in if there was a risk, that they wouldn't let him do it just to "pad stats".

I counter that the opposite must have been true, otherwise, why was Manning in the game w/ a 35-point lead? Lord knows, it wasn't just Randy Cross that thought it was insane to risk your investment (Manning) in a game that was clearly over. IMHO, the only "reason" that makes sense is the pursuit of the aforementioned "record" and that Dungy assured Polian/Irsay that Manning was in no "danger", due to the Texans complete lack of a pass rush. I think that public backlash over that decision, much of it coming from loyal Colts fans (who'd like their QB to live till the SuperBowl), has given Dungy pause in keeping him in late since.


Certainly a reasonable theory, but it makes no sense to me based on what I've seen of Dungy and Manning over the years. Neither has shown any real interest in padding stats in the first place. Case in point, in the Colts - Saints game last year, Manning could probably have broken the records for yards in a game and TD passes in a game if he'd stayed in. The game was on national TV, as added incentive. But it didn't happen - Manning came out. Simply put, I don't believe that either Dungy or Manning are particularly interested in those records in the first place (yeah, I'm sure Manning would be happy to have the season TD record, but not at the expense of a season or even a single game). This season isn't the first time the Colts have had big leads, and in every game - except the Texans - Manning and many starters were gone at the start of the 4th quarter.

So I have to ask what was different about the Texans game, and to me trying to get the defense some rest makes the most sense. What also helped confirm it in my mind were some comments Dungy made after the Detroit game, in which he said that a lot of the players were banged up and had nagging injuries, but that was to be expected when playing so many games in such a short time, because the players weren't getting enough time to recover between games. Given how thin the Colts are on defense to begin with, particularly with a bunch of DBs either out or playing injured, I have to think a coach such as Dungy was giving this some thought early on in the series of 4 games.


2) Your argument is that they kept Manning in the game to "rest" the defense..

If that's the case, you'd be mixing up the play-calling, making sure all receivers stayed inbounds after receptions, etc. The tape of the game doesn't bear out that argument at all. It looks just like a pass-happy attack aimied at getting more TDs for the QB....in this case Manning.


I no longer have a tape of the game, but at the time it seemed to me that the Colts were doing what they usually did: passing when the defense was playing run (which was most of the time), running when they were playing pass. It looked to me more like they were just trying to pick up first downs, and keep the defense guessing a bit in order to be able to be able to do so.


As for the 3-and-outs the Colts backup QB has on his stat sheet... I feel that's probably more a byproduct of the play selection (ie - let's just run it and keep the clock moving) than his potential ineptness at the position.

Tough to say at this point, but he's obviously a rookie with no real NFL experience. In Dungy's position, I wouldn't have let him throw the ball. The Colts had the game in hand, but a few interceptions and giving the Texans a short field each time could have made things a lot more interesting than they needed to be.

I think everyone agrees that's it's tough to understand what Manning and other starters were doing in the game in the 4th quarter with a pretty much insurmountable lead (and it's not just the Colts, e.g. look at Eagles - Packers yesterday). The theories put forward are either Dungy/Manning were padding stats and trying to run up the score to make the Texans look bad, or else there was another reason, such as trying to rest the Colts D. The former makes no sense to me on any level: it doesn't match anything I've heard from/about Dungy, or from/about Manning. Plus Dungy has been around long enough to know that running up a score just pisses off the other team and gives them incentive the next time out. Couple that with the fact that Polian and the Colts fans would lynch everyone involved if Manning got hurt, and I just don't see it happening. Resting the D., on the other hand, does follow with comments Dungy has been making all along.

Dang, ran on forever again! :whew Anyhow, good discussion.

txhoosier
12-06-2004, 10:18 PM
cob...that's a lot of reading for this late at night...but I will say I hadn't thought about your hypothesis before reading it here. I will have to add that to my arsenal of arguments, as I get a LOT of people come by my desk everytime a Pacer or Colt does something wrong, as you can imagine. (Althought the discussion is more Pacer these days for some reason...:D)

StarStruck
12-06-2004, 10:54 PM
IMHO, it isn't the opponents responsibility to make the opposing team look better than they are. Good, close games are exciting, but if a team plays poor enough to be embarrassed, perhaps that will be incentive to do better the next time.

thegr8fan
12-06-2004, 11:03 PM
what the heck does running up the score have to do with class?

We bash the Texans for not playing a full 60 minutes and then bash the 'classless whomever' for actually playing a full 60 minute game. Those players are payed alot of money to play from start to finish. With the Texans comeback in the Minn game I don't see how anyone can claim that the game is 'wrapped up' till way into the 4th QTR.

If you don't want a team racking up a score and embarressing you, do something about it on the field. Otherwise accept the fact that you got spanked. And quite whining with the 'classless/sportsmanship' crying.

It is neither classless nor bad sportsmanship. It is called earning your paycheck.

CrumplerFan
12-07-2004, 05:04 AM
It is neither classless nor bad sportsmanship. It is called earning your paycheck.

Someone already posted that argument, so i won't repeat everything. You earn your paycheck to play and win. That's based on a team effort. Who says that backups are not a part of that team effort to finish the game?

CrumplerFan
12-07-2004, 05:29 AM
So I have to ask what was different about the Texans game, and to me trying to get the defense some rest makes the most sense.
IMO the reaction of the media let them rethink and change it up the following weeks.

... but a few interceptions and giving the Texans a short field each time could have made things a lot more interesting than they needed to be. Mannings Interceptions were already doing that with setting up the two scores of the Texans.

I think everyone agrees that's it's tough to understand what Manning and other starters were doing in the game in the 4th quarter with a pretty much insurmountable lead (and it's not just the Colts, e.g. look at Eagles - Packers yesterday). The theories put forward are either Dungy/Manning were padding stats and trying to run up the score to make the Texans look bad, or else there was another reason, such as trying to rest the Colts D. Dang, ran on forever again! :whew Anyhow, good discussion.

It sums it up very good. Thanks for the arguments to everybody.

Twelfth Man
12-07-2004, 07:07 AM
I just read an article in the Houston paper that the Texans are still POed about the Colts "Running up the Score" in our last meeting.

I looked back at the game summary, and in the second half, the Colts scored 4 TDs. Two were from the Offense and two from the Defense. The two offensive scores were designed short passes that were broken for 69 and 80 yards. Nothing "Downfield". The two defensive scores were a fumble recovery and an interception. The only forth quarter score was the interception with less than two minutes remaining.

I can think of one play in the forth quarter where Peyton threw the ball downfield. It was third and short. The Texans stacked 10 in the box and had single coverage on Marvin. :hmmm: Where would you go to get a first down?

You should take the fact that we left Peyton in as a compliment to your offense. They can score a lot of points quickly. You never want to lose a game that it looks like you have in the bag. Remember the Colts/Bucs on MNF last year? 4 scores in less than 4 minutes.

I'm looking forward to a good game on Sunday. I believe this will be a much closer game than the last one. Here's to no injurys and a competitive game.

Richard

txhoosier
12-07-2004, 07:15 AM
It sums it up very good. Thanks for the arguments to everybody.

Yes, I will thank everyone again...good arguments without all the bashing. I'm not quite used to that coming over from the Colts board...they call each other names over there.

TexansTrueFan
12-07-2004, 07:35 AM
yeah well some of us arent to mad about the last game, maybe our team should play better so we dont have to hear them complain about the colts running up the score. People like to use anything as motivation, and i hope the players can do that this sunday ! And hopefully make the game a lil interesting ! Good luck sunday !

Twelfth Man
12-07-2004, 08:24 AM
I just read an article in the Houston paper that the Texans are still POed about the Colts "Running up the Score" in our last meeting.

I looked back at the game summary, and in the second half, the Colts scored 4 TDs. Two were from the Offense and two from the Defense. The two offensive scores were designed short passes that were broken for 69 and 80 yards. Nothing "Downfield". The two defensive scores were a fumble recovery and an interception. The only forth quarter score was the interception with less than two minutes remaining.

I can think of one play in the forth quarter where Peyton threw the ball downfield. It was third and short. The Texans stacked 10 in the box and had single coverage on Marvin. :hmmm: Where would you go to get a first down?

You should take the fact that we left Peyton in as a compliment to your offense. They can score a lot of points quickly. You never want to lose a game that it looks like you have in the bag. Remember the Colts/Bucs on MNF last year? 4 scores in less than 4 minutes.

I'm looking forward to a good game on Sunday. I believe this will be a much closer game than the last one. Here's to no injurys and a competitive game.

Richard

Sorry about how this looks guys. I started this as it's own thread over in the bull pen to discuss the upcoming Colts/Texans match up but it got moved over here.

Richard

Hoosier
12-07-2004, 07:04 PM
Basically, the stats don't support what you're whining about. For the season the colt's/manning have not scored lots of touchdowns in the third and fourth quarters.
Here is the breakdown by quarter from nfl.com
1st--12
2nd--16
3rd--10
4th--6
4th within 7 points--5
How can anyone possibly see that as running up the score?

Steve

CrumplerFan
12-07-2004, 07:43 PM
There is a plain and simple difference in points scored and in attempting it: I would say, keeping the starters in and still going full speed although you're leading by 30 is an attempt to run up the score. If the attempt is successful or not is another story.

Points scored in the 4th q means the total in all games

...and not only in the games in which the Colts were leading by more than 20.

...and it is not an absolute indicator for the way an offense is attacking the defense, for the play calling, for which players are in the game.

An Example: The fourth quarter scoring of the Green Bay Packers v. Philly will include TD's thrown by Craig Nall in a already lost game. No indication about the "real" game.

Another example: Atl-KC. Atl is done, but the game isn't over. Kc throws two passes in the last Q, all starters gone already, but they still score without forcing it. Atl defense was just killed.They don't try to run up the score imo, but the points would be included in your statical overview.

If you want to argue, bring some (better) arguments to the table. Who's whining now?

Double Barrel
12-07-2004, 09:42 PM
And people in Houston should no that no lead is safe: 35-3 :thud:

Thank you. :hmmm:

I was going to post it if nobody had not already.

The fact is that they are paid to play football, and that is what they should do until the clock says 0:00 at the end of the 4th.

If the shoe were on the other foot, I would want my team to keep on doing what they do until the game is over. That road goes both ways.

disaacks3
12-07-2004, 10:56 PM
If the shoe were on the other foot, I would want my team to keep on doing what they do until the game is over. That road goes both ways. As I posted in another thread, I just can't see risking my multi-million $$$ QB in "garbage time", when my team is 5+ TDs ahead unless there's a really good reason to do so. This is especially true in Manning's case for two reasons - 1) He's not some rookie QB who needs the reps (while his backup COULD use the reps)....and.... 2) Who says you couldn't bring him back in if needed?

The 35-3 comeback didn't occur in the last 15 min. (it was 35-31 at the end of 3) That's also 3 less points than the Colts lead over us going into the 4th qtr. last game. You might also mention that the Bills were a playoff-caliber team, which the Texans aren't at this time.

Wolf
12-08-2004, 10:33 AM
As embarrassing as these games can be for the opposition, the challenge for the Colts is to not give in to human nature and relax. Do that, and foes can come back. Manning points to last year's miraculous 38-35 overtime victory at Tampa Bay, when the Colts became the first in league history to rally from 21 points down with less than four minutes remaining.

"The Tampa game helped us realize that anything can happen and that no lead is safe," Manning said. "We really feel it's important to come out fast and to try to get off to a good start, but if you get a lead or are behind, you keep playing the same way.

Blowouts becoming the norm for the Colts (http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/200584-2649-036.html)

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
12-08-2004, 10:52 AM
It's a 60 minute game. You play your hardest til the final whistle. If you don't like it, then play defense for a change. Isn't that what they get paid to do? Earn your paycheck.

CrumplerFan
12-08-2004, 12:25 PM
Blowouts becoming the norm for the Colts (http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/200584-2649-036.html)

It's interesting what the Indy Offense seems to think. But can they really compare their offense 2003 to that of Detroit, Chicago or Houston?

None of that three teams puts up more than 20 Points average in a FULL game. None of them is a known passing offense with stability. None of them was able to prevent a 24 point lead (at least) at halftime. The Colts comparison is weak, cause it ignores the fact and talks about 0.0001 % chances. Probably the oponent would score 14 points surprisingly. Means that, that you couldn't bring your starters back? Also a NO.

How many times a lead of more than 20 points was blown in the 4th Quarter?
How many times was that kind of lead safe? Think about and go through the results of the last years. You will find a lot more examples for my point of view, for sure.


From the article:
Quarterback Peyton Manning was still throwing in the fourth quarter, including one bomb to Marvin Harrison that fell incomplete.

The Colts maintained they were just trying to get first downs to keep the clock ticking and the Texans' offense off the field. Because Manning saw Texans defenders crowding the line of scrimmage in anticipation of run plays, the Colts considered passing the more viable option.

Why do you go deep if you want to get first downs or keep the opponent offense off the field?

CrumplerFan
12-08-2004, 12:29 PM
Who cares if they run up the score. If they don't like it, then try playing some defense.

Steel Blue Texan, that is your post from page 1 in this thread. Quite similar to your second and in the same style. There were a response by me and Infantrycak as well, which you probably overlooked.

As far as i can follow, you seem to understand that style of game as "professional" behavior and think of it as the modern way of playing, yes?

big sarge
12-12-2004, 02:51 AM
IMO I think that Peyton and Dungy are there to do a job and do it well. I'm a Texans fans first and foremost , but I would like nothing better to see Marino's record smashed to bits. He was a selfish player. To me when you play a game you should always score at will. Any Oiler fan knows this from the Oilers bills game in the early 90's so I say hey Manning break Marino's record, just not against the Texans.

peyton2marvin
12-12-2004, 10:19 AM
Texans are just sore losers, this is not pop warner. There is no mercy rule no unwritten rules, if you don't want to get the score ran up on you then play some defense. If the Texans were to blow somebody out (lol) i don't think any Texan fans would feel sorry for the other team. What is really funny is the fact your players are actually using that as motivation, not the fact they lost but that they were shown up. Playing off of that is only gonna last for so long, then you have to play with your head. I can't wait untill Peyton breaks this record and wins the AFC South on your turf for the second straight year, hopefully he'll run up the score again just to piss you off over the summer...

Carr's Corner
12-12-2004, 11:21 AM
ClassLESS! He's just letting his ego take over and all the announcers are helping him! LAME