So here's what the Rockies want in exchange for Todd Helton:third-baseman Mike Lowell, pitcher Julian Tavarez, prospects Manny Delcarmen, and Craig Hansen.
This is entirely too much to give up for Helton. First of all, I'd rather have Lowell as opposed to Helton. Lowell is getting paid $7M less this season, has proven he can hit in Fenway Park, has similar numbers to Helton (Helton has a big edge in OBP, but Helton also hits at Coors), and we're only tied to him for 2007. Helton would be on our payroll until at least 2011, and then in 2012, it will be either $4.6M to buy out his contract, or over $23M to keep him for another year.
Then we'd have to include Tavarez, whose versatility could come in handy in the ever growing question mark that is our bullpen, and two young pitchers. You know, you can never EVER have enough pitching in this league. To give up two young pitchers, along with a solid hitter, and a decent reliever/spot-starter for an over the hill, expensive ex-slugger is just stupid.
SUDDENLY SENATOR SCHILLING WANTS TO PITCH THROUGH 2008
In lieu of running for Senator in 2008, Curt Schilling would like to continue pitching. His contract with the Sox expires at the end of the 2007 season, and Curt says he wants an extension. And he wants it now.
You know, I love Curt, he was a big part of the 2004 team, and I'd love to see him finish his career in a Sox uniform. But he turned 40 last November. He'll be 41 for the 2008 season. He did have a solid 2006 season with 204 innings of 3.97 ERA work, but I think he needs to have a bit more patience here. He as yet to throw a single meaningful pitch this year and he already wants us to extend his contract? For how much, exactly? He got $13M last year. Will he be worth that much in '08? How the hell can anyone tell?
I think perhaps a tentative contract with incentives might be a good thing to keep Curt happy. But let's say he only goes 150 innings this year with a 4.00 ERA, should we really re-sign him if we have better options for pitchers? Would he be willing to work out of the pen in his final year?
Curt really sprang this one on the Sox at a really awkward time. I could understand wanting this done after a nice April, or even a good Spring Training. But now? C'mon, Curt. Just pitch.
Boston sports blog featuring Patriots propaganda, and opinions on the Red Sox, Bruins, and Celtics.
Monday, January 29, 2007
TODD HELTON?
There's rumors flying around The Nation about the Red Sox acquiring Todd Helton in a trade. This isn't the first time that Helton and the Sox have been rumored to be involved together. But I kind of hope it is the last.
I'm failing to see why the Sox would want to do a deal for Helton.
1. I think we're pretty much set at first base and offensively. Our biggest question marks are in the outfield, not at first-base. Youkilis had a good first full season in 2006, offensively and defensively. He's not going to make any All-Star teams, but he'll be solid enough. First base is not a hole on this team. And let's say Youk gets hurt or something, Ortiz can play there.
2. Todd Helton is a decent hitter that seems much better thanks to Coors Field. Over the past 3 seasons, Helton's numbers are much better at home as opposed to away. He has a .469 OBP at home, .409 away. .353 batting average at home, .293 away. Looking at the power numbers, one can see that he benefits a great deal from the lack of atmosphere at Coors Field. 42 homers in Denver, 25 away from home. 119 extra basehits at Coors, 91 away. .613 slugging at home, .473 away. 1.082 OPS at home, .882 away. Don't get me wrong, he isn't a bad hitter in general, he's good. But Coors makes him seem great.
3. He isn't as good as he used to be. Over the past 4 seasons, his average, OBP, slugging, HR, and RBI have all gone down lower and lower each year. He's 33 years old and not getting any younger.
4. His salary is way too high. He got $16.6 million last year. Even if Colorado paid half of this, I'd still think that $8 million a season was too much for him. This would be a 5 year commitment, too. That's just too much.
So why would we be willing to pay a large amount of money, give up any prospects, for a player who is on a 3 year down-swing, who hits much better at Coors Field than away from it when we already have a good first baseman and really don't have any glaring offensive holes?
I don't know. Hopefully this is all speculative rumor-mill stuff concocted by bloggers like me, and bored Boston sportswriters who are scrambling to write Sox material after being forced to scrap their typical Patriots Super Bowl bye week stuff.
I'm failing to see why the Sox would want to do a deal for Helton.
1. I think we're pretty much set at first base and offensively. Our biggest question marks are in the outfield, not at first-base. Youkilis had a good first full season in 2006, offensively and defensively. He's not going to make any All-Star teams, but he'll be solid enough. First base is not a hole on this team. And let's say Youk gets hurt or something, Ortiz can play there.
2. Todd Helton is a decent hitter that seems much better thanks to Coors Field. Over the past 3 seasons, Helton's numbers are much better at home as opposed to away. He has a .469 OBP at home, .409 away. .353 batting average at home, .293 away. Looking at the power numbers, one can see that he benefits a great deal from the lack of atmosphere at Coors Field. 42 homers in Denver, 25 away from home. 119 extra basehits at Coors, 91 away. .613 slugging at home, .473 away. 1.082 OPS at home, .882 away. Don't get me wrong, he isn't a bad hitter in general, he's good. But Coors makes him seem great.
3. He isn't as good as he used to be. Over the past 4 seasons, his average, OBP, slugging, HR, and RBI have all gone down lower and lower each year. He's 33 years old and not getting any younger.
4. His salary is way too high. He got $16.6 million last year. Even if Colorado paid half of this, I'd still think that $8 million a season was too much for him. This would be a 5 year commitment, too. That's just too much.
So why would we be willing to pay a large amount of money, give up any prospects, for a player who is on a 3 year down-swing, who hits much better at Coors Field than away from it when we already have a good first baseman and really don't have any glaring offensive holes?
I don't know. Hopefully this is all speculative rumor-mill stuff concocted by bloggers like me, and bored Boston sportswriters who are scrambling to write Sox material after being forced to scrap their typical Patriots Super Bowl bye week stuff.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
JD DREW SIGNS WITH SOX...AGAIN
Whenever there's a signing or a trade, you always see this disclaimer. "Pending a physical." Well, this is only the second time that I can recall that said physical has meant something significant in Red Sox Nation. The other time being when the Yankees traded for Ugueth Urbina at the deadline, then he failed a physical, then we traded for him, and he passed a physical. Let's hope that Drew can contribute to the Sox similar to Urbina (49 saves in a season plus a few months) but over a much longer period of time.
I think hope is a key word when talking about JD Drew. The 31 year old has had a career of hope and dashed hope. When the Phillies and Giants drafted him, they hoped he'd sign, but he didn't. Can't blame him much for that. He did sign with St. Louis and the Cardinals hoped their 5th overall pick (Drew was actually selected in the 1st round of the draft twice) would quickly blossom into a potential MVP. Drew did make it to The Show in his very first season with the Cardinals. But in what would have been his first full season (1999), Drew hit the DL for a month and a half with a strained quad. In 2000, he sprained an ankle and missed about 3 weeks. In 2001 he was hit by a pitch and broke a pinkie, then had a lower back sprain. He missed almost a month combined with those injuries. In 2002 he missed half a month with tendinitis in his knee. He had off season surgery on the knee, and coupled with a strained oblique, missed about 6 weeks of 2003. In 2005 he was hit by a pitch on the wrist and missed the entire season after the 4th of July. The barrage of injuries has resulted in JD Drew only playing 145 games or more twice in his career, playing 130 or more 4 times, and playing fewer than 110 four times.
In eight seasons that were meant to be full, JD Drew has amassed 157 homers and 496 RBI. That's 19.6 HRs and 62 RBI. now, he's averaging 27 homers and 86 RBI for every 162 games played, so when he's healthy, he's solid. He also has a very nice .393 OBP in his career, and a respectable .286.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming Drew for his injuries. The two DL stints from being hit by pitches are just freak things. And the guy is obviously in good shape so it isn't like he's to blame for getting hurt. And I'm not going to accuse him of being a Nomar and milking injuries as long as possible. It's just somewhat uneasing to think of him on the Sox. He could very well play 145 games for us this season, hit 30 HRs, and knock in 110 runs. He could very well do that for a few seasons. But at the moment, it is still just a hope. There's very little evidence to suggest that he will do it. He seems capable of doing it, but is he very likely to remain healthy enough to do that? And the thing about injuries is that they mount up over time. They get worse and worse the more times you get hurt. And he isn't exactly a young player anymore.
It just seems like we're taking a big risk on Drew. He seems so much like Trot Nixon in every regard except for salary. Baseball-Reference.com has Trot Nixon as the most similar batter to Drew statistically. The two are prone to frequent injury, and neither one hits right-handers that well. Yet Drew is getting $70 million over 5 seasons, and Nixon was signed by Cleveland for 1 year at $3 million. That's about 5 times as much as Nixon, per season, and its 23 times the commitment to Nixon.
But it isn't my money to risk. I think Drew will perform well, spend some time on the DL, but generally be a positive impact player on the team.
With Drew, the Sox starting position players look like this:
C - Jason Varitek
1B - Kevin Youkilis
2B - Dustin Pedroia
3B - Mike Lowell
SS - Julio Lugo
LF - Manny Ramirez
CF - Coco Crisp
RF - JD Drew
DH - David Ortiz
My basic lineup would look like this:
1. Coco Crisp
2. Kevin Youkilis
3. David Ortiz
4. Manny Ramirez
5. JD Drew
6. Mike Lowell
7. Julio Lugo
8. Jason Varitek
9. Dustin Pedroia
That has the potential to be a very solid middle of the lineup. But the entire thing has the potential to be a disaster. If Crisp continues to struggle, Youkilis's performance last year was a fluke, Manny decides not to try, Drew gets hurt, Lowell falls off, Lugo is a bust, Varitek continues to struggle, and Pedroia doesn't play like a major leaguer; we're screwed. I think we'll score as many as 975 runs if things go right, and as few as 800 if things go poorly. I think as long as we get in that 900 range, we'll be fine.
I think hope is a key word when talking about JD Drew. The 31 year old has had a career of hope and dashed hope. When the Phillies and Giants drafted him, they hoped he'd sign, but he didn't. Can't blame him much for that. He did sign with St. Louis and the Cardinals hoped their 5th overall pick (Drew was actually selected in the 1st round of the draft twice) would quickly blossom into a potential MVP. Drew did make it to The Show in his very first season with the Cardinals. But in what would have been his first full season (1999), Drew hit the DL for a month and a half with a strained quad. In 2000, he sprained an ankle and missed about 3 weeks. In 2001 he was hit by a pitch and broke a pinkie, then had a lower back sprain. He missed almost a month combined with those injuries. In 2002 he missed half a month with tendinitis in his knee. He had off season surgery on the knee, and coupled with a strained oblique, missed about 6 weeks of 2003. In 2005 he was hit by a pitch on the wrist and missed the entire season after the 4th of July. The barrage of injuries has resulted in JD Drew only playing 145 games or more twice in his career, playing 130 or more 4 times, and playing fewer than 110 four times.
In eight seasons that were meant to be full, JD Drew has amassed 157 homers and 496 RBI. That's 19.6 HRs and 62 RBI. now, he's averaging 27 homers and 86 RBI for every 162 games played, so when he's healthy, he's solid. He also has a very nice .393 OBP in his career, and a respectable .286.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming Drew for his injuries. The two DL stints from being hit by pitches are just freak things. And the guy is obviously in good shape so it isn't like he's to blame for getting hurt. And I'm not going to accuse him of being a Nomar and milking injuries as long as possible. It's just somewhat uneasing to think of him on the Sox. He could very well play 145 games for us this season, hit 30 HRs, and knock in 110 runs. He could very well do that for a few seasons. But at the moment, it is still just a hope. There's very little evidence to suggest that he will do it. He seems capable of doing it, but is he very likely to remain healthy enough to do that? And the thing about injuries is that they mount up over time. They get worse and worse the more times you get hurt. And he isn't exactly a young player anymore.
It just seems like we're taking a big risk on Drew. He seems so much like Trot Nixon in every regard except for salary. Baseball-Reference.com has Trot Nixon as the most similar batter to Drew statistically. The two are prone to frequent injury, and neither one hits right-handers that well. Yet Drew is getting $70 million over 5 seasons, and Nixon was signed by Cleveland for 1 year at $3 million. That's about 5 times as much as Nixon, per season, and its 23 times the commitment to Nixon.
But it isn't my money to risk. I think Drew will perform well, spend some time on the DL, but generally be a positive impact player on the team.
With Drew, the Sox starting position players look like this:
C - Jason Varitek
1B - Kevin Youkilis
2B - Dustin Pedroia
3B - Mike Lowell
SS - Julio Lugo
LF - Manny Ramirez
CF - Coco Crisp
RF - JD Drew
DH - David Ortiz
My basic lineup would look like this:
1. Coco Crisp
2. Kevin Youkilis
3. David Ortiz
4. Manny Ramirez
5. JD Drew
6. Mike Lowell
7. Julio Lugo
8. Jason Varitek
9. Dustin Pedroia
That has the potential to be a very solid middle of the lineup. But the entire thing has the potential to be a disaster. If Crisp continues to struggle, Youkilis's performance last year was a fluke, Manny decides not to try, Drew gets hurt, Lowell falls off, Lugo is a bust, Varitek continues to struggle, and Pedroia doesn't play like a major leaguer; we're screwed. I think we'll score as many as 975 runs if things go right, and as few as 800 if things go poorly. I think as long as we get in that 900 range, we'll be fine.
Monday, January 22, 2007
WE LOST
The Colts played better than us and deserved to win. Give them all the credit in the world for their victory.
You know, at the beginning of the season, we had an almost entirely new receiver corps, a plague of injuries to our defensive secondary, and a variety of other problems to contend with. We didn't win the Super Bowl, or even the AFC title, but we had a solid season. We can build on this year and do better next year.
Just a few instances in Sunday's game that combined with other things to result in our loss:
1:32 1st quarter: On 3rd and 19, the Colts ran a draw play that wound up resulting in an 11 yard gain. Had Addai been stopped at the line of scrimmage, the field goal would have been much more difficult for Vinatieri to hit.
4:32 2nd quarter: On 3rd and 6, the Patriots seemed to convert a 1st down at the Indy 19, instead, the play was called back for offensive pass interference.
4:05 2nd quarter: On 3rd and 16, the Pats tried a draw on which Evans got 4 yards, but the play was called back for illegal motion on Watson.
3:37 2nd quarter: On 3rd and 21, Brady was sacked at the 49. This play, coupled with the previous two penalties, knocked us from field goal range and forced us to punt.
7:23 3rd quarter: The Patriots fail to convert a 3rd and 2 and go 3 and out. Their drive took 1:05 off the clock. This came after the Colts had a 6:47 drive. The weary Patriots defense then endured a 2:50 drive
4:58 3rd quarter: Richard Seymour enters the neutral zone, 5 yard penalty resulting in an Indianapolis 1st down instead of a 3rd and 5 attempt.
4:12 3rd quarter: Ellis Hobbs doesn't even try to play the ball and the refs throw an obvious pass interference flag in the end zone, setting up 1st and goal.
13:42 4th quarter: Jarvis Green gets called for a neutral zone infraction on 2nd and goal.
13:34 4th quarter: Addai fumbles just before the goal line. Hobbs and Bruschi are in the area, but not able to fall on the ball. The Colts regain possession in the end zone.
8:59 4th quarter: On 1st and 10 from the Indy 15, Brady hits Brown for a gain of 7. But the play is called back as Gaffney is flagged for an illegal shift.
8:38 4th quarter: On 1st and 15 from the Indy 20, nobody, and I mean NOBODY is anywhere close to covering Reche Caldwell on the far sideline. Brady throws a short dump pass to him, and Caldwell appears he will get at least 7 yards on the play. But he drops the ball after it ricochets between both his hands. The Pats settle for a field goal on the drive.
3:22 4th quarter: Heath Evans gets flagged for being the 12th man in the offensive huddle before a 1st down play. The Patriots would wind up 4 yards shy of a 1st down.
2:01 4th quarter: Tully Banta-Cain gets a roughing the passer penalty in one of the ticky-tackiest roughing calls we've seen all season. This gives the Colts an additional 12 yards in the red zone, setting up 1st and 10 from the 11 instead of 1st and 10 from the 23. On the same play, the ball pops out of Reggie Wayne's hands, but no Patriot is able to grab it out of the air. The Colts eventually score the game winning TD.
We've got no-one to blame but ourselves. The roughing penalty was pretty God-awful, but we could have stopped them after that. Reche had some bad dropped passes, Brady had some passes that looked way off, our defense got ripped apart by the Colts in the 2nd half, we committed some stupid penalties, etcetera.
You know, we had the ball with a 3 point lead and 3:22 on the clock. We get a a 1st down, the game is very close to being over. We get two 1st downs, the game is over. Instead, we went 3 and out and punted.
But we'll be back. And we'll be better. And we'll play better.
All in all, a good season. Good, not great. Can't wait until next year.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
PATRIOTS/COLTS PREVIEW
Back in November when we lost to Indianapolis, I ended my post about the game with "I wouldn't be surprised if these two teams met again."
Well, I was right. I am not shocked in any way that these two teams are playing each other again. Yet another correct prediction from Boston Blood Sox.
Anyway, these two teams have been the best in the AFC consistently for several years now. This is their 3rd meeting in the playoffs in four seasons. Their regular season meeting did indeed have playoff implications, as both teams finished with 12-4 records, with Indy getting home-field advantage based on their victory over us.
We all know the history between these two teams. Manning and the Colts are 0-2 against us in the playoffs. Since 2001, the Patriots are 6-2 against Indy, but haven't beaten them since the 2004 divisional playoff game. Furthermore, only 2 of these games were in Indianapolis.
These two teams met in November and both looked dreadful. There were 7 turnovers, including 5 from the Patriots. There was a combined 703 yards of offense. The major deciding factor in the game were the turnovers as it was pretty close statistically and on the scoreboard.
I've always felt that the key to beating the Colts is to prevent Manning and the offense from scoring too much and from taking utter control over the field position battle and at the same time taking advantage of every opportunity to score and move the ball. Seems pretty obvious, eh? Score more than your opponent.
The key to stopping Manning and the offense is 4 man pressure on the QB. Blitzing too often is unwise as Manning and his receivers are too good to cover with one-on-one coverage. We run the 3-4 defense (and do it very well) which has the built-in advantage of a 4th rusher coming from an unknown player. Typically, it is one of the outside linebackers, and sometimes one of the inside guys. Now, if we can get good, consistent pressure on Manning with 4 and sometimes 5 rushers, it will leave 6 or 7 men back in coverage.
The pressure prevents Manning from finding his open receivers, it forces him to make decisions quickly in order to avoid being sacked. As pressure to score points mounts in the game, he is more prone to make mistakes. These mistakes get bigger and bigger as passes that are slightly off target soon turn into passes that are thrown directly at defenders and intercepted. The reason Manning hasn't won a big game in college or the NFL is typically that his mistakes build and snowball on each other. He makes a small mistake, then pressures himself to make up for it, causing a bigger mistake. This repeats and the mistakes become more common and more glaring.
The Colts defense is small, but it is fast. In the November game, the Patriots tried a few misdirection plays that were blown up by the Colts. These types of plays are unwise to run. It's better to run right at them and try to be more physical. The Patriots ran for 148 yards against their defense in November on 33 carries (4.5 yards per carry). The problem was that we were slightly behind for most of the game. We also didn't want to have the running game stopped three straight plays and be forced to punt in a disadvantageous position. We actually passed the ball 35 times, 2 more than we rushed. I wouldn't be shocked if the Patriots tried a similar overall balanced offense, but perhaps with a bit more running. Let's say we run 60 plays on offense, I think we will have about 35 rushes and 25 passes. Of course, this could change based on the score of the game.
In the first game, we didn't do a good job of setting up the pass through the rush. We seemed to be afraid that the defense would sit on the run and stop us so we went to the pass just a bit too early. In the first drive of the game, we attempted a deep pass to the end zone for seemingly no reason. We had driven 47 net yards on our first possession, with 37 yards of rushing and 24 passing (we had a few penalties that drive). On 1st and 10 from the Indy 34, we suddenly passed deep for Gabriel and the ball was intercepted.
In the second half of the game, we seemed to get away from the run just a bit. I'm not saying we should have run the ball every time, but a few additional rushes here and there might have done well. There was one drive in which we had 1st and goal from the 10 and ran Faulk instead of say Dillon. We then tried two passes and then kicked a field goal. What really hurt us, though, were the turnovers.
Let's look at all five.
9:30 1st quarter - Brady throws deep for Gabriel, intercepted and returned to the Indy 38, ended what seemed to be a sure scoring drive. Indy scored on their drive.
0:28 2nd quarter - Brady throws into triple coverage, bobbled by Watson, intercepted ending a 2 minute drill. Colts kneeled the ball.
12:21 3rd quarter - Dillon fumbles on our 27. The Colts went 3 and out and punted.
13:11 4th quarter - Tipped ball interception 2 plays after we intercepted Manning. Colts drove for nearly 3 minutes and kicked a field goal.
1:23 4th quarter - Tipped ball interception right after a 25 yard reception by Watson. Colts kneeled to end the game.
Right up there with turnovers as far as important stats go, is points scored off turnovers. The Colts scored 10 off our turnovers, we scored 0 off theirs. The Colts also had 2 picks that ended 2 minute drill drives.
The Colts defense has looked very good these past two games, but the offenses they were up against played terribly. Our offense didn't exactly look good last week, but we were up against the Chargers defense, one of the toughest in the league. We managed to put 24 points on the board. The Colts faced a good defense in Baltimore and managed only 15 points and 0 touchdowns.
I think we'll win this one, but it won't be easy. I would not be surprised if we did not have the lead for most of the game. But I think when it comes down to the wire, we'll prevail. 24-20 Patriots.
I really hope I'm right. If the Colts win this game, they'll win the Super Bowl, and Manning will have more confidence in big games regardless of how well he plays. I'd prefer it if the weak, collapsible Peyton Manning was still out there in years to come.
Well, I was right. I am not shocked in any way that these two teams are playing each other again. Yet another correct prediction from Boston Blood Sox.
Anyway, these two teams have been the best in the AFC consistently for several years now. This is their 3rd meeting in the playoffs in four seasons. Their regular season meeting did indeed have playoff implications, as both teams finished with 12-4 records, with Indy getting home-field advantage based on their victory over us.
We all know the history between these two teams. Manning and the Colts are 0-2 against us in the playoffs. Since 2001, the Patriots are 6-2 against Indy, but haven't beaten them since the 2004 divisional playoff game. Furthermore, only 2 of these games were in Indianapolis.
These two teams met in November and both looked dreadful. There were 7 turnovers, including 5 from the Patriots. There was a combined 703 yards of offense. The major deciding factor in the game were the turnovers as it was pretty close statistically and on the scoreboard.
I've always felt that the key to beating the Colts is to prevent Manning and the offense from scoring too much and from taking utter control over the field position battle and at the same time taking advantage of every opportunity to score and move the ball. Seems pretty obvious, eh? Score more than your opponent.
The key to stopping Manning and the offense is 4 man pressure on the QB. Blitzing too often is unwise as Manning and his receivers are too good to cover with one-on-one coverage. We run the 3-4 defense (and do it very well) which has the built-in advantage of a 4th rusher coming from an unknown player. Typically, it is one of the outside linebackers, and sometimes one of the inside guys. Now, if we can get good, consistent pressure on Manning with 4 and sometimes 5 rushers, it will leave 6 or 7 men back in coverage.
The pressure prevents Manning from finding his open receivers, it forces him to make decisions quickly in order to avoid being sacked. As pressure to score points mounts in the game, he is more prone to make mistakes. These mistakes get bigger and bigger as passes that are slightly off target soon turn into passes that are thrown directly at defenders and intercepted. The reason Manning hasn't won a big game in college or the NFL is typically that his mistakes build and snowball on each other. He makes a small mistake, then pressures himself to make up for it, causing a bigger mistake. This repeats and the mistakes become more common and more glaring.
The Colts defense is small, but it is fast. In the November game, the Patriots tried a few misdirection plays that were blown up by the Colts. These types of plays are unwise to run. It's better to run right at them and try to be more physical. The Patriots ran for 148 yards against their defense in November on 33 carries (4.5 yards per carry). The problem was that we were slightly behind for most of the game. We also didn't want to have the running game stopped three straight plays and be forced to punt in a disadvantageous position. We actually passed the ball 35 times, 2 more than we rushed. I wouldn't be shocked if the Patriots tried a similar overall balanced offense, but perhaps with a bit more running. Let's say we run 60 plays on offense, I think we will have about 35 rushes and 25 passes. Of course, this could change based on the score of the game.
In the first game, we didn't do a good job of setting up the pass through the rush. We seemed to be afraid that the defense would sit on the run and stop us so we went to the pass just a bit too early. In the first drive of the game, we attempted a deep pass to the end zone for seemingly no reason. We had driven 47 net yards on our first possession, with 37 yards of rushing and 24 passing (we had a few penalties that drive). On 1st and 10 from the Indy 34, we suddenly passed deep for Gabriel and the ball was intercepted.
In the second half of the game, we seemed to get away from the run just a bit. I'm not saying we should have run the ball every time, but a few additional rushes here and there might have done well. There was one drive in which we had 1st and goal from the 10 and ran Faulk instead of say Dillon. We then tried two passes and then kicked a field goal. What really hurt us, though, were the turnovers.
Let's look at all five.
9:30 1st quarter - Brady throws deep for Gabriel, intercepted and returned to the Indy 38, ended what seemed to be a sure scoring drive. Indy scored on their drive.
0:28 2nd quarter - Brady throws into triple coverage, bobbled by Watson, intercepted ending a 2 minute drill. Colts kneeled the ball.
12:21 3rd quarter - Dillon fumbles on our 27. The Colts went 3 and out and punted.
13:11 4th quarter - Tipped ball interception 2 plays after we intercepted Manning. Colts drove for nearly 3 minutes and kicked a field goal.
1:23 4th quarter - Tipped ball interception right after a 25 yard reception by Watson. Colts kneeled to end the game.
Right up there with turnovers as far as important stats go, is points scored off turnovers. The Colts scored 10 off our turnovers, we scored 0 off theirs. The Colts also had 2 picks that ended 2 minute drill drives.
The Colts defense has looked very good these past two games, but the offenses they were up against played terribly. Our offense didn't exactly look good last week, but we were up against the Chargers defense, one of the toughest in the league. We managed to put 24 points on the board. The Colts faced a good defense in Baltimore and managed only 15 points and 0 touchdowns.
I think we'll win this one, but it won't be easy. I would not be surprised if we did not have the lead for most of the game. But I think when it comes down to the wire, we'll prevail. 24-20 Patriots.
I really hope I'm right. If the Colts win this game, they'll win the Super Bowl, and Manning will have more confidence in big games regardless of how well he plays. I'd prefer it if the weak, collapsible Peyton Manning was still out there in years to come.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
INJURY REPORTS FOR AFC CHAMPIONSHIP
Patriots:
Doubtful: S Rodney Harrison (Knee).
Questionable: DE Mike Wright (Illness-Flu); T Ryan O'Callaghan (Illness-Flu); WR Troy Brown (Illness-Flu).
Probable: QB Tom Brady (Right Shoulder).
Colts:
Questionable: WR Ricky Proehl (Hamstring); CB Nicholas Harper (Ankle); T Ryan Diem (Shoulder); LB Cato June (Concussion); S Bob Sanders (Knee); G Ryan Lilja (Knee).
As you can see, Rodney Harrison has been upgraded from out to doubtful, meaning there is about a 25% chance that he will play in Sunday's game. Wright, O'Callaghan, and Brown all apparently are exhibiting flu-like symptoms, and all three were unavailable to the media the other day. Tom Brady, as always, is probable with a right shoulder "injury" that has been nagging him for a few years now.
Ricky "Tonight a Dynasty is Born" Proehl will be facing the Patriots in the playoffs for the third time on the third different team. He was on the Rams in Super Bowl XXVI and on the Panthers in Super Bowl XXXVIII.
Doubtful: S Rodney Harrison (Knee).
Questionable: DE Mike Wright (Illness-Flu); T Ryan O'Callaghan (Illness-Flu); WR Troy Brown (Illness-Flu).
Probable: QB Tom Brady (Right Shoulder).
Colts:
Questionable: WR Ricky Proehl (Hamstring); CB Nicholas Harper (Ankle); T Ryan Diem (Shoulder); LB Cato June (Concussion); S Bob Sanders (Knee); G Ryan Lilja (Knee).
As you can see, Rodney Harrison has been upgraded from out to doubtful, meaning there is about a 25% chance that he will play in Sunday's game. Wright, O'Callaghan, and Brown all apparently are exhibiting flu-like symptoms, and all three were unavailable to the media the other day. Tom Brady, as always, is probable with a right shoulder "injury" that has been nagging him for a few years now.
Ricky "Tonight a Dynasty is Born" Proehl will be facing the Patriots in the playoffs for the third time on the third different team. He was on the Rams in Super Bowl XXVI and on the Panthers in Super Bowl XXXVIII.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
YOU STAY WHINEY, SAN DIEGO
Is it me, or does almost every opponent we've beaten in the playoffs turn into a whining, moaning, bitching bunch of p*ssies after we end their season? The Raiders and Steelers in '01, The Colts in '03 and '04, and now the San Diego Chargers take their place among the obnoxious and pathetic whiners.
Why? Because after the game was decided, some of the Patriots celebrated. They imitated Shawne Merriman's spaz dance, and stomped on the all of a sudden hallow and sacred San Diego Charger logo at midfield. The excessive celebration resulted in a meaningless 15 yard taunting penalty, and an equally meaningless Ladainian Tomlinson temper tantrum.
Here's what LT had to say:
"When you go to the middle of our field, when you start doing the dance that Shawne Merriman is known for, that's disrespectful to me. And I can't sit there and watch that. And so, yeah, I was very upset. And just the fact that they showed no class at all. Absolutely no class. And maybe that comes from their head coach. So you know, there you have it."
First of all, how is making fun of Merriman disrespectful to LT? I understand Tomlinson wanting to stand up for his teammate, and I respect him for that, but the Patriots weren't disrespectful to Tomlinson in any way shape or form by doing the "Lights Out" dance. LT is taking this way too personally, as if Ellis Hobbs walked over his mother's grave doing the Lights Out dance.
Let's look at the man that the Patriots actually disrespected by mimicking him. Shawne Merriman is one of the best players in the NFL. He was also suspended for 4 games due to failing a steroids test. In other words, he cheated. He cheated big time.
When Merriman finished 3rd in the voting for defensive player of the year, Jason Taylor said that he didn't belong on the ballot due to his steroid use. According to some rumors, Merriman then sent Taylor a "Lights Out" t-shirt, and some popcorn so that Taylor could eat it while watching Merriman in the playoffs. That's real classy. Now maybe it was a joke, and maybe it never happened. Nevertheless, on the surface at least, it seems like Merriman has some difficulty in respecting a player who is not only very good, but has been very good for a long time.
The funny thing is, the NFL seems to have heeded the advice of Taylor and will not be allowing any player who has been suspended during the season to receive any award or accolade beginning next season.
Merriman is perhaps best known for his spastic embolisms after recording a sack. He's one of countless players that have prepared and planned celebrations. Usually, guys like Chad Johnson or TO do their little dances after touchdowns. Merriman does them after sacks. Now a sack is a great play, but it is hardly a touchdown. Apparently, Merriman can do his dance, but nobody else can.
Where did Merriman get the nickname "Lights Out" which adorns his body in the form of a tattoo? Playing in a high school game, he knocked out 4 players on the opposing team in the 1st half. This achievement, of injuring 4 players, has caused so much pride for Merriman that he revels in being named for it.
Merriman was also not shy or even humble leading up to Sunday's game. During the Pats/Jets game, he predicted the Patriots would lose. During a pep rally in San Diego, he vowed to "hit Tom Brady in the mouth" as if Tom had done something to him.
What did Merriman do to backup his talk on Sunday? He had two tackles, and sacked Tom Brady at the line of scrimmage as Brady attempted to scramble for yardage. It was hardly an electrifying performance. In fact, it was quite mediocre.
This is the player the New England Patriots had the gall to disrespect. A cheater, a showboat, a braggart, a trash talker, and after Sunday: a loser.
As far as celebrating on a team's emblem on a field goes, I think LT and some anti-Patriots haters out there are blowing it out of proportion. I'm sure it hurts to watch an opposing team dance on your own field, but it happens. Grow up! It's a friggin' lightning bolt painted on turf! If you don't want people celebrating on your field, or on your team's logo, don't give them reason to celebrate. Don't get pissed off at the Patriots for beating you in your own house. Could you imagine Tedy Bruschi going ape-sh*t if opposing players danced on the Flying Elvis in Gillette? I'm sure he wouldn't be pleased, but he'd probably be more upset at losing a game, not watching another team do a little dance on a painted piece of sod.
People are comparing the Patriots logo celebration with the infamous incident in Dallas with TO.
There's a few differences, though. TO celebrated twice DURING the game after touchdowns. The Patriots celebrated after essentially WINNING the game. TO's celebrations were also during a regular season game against a mediocre Cowboys team. The Patriots celebrated on the logo of the #1 seeded 14-2 Chargers in a divisional playoff game. BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.
This will sound weird, but maybe LT and the Chargers can see the Patriots celebrating as a sign of respect to their team. I can't recall the Patriots celebrating on anyone else's logo in recent memory. And we certainly wouldn't do a dance on the Buffalo Bills logo or the Houston Texans logo. You only do that kind of thing if the logo actually means something. This season, the Chargers logo meant the best in the NFL in the regular season.
And the remark about Belichick was way, WAY out of line. It was a very disrespectful thing to say about one of the best coaches in the NFL's history. Belichick keeps things in house, and shows nothing but respect for his opponents. All of us in New England who watch him on TV shows or listen to him on the radio in between games are practically sick of hearing him talk about how good of a pass rusher Jason Taylor is.
It isn't as if Belichick ordered or even suggested to his players that they go celebrate on the Chargers logo. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if he scolded some of them for the outburst. But he isn't going to use the media to do that scolding. If he wants to say something to Ellis Hobbs, he'll say it to Ellis man to man, not through WCVB or the Boston Globe. Unlike a guy like Parcells, he isn't going to tear down one of his players via the media.
But there's some people that just flat out dislike Belichick and still think the Patriots are nothing but lucky illusionists, somehow beating teams through smoke and mirrors, or even the occasional vast NFL conspiracy theory. Just look at Mike Ditka, the coach of the Super Bowl Shuffle Bears, who called out Belichick and the Patriots for being "classless, ridiculous, and childish." You want to talk about class, Coach Ditka? Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
The remarks from Tomlinson above came right after a gut-wrenching and heartbreaking loss in his team's first playoff game of the season. So some intense emotion is to be expected. It's got to be frustrating to have a great game like LT had and still lose. But Tomlinson, a self-described "classy guy," was still crying about it long after the game was over with.
“What message do you want to send kids? That’s the way you act after a win? In my opinion, that’s not the way you act.”
Apparently LT feels that a dance mimicking his teammate is a worse influence on kids than say, a Pro Bowl linebacker doing steroids (Merriman), or another linebacker driving around drunk (Steve Foley), or a defensive linemen using steroids to recover from an injury (to Luis Castillo's credit, he openly admitted his steroid use). I guess LT feels that respecting the pride and honor of another team is a much more heinous act than injecting yourself with a harmful substance in order to gain an unfair advantage, or driving around with 3 times the legal limit blood alcohol level in your system, disobeying a police officer.
“When you’re the three-time Super Bowl champion, you don’t need to act that way. My whole thing is, you won the game. We were going to congratulate you for going on. But then you start to further disrespect us. In my mind, you don’t do that. Not with athletes, anyway. We’re all competing.”
I guess, in LT's mind, it's okay to talk trash and be disrespectful before a game, then during it, but not after you've won it. The Chargers were talking and jawing all game long. Hell, they even head-butted Kevin Faulk in plain sight of the official. The Patriots kept their cool and celebrated when they had secured victory.
And what the hell does Ladainian Tomlinson know about being a three time Super Bowl champ? Seriously, who does this guy think he is, giving advice on how to act like champions to the New England Patriots? The only Bowl LT has ever won is the Sun Bowl. If you want to give lectures and criticism on how to act like a champion, let's limit it to the Mountain West for now.
“Marty always tells us to act like you’ve been there before. That’s something your coach always tells you, so if your guys are acting like that, it comes from top to the bottom, in my opinion. I could be wrong.”
Again, what does Marty know about "being there?" Did I miss something? This is the guy who holds the distinction of being the NFL head coach to have the most wins without ever coaching in a Super Bowl! Suddenly everyone who has never been "there" is telling a team that has been "there" how to act like they've been "there."
Does Marty tell Merriman to act like he's been there before when he records a sack? If he does, Shawne must not be listening. Maybe Merriman is on another cycle and the roids cause muscle spasms or something.
LT, you are wrong.
Here is what Philip Rivers had to say:
"I was disappointed at the finger-pointing and the lights-out stuff and how they handled winning. As much as people expect them to win, they didn't act like it."
I guess Rivers is more disappointed in the Patriots than he is with his own teammates. How about Drayton Florence and Shane Olivea and their pointless unnecessary roughness penalties? How about Marlon McCree fumbling a game sealing pick, or Eric Parker trying to pick up a muffed punt so he could return it? How about the non-factor Merriman was? I guess Rivers is more concerned with the honor of his team's logo and the lack of respect shown to his honorable teammate Shawne Merriman, than he is about winning. Good for him.
This is all really funny and childish. It was obvious that the Chargers were trash talking right in the face of the Patriots players during the game. How did we handle it? We remained calm and won the game. That is what acting like a champion entails.
Since when did people expect us to win? Are you telling me the Chargers were underdogs in this game? Guess what, Phil, you were expected to win by everyone and your team messed it up. You had 9 Pro Bowlers, the NFL MVP, homefield advantage, and pretty much everything in the world in your favor. But you lost the game. Your team lost to the likes of Jabbar Gaffney and Artrell Hawkins. No offense to either of these guys, but they aren't exactly superstars or Pro Bowlers. But they are winners.
Here's what Shaun Phillips had to say:
"That was very classless. When we went in and beat their head in New England, blew them out, we did nothing but compliment them and say they were a good team. We would never disrespect a team like that. Shaun Phillips will have a grudge against them the rest of his career."
That game was in 2005 and you're still talking about it? Wow! And talking in 3rd person? HAHAHAHAHA!
"That's just something you don't do"
That's what Merriman had to say. Apparently doing steroids is okay, but doing his "Lights Out" dance isn't. Now, in the rest of this interview with Merriman, he seemed to want to move on from this whole celebration issue and focus on next season, so give some credit to him for not being a total cry baby. He didn't like what we did, but he seemed to not like losing even more.
The San Diego Chargers are being nothing but a bunch of cry-babies. It's really a shame because they played such a tough game against us, and are a very good young team that will be in many more playoff games in the upcoming years. but it seems like they're trying to take the low road like the 2001 Raiders, 2001 Steelers, 2003 Colts, and 2004 Colts. They're getting mad at things and people other then themselves for losing. The Raiders blamed the refs and their fans concocted a huge NFL-wide conspiracy. The Steelers complained about the better team not winning. The Colts whined and moaned about being touched too often. None of these teams could just look in the mirror and say "We lost, let's learn from it, and move on."
LT, Rivers, and Phillips are taking their anger out on the Patriots because we celebrated a victory. They're not assessing their own team's performance against us. They're being immature, and as tough as they played us, that toughness seems to have vanished after the game as they whined and moaned about the Big Bad Patriots being a bunch of Big Bad Meanies.
To paraphrase one of my favorite lines from The Rock, losers complain about classless celebrations, winners go home and [expletive] Gisele Bundchen.
Why? Because after the game was decided, some of the Patriots celebrated. They imitated Shawne Merriman's spaz dance, and stomped on the all of a sudden hallow and sacred San Diego Charger logo at midfield. The excessive celebration resulted in a meaningless 15 yard taunting penalty, and an equally meaningless Ladainian Tomlinson temper tantrum.
Here's what LT had to say:
"When you go to the middle of our field, when you start doing the dance that Shawne Merriman is known for, that's disrespectful to me. And I can't sit there and watch that. And so, yeah, I was very upset. And just the fact that they showed no class at all. Absolutely no class. And maybe that comes from their head coach. So you know, there you have it."
First of all, how is making fun of Merriman disrespectful to LT? I understand Tomlinson wanting to stand up for his teammate, and I respect him for that, but the Patriots weren't disrespectful to Tomlinson in any way shape or form by doing the "Lights Out" dance. LT is taking this way too personally, as if Ellis Hobbs walked over his mother's grave doing the Lights Out dance.
Let's look at the man that the Patriots actually disrespected by mimicking him. Shawne Merriman is one of the best players in the NFL. He was also suspended for 4 games due to failing a steroids test. In other words, he cheated. He cheated big time.
When Merriman finished 3rd in the voting for defensive player of the year, Jason Taylor said that he didn't belong on the ballot due to his steroid use. According to some rumors, Merriman then sent Taylor a "Lights Out" t-shirt, and some popcorn so that Taylor could eat it while watching Merriman in the playoffs. That's real classy. Now maybe it was a joke, and maybe it never happened. Nevertheless, on the surface at least, it seems like Merriman has some difficulty in respecting a player who is not only very good, but has been very good for a long time.
The funny thing is, the NFL seems to have heeded the advice of Taylor and will not be allowing any player who has been suspended during the season to receive any award or accolade beginning next season.
Merriman is perhaps best known for his spastic embolisms after recording a sack. He's one of countless players that have prepared and planned celebrations. Usually, guys like Chad Johnson or TO do their little dances after touchdowns. Merriman does them after sacks. Now a sack is a great play, but it is hardly a touchdown. Apparently, Merriman can do his dance, but nobody else can.
Where did Merriman get the nickname "Lights Out" which adorns his body in the form of a tattoo? Playing in a high school game, he knocked out 4 players on the opposing team in the 1st half. This achievement, of injuring 4 players, has caused so much pride for Merriman that he revels in being named for it.
Merriman was also not shy or even humble leading up to Sunday's game. During the Pats/Jets game, he predicted the Patriots would lose. During a pep rally in San Diego, he vowed to "hit Tom Brady in the mouth" as if Tom had done something to him.
What did Merriman do to backup his talk on Sunday? He had two tackles, and sacked Tom Brady at the line of scrimmage as Brady attempted to scramble for yardage. It was hardly an electrifying performance. In fact, it was quite mediocre.
This is the player the New England Patriots had the gall to disrespect. A cheater, a showboat, a braggart, a trash talker, and after Sunday: a loser.
As far as celebrating on a team's emblem on a field goes, I think LT and some anti-Patriots haters out there are blowing it out of proportion. I'm sure it hurts to watch an opposing team dance on your own field, but it happens. Grow up! It's a friggin' lightning bolt painted on turf! If you don't want people celebrating on your field, or on your team's logo, don't give them reason to celebrate. Don't get pissed off at the Patriots for beating you in your own house. Could you imagine Tedy Bruschi going ape-sh*t if opposing players danced on the Flying Elvis in Gillette? I'm sure he wouldn't be pleased, but he'd probably be more upset at losing a game, not watching another team do a little dance on a painted piece of sod.
People are comparing the Patriots logo celebration with the infamous incident in Dallas with TO.
There's a few differences, though. TO celebrated twice DURING the game after touchdowns. The Patriots celebrated after essentially WINNING the game. TO's celebrations were also during a regular season game against a mediocre Cowboys team. The Patriots celebrated on the logo of the #1 seeded 14-2 Chargers in a divisional playoff game. BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.
This will sound weird, but maybe LT and the Chargers can see the Patriots celebrating as a sign of respect to their team. I can't recall the Patriots celebrating on anyone else's logo in recent memory. And we certainly wouldn't do a dance on the Buffalo Bills logo or the Houston Texans logo. You only do that kind of thing if the logo actually means something. This season, the Chargers logo meant the best in the NFL in the regular season.
And the remark about Belichick was way, WAY out of line. It was a very disrespectful thing to say about one of the best coaches in the NFL's history. Belichick keeps things in house, and shows nothing but respect for his opponents. All of us in New England who watch him on TV shows or listen to him on the radio in between games are practically sick of hearing him talk about how good of a pass rusher Jason Taylor is.
It isn't as if Belichick ordered or even suggested to his players that they go celebrate on the Chargers logo. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if he scolded some of them for the outburst. But he isn't going to use the media to do that scolding. If he wants to say something to Ellis Hobbs, he'll say it to Ellis man to man, not through WCVB or the Boston Globe. Unlike a guy like Parcells, he isn't going to tear down one of his players via the media.
But there's some people that just flat out dislike Belichick and still think the Patriots are nothing but lucky illusionists, somehow beating teams through smoke and mirrors, or even the occasional vast NFL conspiracy theory. Just look at Mike Ditka, the coach of the Super Bowl Shuffle Bears, who called out Belichick and the Patriots for being "classless, ridiculous, and childish." You want to talk about class, Coach Ditka? Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
The remarks from Tomlinson above came right after a gut-wrenching and heartbreaking loss in his team's first playoff game of the season. So some intense emotion is to be expected. It's got to be frustrating to have a great game like LT had and still lose. But Tomlinson, a self-described "classy guy," was still crying about it long after the game was over with.
“What message do you want to send kids? That’s the way you act after a win? In my opinion, that’s not the way you act.”
Apparently LT feels that a dance mimicking his teammate is a worse influence on kids than say, a Pro Bowl linebacker doing steroids (Merriman), or another linebacker driving around drunk (Steve Foley), or a defensive linemen using steroids to recover from an injury (to Luis Castillo's credit, he openly admitted his steroid use). I guess LT feels that respecting the pride and honor of another team is a much more heinous act than injecting yourself with a harmful substance in order to gain an unfair advantage, or driving around with 3 times the legal limit blood alcohol level in your system, disobeying a police officer.
“When you’re the three-time Super Bowl champion, you don’t need to act that way. My whole thing is, you won the game. We were going to congratulate you for going on. But then you start to further disrespect us. In my mind, you don’t do that. Not with athletes, anyway. We’re all competing.”
I guess, in LT's mind, it's okay to talk trash and be disrespectful before a game, then during it, but not after you've won it. The Chargers were talking and jawing all game long. Hell, they even head-butted Kevin Faulk in plain sight of the official. The Patriots kept their cool and celebrated when they had secured victory.
And what the hell does Ladainian Tomlinson know about being a three time Super Bowl champ? Seriously, who does this guy think he is, giving advice on how to act like champions to the New England Patriots? The only Bowl LT has ever won is the Sun Bowl. If you want to give lectures and criticism on how to act like a champion, let's limit it to the Mountain West for now.
“Marty always tells us to act like you’ve been there before. That’s something your coach always tells you, so if your guys are acting like that, it comes from top to the bottom, in my opinion. I could be wrong.”
Again, what does Marty know about "being there?" Did I miss something? This is the guy who holds the distinction of being the NFL head coach to have the most wins without ever coaching in a Super Bowl! Suddenly everyone who has never been "there" is telling a team that has been "there" how to act like they've been "there."
Does Marty tell Merriman to act like he's been there before when he records a sack? If he does, Shawne must not be listening. Maybe Merriman is on another cycle and the roids cause muscle spasms or something.
LT, you are wrong.
Here is what Philip Rivers had to say:
"I was disappointed at the finger-pointing and the lights-out stuff and how they handled winning. As much as people expect them to win, they didn't act like it."
I guess Rivers is more disappointed in the Patriots than he is with his own teammates. How about Drayton Florence and Shane Olivea and their pointless unnecessary roughness penalties? How about Marlon McCree fumbling a game sealing pick, or Eric Parker trying to pick up a muffed punt so he could return it? How about the non-factor Merriman was? I guess Rivers is more concerned with the honor of his team's logo and the lack of respect shown to his honorable teammate Shawne Merriman, than he is about winning. Good for him.
This is all really funny and childish. It was obvious that the Chargers were trash talking right in the face of the Patriots players during the game. How did we handle it? We remained calm and won the game. That is what acting like a champion entails.
Since when did people expect us to win? Are you telling me the Chargers were underdogs in this game? Guess what, Phil, you were expected to win by everyone and your team messed it up. You had 9 Pro Bowlers, the NFL MVP, homefield advantage, and pretty much everything in the world in your favor. But you lost the game. Your team lost to the likes of Jabbar Gaffney and Artrell Hawkins. No offense to either of these guys, but they aren't exactly superstars or Pro Bowlers. But they are winners.
Here's what Shaun Phillips had to say:
"That was very classless. When we went in and beat their head in New England, blew them out, we did nothing but compliment them and say they were a good team. We would never disrespect a team like that. Shaun Phillips will have a grudge against them the rest of his career."
That game was in 2005 and you're still talking about it? Wow! And talking in 3rd person? HAHAHAHAHA!
"That's just something you don't do"
That's what Merriman had to say. Apparently doing steroids is okay, but doing his "Lights Out" dance isn't. Now, in the rest of this interview with Merriman, he seemed to want to move on from this whole celebration issue and focus on next season, so give some credit to him for not being a total cry baby. He didn't like what we did, but he seemed to not like losing even more.
The San Diego Chargers are being nothing but a bunch of cry-babies. It's really a shame because they played such a tough game against us, and are a very good young team that will be in many more playoff games in the upcoming years. but it seems like they're trying to take the low road like the 2001 Raiders, 2001 Steelers, 2003 Colts, and 2004 Colts. They're getting mad at things and people other then themselves for losing. The Raiders blamed the refs and their fans concocted a huge NFL-wide conspiracy. The Steelers complained about the better team not winning. The Colts whined and moaned about being touched too often. None of these teams could just look in the mirror and say "We lost, let's learn from it, and move on."
LT, Rivers, and Phillips are taking their anger out on the Patriots because we celebrated a victory. They're not assessing their own team's performance against us. They're being immature, and as tough as they played us, that toughness seems to have vanished after the game as they whined and moaned about the Big Bad Patriots being a bunch of Big Bad Meanies.
To paraphrase one of my favorite lines from The Rock, losers complain about classless celebrations, winners go home and [expletive] Gisele Bundchen.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
LUCK OF THE PATRIOTS?
I've lived in central New York state for nearly 4 years now, surrounded by Bills, Jets, Giants, Eagles, and Steelers fans. These people also think Peyton Manning is the best player in the NFL. They are united only in their hatred of the New England Patriots.
A common word associated by these haters is "lucky." The Patriots were "lucky" to win such and such a game. An even more ludicrous statement is "the Patriots didn't win the game, the other team lost it." Of course, this makes no sense, because if someone loses a football game, then someone else wins it. Then there's also the "they didn't deserve to win" accusation. All of these things are just silly.
With the recent 24-21 victory over the San Diego Chargers, these words have been tossed around by many up here in CNY, and by some on the national sports media level. If you ever want to lose a few brain cells, listen to WEEI past midnight. WOW!
They all point to the Tuck Play a few seasons back in Oakland. They claim that this single play is what made Brady, Belichick, and the Patriots what they are today.
Just a few things about this particular play:
1. The officials called it correctly, as confirmed by the NFL after the game.
2. The NFL has kept the tuck rule in exactly the same language as it was written back then.
3. It may have been a freak thing, but it didn't exactly end the game. The play was called incomplete in our favor, not a touchdown or anything.
The Tuck Play occurred at the Oakland 47. There was only a little over 90 seconds on the clock in that game with us down by 3. We drove the ball 23 yards after that play to set up Vinatieri's game tying 45 yard kick.
We won the toss for overtime, which I guess is lucky. But then we drove to the Oakland 28, converted a 4th and 4, and kept driving until we set-up a Vinatieri 23 yard field goal. Yeah, Oakland let us get all the way down to the 6 yard line. I guess we were lucky to get down there.
The next week, we beat Pittsburgh straight up. Yeah, we had 2 special teams TDs, but we also held Jerome Bettis to 8 yards on 9 carries. And despite what Bill Cowher might still think, special teams are part of the game. You return a punt for a TD, or block a field goal, it is a good football play, not a lucky play.
We all know what happened to the Rams the next week. There wasn't much luck in that game, either. We outplayed St. Louis and we won.
We also won 21 straight games a few seaosns later, 6 more playoff games and 2 more Super Bowls. I guess we were still riding that luck. Remember when we dominated the Colts and Steelers in back to back weeks? Man, we were sooooooooo lucky!
After our win against the Chargers on Sunday, all the haters continued to call the Patriots lucky. But where the hell is this luck?
I'll say this much, the Chargers did make a few pivotal errors which gave the Patriots an opportunity to win the game. The muffed and re-muffed punt, a few dropped passes, and the interception fumble are a few of the most obvious. I don't see how this is luck, though. Nor do I see our being able to score after these plays was being lucky. Furthermore, we made plenty of mistakes, as well. We turned the ball over 3 times. San Diego had 0 points off our turnovers. We scored 14 off their turnovers. Luck? We had a few dropped balls, and a few misguided passes, but in the end, our offense was still able to score more points than the Chargers.
As glaring as some of the mistakes San Diego made were, they also played one hell of a football game. LT had 187 yards of total offense. As a team, they ran for nearly 3 times as many yards as we did. They pressured Brady a great deal, sacking him twice, hurrying and hitting him so often that he made big mistakes. Both of their lines did a great job at what they do. Most of them played a very good game. They controlled the line of scrimmage, the rushing game, the field position, 3rd down conversions, total first downs, time of possession, and were only -1 in the turnover ratio. But we still won. I guess we got lucky.
What exactly is luck? Here's what Dictionary.com defines luck as:
1. the force that seems to operate for good or ill in a person's life, as in shaping circumstances, events, or opportunities: With my luck I'll probably get pneumonia.
2. good fortune; advantage or success, considered as the result of chance: He had no luck finding work.
3. a combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance to bring good or ill to a person: She's had nothing but bad luck all year.
4. some object on which good fortune is supposed to depend: This rabbit's foot is my luck.
—Verb phrases Informal.
5. luck into or onto, to meet, acquire, become, etc., by good luck: She lucked into a great job.
6. luck out, to have an instance or run of exceptionally good luck: He lucked out when he made a hole in one during the tournament.
7. luck upon, to come across by chance: to luck upon a profitable investment.
—Idioms
8. down on one's luck, in unfortunate circumstances; unlucky: She hated to see her old friend so down on her luck.
9. in luck, lucky; fortunate: We were in luck, for the bakery was still open.
10. luck of the draw, the luck one has in or as if in drawing cards.
11. out of luck, unlucky; unfortunate: When it comes to getting World Series tickets, we're usually out of luck.
12. push one's luck, Informal. to try to make too much of an opportunity; go too far. Also, crowd one's luck.
A key word I'm seeing here is "chance." Now, a flip of a coin, that's luck. That's purely chance. Recovering a fumble, that isn't luck. There isn't much chance involved in that. The player fumbled for some reason. He could have been stripped, hit hard, just lost control of the ball, whatever. He still fumbled because he lost control over the ball. That isn't chance. Neither is a muffed punt, or a personal foul penalty. These things are not random events like being struck by lightning. These are mistakes.
The real test in any football game is how a team capitalizes on their opponent's mistakes and how they minimize the effect of their own miscues. You can throw 10 INTs and fumble the ball 5 times, but if the other team fails to score any points off these turnovers, and you score a touchdown somehow, you'll probably win.
The Pats are NOT lucky to still be in the playoffs. They outplayed the San Diego Chargers. They outcoached the San Diego Chargers. On Sunday, they were better than the Chargers.
A common word associated by these haters is "lucky." The Patriots were "lucky" to win such and such a game. An even more ludicrous statement is "the Patriots didn't win the game, the other team lost it." Of course, this makes no sense, because if someone loses a football game, then someone else wins it. Then there's also the "they didn't deserve to win" accusation. All of these things are just silly.
With the recent 24-21 victory over the San Diego Chargers, these words have been tossed around by many up here in CNY, and by some on the national sports media level. If you ever want to lose a few brain cells, listen to WEEI past midnight. WOW!
They all point to the Tuck Play a few seasons back in Oakland. They claim that this single play is what made Brady, Belichick, and the Patriots what they are today.
Just a few things about this particular play:
1. The officials called it correctly, as confirmed by the NFL after the game.
2. The NFL has kept the tuck rule in exactly the same language as it was written back then.
3. It may have been a freak thing, but it didn't exactly end the game. The play was called incomplete in our favor, not a touchdown or anything.
The Tuck Play occurred at the Oakland 47. There was only a little over 90 seconds on the clock in that game with us down by 3. We drove the ball 23 yards after that play to set up Vinatieri's game tying 45 yard kick.
We won the toss for overtime, which I guess is lucky. But then we drove to the Oakland 28, converted a 4th and 4, and kept driving until we set-up a Vinatieri 23 yard field goal. Yeah, Oakland let us get all the way down to the 6 yard line. I guess we were lucky to get down there.
The next week, we beat Pittsburgh straight up. Yeah, we had 2 special teams TDs, but we also held Jerome Bettis to 8 yards on 9 carries. And despite what Bill Cowher might still think, special teams are part of the game. You return a punt for a TD, or block a field goal, it is a good football play, not a lucky play.
We all know what happened to the Rams the next week. There wasn't much luck in that game, either. We outplayed St. Louis and we won.
We also won 21 straight games a few seaosns later, 6 more playoff games and 2 more Super Bowls. I guess we were still riding that luck. Remember when we dominated the Colts and Steelers in back to back weeks? Man, we were sooooooooo lucky!
After our win against the Chargers on Sunday, all the haters continued to call the Patriots lucky. But where the hell is this luck?
I'll say this much, the Chargers did make a few pivotal errors which gave the Patriots an opportunity to win the game. The muffed and re-muffed punt, a few dropped passes, and the interception fumble are a few of the most obvious. I don't see how this is luck, though. Nor do I see our being able to score after these plays was being lucky. Furthermore, we made plenty of mistakes, as well. We turned the ball over 3 times. San Diego had 0 points off our turnovers. We scored 14 off their turnovers. Luck? We had a few dropped balls, and a few misguided passes, but in the end, our offense was still able to score more points than the Chargers.
As glaring as some of the mistakes San Diego made were, they also played one hell of a football game. LT had 187 yards of total offense. As a team, they ran for nearly 3 times as many yards as we did. They pressured Brady a great deal, sacking him twice, hurrying and hitting him so often that he made big mistakes. Both of their lines did a great job at what they do. Most of them played a very good game. They controlled the line of scrimmage, the rushing game, the field position, 3rd down conversions, total first downs, time of possession, and were only -1 in the turnover ratio. But we still won. I guess we got lucky.
What exactly is luck? Here's what Dictionary.com defines luck as:
1. the force that seems to operate for good or ill in a person's life, as in shaping circumstances, events, or opportunities: With my luck I'll probably get pneumonia.
2. good fortune; advantage or success, considered as the result of chance: He had no luck finding work.
3. a combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance to bring good or ill to a person: She's had nothing but bad luck all year.
4. some object on which good fortune is supposed to depend: This rabbit's foot is my luck.
—Verb phrases Informal.
5. luck into or onto, to meet, acquire, become, etc., by good luck: She lucked into a great job.
6. luck out, to have an instance or run of exceptionally good luck: He lucked out when he made a hole in one during the tournament.
7. luck upon, to come across by chance: to luck upon a profitable investment.
—Idioms
8. down on one's luck, in unfortunate circumstances; unlucky: She hated to see her old friend so down on her luck.
9. in luck, lucky; fortunate: We were in luck, for the bakery was still open.
10. luck of the draw, the luck one has in or as if in drawing cards.
11. out of luck, unlucky; unfortunate: When it comes to getting World Series tickets, we're usually out of luck.
12. push one's luck, Informal. to try to make too much of an opportunity; go too far. Also, crowd one's luck.
A key word I'm seeing here is "chance." Now, a flip of a coin, that's luck. That's purely chance. Recovering a fumble, that isn't luck. There isn't much chance involved in that. The player fumbled for some reason. He could have been stripped, hit hard, just lost control of the ball, whatever. He still fumbled because he lost control over the ball. That isn't chance. Neither is a muffed punt, or a personal foul penalty. These things are not random events like being struck by lightning. These are mistakes.
The real test in any football game is how a team capitalizes on their opponent's mistakes and how they minimize the effect of their own miscues. You can throw 10 INTs and fumble the ball 5 times, but if the other team fails to score any points off these turnovers, and you score a touchdown somehow, you'll probably win.
The Pats are NOT lucky to still be in the playoffs. They outplayed the San Diego Chargers. They outcoached the San Diego Chargers. On Sunday, they were better than the Chargers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)