Football pet peeves
Posted by Jason Lisk on Friday, February 20, 2009
Throughout the season, the various contributors to this blog have had an ongoing thread of discussion of football pet peeves. Some are related to coaches, some players, some to announcers and television broadcasts, and well, some to just about anything else football-related. As you will see, some of us are a little more crotchety than others.
PLAYER BEHAVIOR
Doug: Oh yeah, if I were ever named commissioner, the first rule I would enact is this: Any receiver who looks at a ref and does the little throw-the-flag wrist flip gets a 15-yard penalty and a lifetime ban from the league. [Ed. note: if this rule were actually enacted, NFL teams would be running the wing-T all the time within a year]JKL: The whole exaggerated "hands over the back", thumb-pointing thing that alot of players have been doing recently after a touchdown, pointing to their own name on the back of the jersey. It usually follows a simple touchdown pass where 10 other guys made the easy catch likely. I'd rather have players proposing to cheerleaders and doing snow angels after touchdowns than this.
JKL: Lendale White. I'm waiting for the first story noting that the Titans win if Lendale White gets more than one carry. At least guys like TO and Moss have earned the right to bitch about something by, oh, having an ounce of talent. [this was written after the NY Jets win over the Titans, when White complained about getting only 1 carry and 1 dropped pass when the Titans fell behind big early and needed plays to be made to catch up]
PLAYER APPAREL
Doug: I grant that this is the most frivolous of peeves, but what is the deal with baseball caps? When you go to the sideline and take off your helmet, how does it make any sense to then put on a baseball cap? I guess it's just a marketing deal, yes? I try hard not to let the Old Fartism creep in, but this just really rankles.Chase: I always thought [it] was because of hat hair, but maybe it's a marketing thing.
JKL: when did "baseball caps" become the accepted hat of choice in this country? Was it before the 80's? It had to happen sometime, but it has been the case as long as I can remember. I would love to see quarterbacks go to the sideline and don their berets in between series.
Sean: I hate, hate, hate the t-shirts and hats they pass out after the Super Bowl, World Series, etc. The players are wearing classy $150 jerseys and then put on these cheapo $10 t-shirts and $12 hats. Drives me crazy. [Ed. note: do those shirts and hats really cost that much?]
Sean: Just to follow up for this year's Super Bowl the players will also be given 24"x42" Trophy Towels. Read that in Sports Business Journal.
TELEVISION AND ANNOUNCERS
JKL: commercials after a touchdown, followed by a kickoff, followed by more commercials. We cant get all the commercials in at once?Chase: Here's one that's absurd on a lot of levels: every QB on a winning team that doesn't throw for a ton of yards is "being asked to play a dilferesque role." I saw that applied to Pennington today.
Chase: All [insert the QB on the favorite, if said favorite has a good defense] needs to do is play mistake free ball. If [his team] doesn't lose the turnover battle, they'll win.
What does this even mean? Do they think QBs intentionally throw interceptions? Do they want them to avoid all plays with any degree of risk even if they're positive EV plays? Should they just kneel it every down?
JKL: [written on October 21, following the Giants-Browns Monday night game] Here's one of mine. When Announcer says "it's too early to go for two . . .", regardless of the score and time situations. In the Browns/Giants Monday night game, the Browns scored on the INT to go up by 19 with about 9 minutes left in the game, and Jaws actually said "it's too early to go for two", when the Browns went for 2 and successfully made it a 21 point game. It also came up in the K-State-Colorado game. Didn't watch it, but I guess K-State scored to make it 12-14 late in the 3rd, and kicked the extra point. The final score was 13-14. The radio show I was listening to said you can't go for 2 in the 3rd. For some reason, this absolutist attitude that I hear quite frequently on 2 point conversions is a pet peeve.
Chase: I heard that Jaws thing. That was absolutely absurd. Only an idiot wouldn't go for two up by 19 with 9 minutes left in the game. It's not even close to debatable. The way he forcefully argued it was almost as crazy as the reasoning behind his argument (it was too early).
Doug: Brent Musberger, who I generally like OK, has got to stop saying "snaps it off" when he means "throws a pass." If he said it once a game, it would be nonsensical but acceptable. But he says it a dozen times a game at least. [IMPORTANT UPDATE: it appears that his producers said something to him about it. In the few games Musberger worked after I wrote this, he was down to about one "snaps it off" per game.]
JKL: Announcers who refer to how costly an intentional grounding penalty is, because of the loss of down. Hello! If he had simply held the ball and taken the sack, he risks a fumble and a sack also results in a "loss of down". It's actually one of the smarter penalties a player can risk taking. Rarely does a QB do it without a sack being eminent. At least half the time, they can convince the ref that they were trying to throw it to someone and got it close. And when they don't, they don't lose anything except the same result as a sack.
Doug: NBC's little scoreboard thing at the bottom of the screen has a space that flashes after every single play. First of all, it serves no purpose. But you can't go around getting hot about everything someone does that serves no purpose. No, what makes this rise to pet peeve status is that it flashes yellow. The same color as any sensible penalty flag related graphic. Even though I'm aware of the situation, my subconscious brain still thinks there is a penalty flag on every play.
COACHING DECISIONS
Doug: any timeout called in the second half to "talk things over." Timeouts are for STOPPING THE CLOCK. I get that your 3rd-and-2 is a crucial play, but in your 90 hours of preparation for this game, did you not foresee that a crucial 3rd-and-2 might arise at some point? In the first half, I guess it's OK, but in the second half, timeouts are for STOPPING THE CLOCK.Chase: I've been on [calling second half timeouts] for awhile. It annoys me more, I think, because I (probably incorrectly) feel like teams usually come out of timeouts with a good play, too. Why couldn't you have thought of that great play on Wednesday?
JKL: Also, timeouts called to determine whether to challenge. I'm pretty sure I have seen Herm Edwards do this. Nothing quite as gut-wrenching and mind numbing as watching your coach burn two timeouts in a row.
Your point is particularly well taken when the team in question is trailing and KNOWS they will need the timeouts on defense. I have seen this happen alot.
JKL: Here's one that I meant to add after last Monday's Buffalo-Cleveland ending. Coaches who play for a field goal at the end of the game once they get in "field goal range (35 yard line)". They are so afraid of throwing an interception, which, what, may happen 5% of the time, so they instead meekly play for the long FG, so they have about a 30-40% chance of failure. Dick Jauron is just the latest member, though I'm sure he was already in the club.
Doug: I hate it when they call for a measurement when the ball is spotted on one side of a yard-line and the marker is on the other side of the same yard-line. Do they think maybe the stripes are crooked, or what?
[yeah, yeah, I know they're probably just doing it because a coach asked for a measurement to buy some time. I think the ref should deny the request.]
MISCELLANEOUS
Doug: [This is] only vaguely related to football, but.... AC/DC.Doug: Punt, Pass, and Kick enrages me. Why is two thirds of this thing devoted to non-football activities? [Ed. note: of course, the two things Doug refers to are the two things that one would actually do with a foot.]
Chase: Thinking that coaches don't age.
I actually read someone calling Marty Schottenheimer a bad coach because of all the things John Elway used to do to him. JOHN ELWAY!!! Could you imagine calling Fred Taylor a bad RB because Eric Turner forced two fumbles in a game with him once? (Note: I made that up). Even worse, the Elway stuff wasn't from '98 but the '80s. How in the world could anything that possibly happened in the '80s be relevant to today's game? Joe Gibbs down?
Anything a coach does that happened >6 years ago should henceforth be stricken. I don't want my team to hire Brian Billick because he won a SB in 2000. That was eight years ago. Tom Brady was a rookie back then. Who cares? This isn't a lifetime achievement award.
If you want to evaluate Tony Dungy as a playoff coach for 2009, I don't want to hear anything about what happened in Tampa.
John Gruden? Whenever he's fired, I don't want to hear that his next team is hiring a SB winning coach. Did anyone say that the Cowboys were okay when Romo got hurt because they had a SB winning QB come in?
Chase: People . . . saying Pittsburgh had the hardest schedule ever this year because their opponents had great records in 2007.
Doug: This is mostly a message board thing, but I am calling a moratorium on the word "sick." I am [also] really tired of the word "presser." [Ed. note: feel free to use "sick" as much as you want in the comments, now that you know Doug's position].
Doug: Granted, this does no real harm, but it annoys me when draft-related literature well after the deadline for underclassmen to declare includes asterisks for underclassmen. In December, sure, the asterisks let us know that the listed player might not even actually be in the draft. But in February they're pointless.
This entry was posted on Friday, February 20th, 2009 at 7:48 AM and filed under General, Rant. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
Two comments, one original:
Doug: I hate it when they call for a measurement when the ball is spotted on one side of a yard-line and the marker is on the other side of the same yard-line. Do they think maybe the stripes are crooked, or what?
Me: Then there was the game I saw a while ago where they called for a measurement...ten yards out from a touchback.
Also, I dislike the graphic at the bottom of CBS where they only sometimes give you field position, but say a team has the ball at the opponent's 2 yard line for a PAT or their own 30 for a kickoff. I'm more interested in how much time is left in the game than a running back who has 54 yards rushing when the game is in the 3rd-4th quarter. (I find the games more interesting without having a fantasy football team.)
FIFA gives soccer players a yellow card for miming pulling a card out of a pocket; I don't see much difference with the throw-the-flag-already gesture.
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 9:17 am | PermalinkDoug: any timeout called in the second half to “talk things over.” Timeouts are for STOPPING THE CLOCK.
Football is a game of momentum. If the coach thinks the offense doesn't have enough momentum going, or the other team is gaining momentum, he'll call a timeout to regroup, pick the right play, talk his players up, and try to regain momentum...
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 9:45 am | PermalinkMy peeve: As TV screens have gotten bigger and high-def, the networks have felt compelled to fill them up with more and more information and ads. A few months ago on the NFL network, I caught a replay of the Montana-Elway Monday night game from 1994. What was on the screen most of the time? The game, and nothing else.
I love having the score and time remaining stay on the screen--that's a big improvement. But now there are bars across the top and bottom, and sometimes a sidebar as well, showing us the score, time remaining, each team's timeouts, possession, the down and yards, a news ticker, current scores and fantasy results from other games and even other sports (if I want to know how the NASCAR race is going, which I do, I'll find out on my own), and two or three sponsored ads/logos.
It's distracting, and it crowds out the parts of the game that don't happen right on top of the ball. If something happens at the bottom of the screen, I want to be able to watch it instead of trying to see through last night's WNBA results and a Tostito's ad.
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 9:54 am | PermalinkI've always assumed the "talk things over" was mostly announcer jargon for "for not immediately obvious reasons". Those guys are running hard and taking some huge shots out there. Perhaps the RB got his clock cleaned and needs to put himself back together before the next play, or maybe the corners are winded, or maybe the coach wants to change the plan from whatever they decided in all their pre-game prep for this situation. I'm sure some of the timeouts are stupid, but I'm willing to give coaches the benefit of the doubt on that one -- they're more familiar with the players and they're watching them with more attention than a TV viewer so they may have real reasons that the announcers aren't aware of, and the announcers have to fill dead air SOMEHOW... Another, less politically correct reason... While all NFL players are athletically gifted, a good number of them are downright dumb. What would be a silly, wasted timeout for YOU might be much more necessary for a guy with an IQ in the low 80's.
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 10:38 am | PermalinkIn a similar vein to Chase's TV & Announcers peeve, my most despised phrase is describing a QB who "manages a game" as a good thing. What it actually means is that he isn't as good as other QBs.
Peyton Manning doesn't manage games. Drew Brees doesn't manage games. Tom Brady doesn't manage games. They're all better than Chad Pennington, Jeff Garcia, and old-school Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer. Not to say that those guys don't/didn't have value, but it's like saying a RB who averages 4.5 yards per carry is "good," while one who gets 4.0 yards per carry is "managing the running game."
No, he just isn't as good.
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 12:07 pm | PermalinkWell, you're probably right that most 3-and-2 "talk things over" timeouts are wasted. However, maybe all the good 3-and-2 plays have been used up and they need to decide which one to use again. Or maybe an injury has taken out the lineman you were counting on to win his matchup so a given play would work. Or maybe the rookie DT you thought your OG could block 1-on-1 is better than he looked on tape. Or one of any million things that could have happened to screw up your planning in spite of the insane amount of time spent on preparation for the game.
My pet timeout peeves: First, the 3-and-26 timeout to avoid a delay of game, because those five yards are so valuable that you want to use an irreplaceable resource (not just for time conservation but also for challenging a call). Second, the timout after a big gain, especially when your wideout has been so busy celebrating that he forgot to get back to the huddle -way to keep THAT momementum going (yes I know your players might be winded but so are the defense's and maybe you should do some more aerobic work besides your wieghtlifting in the off-season).
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 12:22 pm | Permalink(Raises hand and waves it wildly about.) OOOH!!! OOOH!!! PICK ME!!!
But seriously, here's some that haven't been covered (in this thead anyway).
1. When a game comes back from an excuciatingly long ad break, the camera is on the cheerleaders...and then someone chooses to plaster a big ol' company logo over them after we JUST SAW their ad, and will see it about 10-15 times per game. I HATE that! If the cheerleaders are going to be covered up anyway, might as well fade back in with a generic shot of the field or stadium or sidelines.
2. Passes that get batted down at the line. HUGELY annoying to me, especially when it causes the camera to jerk backwards violently because the cameraman didn't expect it to happen.
3. Big plays that get called back because of illegal formation due to not enough men being on the line or the TE being "covered up". I HATE this penalty and the reasons for it and the fact that teams even commit it to begin with.
4. Garbage time TDs. Especially when they somehow convince people a game was closer than it really was. Oh, NOW you start trying after you're down by 30 with 5 minutes left.
5. Replays that are incorrectly ruled even after the officials (and everyone else watching) looks at it for 5 minutes and the viwer can CLEARLY tell what the call should be...and they get it wrong anyway.
6. Sideline "reporters" giving pointless, rambling interviews with people I couldn't care less about and talking over the action in the process.
7. The modern day dink and dunk-style passing philosophy where teams pray that whoever catches the ball can break tackles from half the D to get the first down, constantly resulting in passes completed on 3rd and less than 5 that somehow result in 4th down anyway because the ball only traveled 1-2 yards in the air.
8. Coaches being allowed to call timeout in mid-snap on FG attempts. Seriously, anyone who does that should have his team get penalized 15 yards on the spot. I would suggest other punishments but somehow I don't think they're doable by NFL officials...
9. Players' increasing inability to hang onto the ball from when they're tackled until they reach the ground, causing repeated "did he or didn't he?" fumble replay reviews, and of course every player concerned *insisting* he was down. It's gotten to the point where players just ASSUME they'll be ruled down so why bother with this holding onto the ball thing?
10. The fact that in certain situations when a penalty is called we're just supposed to take the officials' word for it with no replay whatsoever being shown, even though they'll show 20 replays in other situations. Example: Any penalty on a kick return, most holding calls.
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 8:37 pm | PermalinkI have to agree with the peeve concerning a commercial timeout before the kickoff and then another set of commercials right after the kickoff return. Completely dirsrupts the continuity of the game.
Also, the sideline reporter thing used to be aired only when it was needed - and was much more informative. Now it is aired at certain intervals, presumably from somebody in the truck - the most annoying of which is the obligatory interview with the coach just as he's walking in at halftime to address his team - seldom enlightening, just part of the networks attempts to spoon-feed us with their own talent.
Also, Monday Night Football has got so bad. I won't mention names but geez when did the game become secondary?
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 9:23 pm | PermalinkGreat idea for a blog entry! My pet peeves:
1)The NFL constantly tweaking the rules to favor the offense. I enjoy a hard fought 14-10 game, but I don't enjoy watching defenders trying to play with essentially one hand tied behind their backs.
2)The current division and playoff seeding format. The fact that some teams make the playoffs (Cardinals, ahem) due to nothing more than their geographic location is just asanine.
3)If a team is ahead by 35 in the 4th quarter and drives for a TD, it's "poor sportmanship." Yet if a team is down by 35 with two minutes left and goes out of their way to score a garbage time TD to inflate their stats, nobody complains.
4)That the NFL still uses total yards to rank offenses and defenses, and that broadcasters perpetuate this silliness by referring to "the 6th ranked offense in football" on a regular basis.
5)As DolFan316 already mentioned, the ultraconservative modern passing game. It seems like teams noawdays are more concerned with avoiding INT's than they are in throwing TD's.
6)Prevent defense. Happens every week where Team A has stopped Team B all day with their regular defense, then in the final minutes of the game inexplicably switches to Prevent and lets Team B march down the field and steal the game. If something has worked the whole game, why suddenly let up in crunch time? I will never understand this.
7)Ticky-tack, game changing, roughing-the-passer penalties. Remember, QB's are football players, too! They can (and should) take a few hits.
8)The media's obsession with the train wreck that is the Dallas Cowboys. In the same vein, why the hell are they called "America's Team"?
9)People who evaluate QB's by nothing more than wins and rings. If Scott Norwood would have made that fateful field goal, would Jim Kelly suddenly be a better player?
Posted on 20-Feb-09 at 11:45 pm | Permalink@Jason W: I may be mistaken, but isn't calling payton manning a "field general" the same as saying he "manages the game"? Because i've heard that term quite a bit about him
"9)People who evaluate QB’s by nothing more than wins and rings. If Scott Norwood would have made that fateful field goal, would Jim Kelly suddenly be a better player?" and to further the point, is Dan Marino worse than Trent Dilfer or Jim Plunkett because Marino never got a ring?
Posted on 21-Feb-09 at 3:20 am | PermalinkAdam and Alex---The ultimate GOAL for an NFL QB is to play good enough to lead their Teams to as many wins AND as many Championships as they can. Not all of them succeeded as often as they should have, or could have and for the most part it was due to their own bad play. Those that did succeed more than others should be recognized and rewarded for their accomplishments, especially where they themselves played a good game. A QB is said to have reached "the pinnacle of his profession" when he leads his Team to a S.B. win, but I would add that the real "pinnacle" is achieved when he is named the MVP of that S.B. game.
Posted on 21-Feb-09 at 8:13 am | PermalinkI have an announcer-related pet peeve. Every year, when the season is winding down, I'll hear an announcer suggest that a team should be more willing to go for it on 4th down if they're already out of the playoffs. It's become a cliche in 4th down situations: They're 4-10, what do they have to lose? Regardless of a team's record, their strategy should be designed to maximize their chances of winning. So, if it's a smart decision for a 4-10 team to go for it on 4th down, why would a 10-4 team punt in that same situation?
Posted on 21-Feb-09 at 3:02 pm | Permalink9)People who evaluate QB’s by nothing more than wins and rings. If Scott Norwood would have made that fateful field goal, would Jim Kelly suddenly be a better player?
So...Trent Dilfer is a better quarterback than Dan Marino.
Posted on 21-Feb-09 at 5:53 pm | PermalinkDenny, I see where you're coming from, but I have to disagree. I think a QB's job is to do everything he can to help his team win, but it's foolish to discount the fact that there are 52 other guys on his team, and he can't win without help.
Take Ben Roethlisberger for example. Is he a very good player? Yes. Does he make spectacular plays that help his team win? Yes. Would he have won the SB this year playing with the Lions defense? No.
I would also say that SB MVP is the most irrelevant award there is. Often the QB wins it by default because nobody knows who else to vote for. Like Brady against the Rams going 16/27 for 160 yards and an INT, yet he wins the MVP award even though his defense basically won the game for him.
Posted on 21-Feb-09 at 7:16 pm | PermalinkI'll give an emphatic repeat to people who evaluate QBs by rings and wins, expand JKL's 2nd player behavior pet peeve to just LenDale White in general, and the big one for me, Holding not being called unless it's not just obvious, but obvious that the defender was going to make the play. It's ridiculously frustrating for me to watch Freeney or Mathis to spin past a lineman who then just hooks an arm across their neck to hold them back, and not have it draw a flag.
The "throw the PI flag" gesture is so ingrained in receivers. Even guys that are the antithesis of the whiny, loudmouthed me-first type guys who are expected to throw tantrums do it. Marvin Harrison did it after he was mugged by Rashean Mathis for a pick 6 (It was a horribly missed call, I remember a FO writer in the audibles saying that even though he's in favor of flags for that gesture he's ok with it there and that Rashean Mathis should have at least bought Marvin dinner first).
Posted on 22-Feb-09 at 12:52 am | PermalinkOh my god, coaches who called timeouts to consider challenges is the worst thing ever. Andy Reid has done this at least twice in the past few years. What do you gain?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Seriously. Wow.
A thing I hate is the forward progress rule. If a defender and offensive player meet at a point and the offensive player falls forward, he gets that yardage. If he is knocked backwards, he gets credit for the point he reached. I understand the need to have a forward progress rule, but shouldn't we give SOME credit for a good tackle that knocks a guy back a yard or two?
Posted on 22-Feb-09 at 10:05 am | PermalinkThe Cowboys are still called America's Team because they make the league the most money. I'm not sure about ratings numbers but I do work for a company that makes NFL licensed goods. We have our own data on sales and the league also shares their data (I guess to better help companies figure out what to make). When the Cowboys are even remotely relevant they are #1 or #2 in sales. Even when they go 5-11 for three years in a row they're in the top 5. They were the top in sales for 2008. Based on our early 2009 numbers the Steelers will be #1 this year but the Cowboys are currently trending as #2.
Posted on 22-Feb-09 at 4:28 pm | PermalinkHolding out? Fine, but don't insult us and say that you "gotta feed your kids." I know I have never met a kid how eats $5 million worth of food each year.I pay your Ferrari payments with by buying season tickets on a $30k salary. Give me a break.
Posted on 23-Feb-09 at 7:31 am | PermalinkWhew. Quite a list of peeves.
Posted on 23-Feb-09 at 9:20 am | Permalink#1 Sideline reporters who "interview" the coach before the game or at the half. leave the guys alone as they are busy and they have nothing real to say. Can you imagine Don Shula, Tom Landry or Vince Lombardi during one of these?
# 2 Not a peeve but a comment on earlier post. A "field general" QB connotes a "leader" aka a coach on the field. A QB designated as a "game manager" minimzes mistakes, plays more cautiously and is thus is doing less to "make plays" (silly phrase) and is minimizing risk.
# 3 too much crap info on the screen during the game.
#4 The inane programming of NBC's post game show. Individually I like most of these guys, but collectively the show is "snarky", cynical, and there is too much belittling of teams and players when they are not succeeding.
# I'm a big Cowboy fan, but man I have heard enough about the "Ice Bowl" (I watched it!). Great game but c'mon! The 1966 game was better anyhow and just as dramatic.
I agree with Tim: the sideline reporter interview at the beginning of halftime is beyond pointless--I've never heard any interesting insight, and have just watched as an impatient, frustrated man thinks about something else.
I would actually say most notes from sideline reporters are pointless. There should be sideline reporters--if something happens that we don't know about directly (like an injury), then the sideline reporter can "report." But having the mandatory chats with sideline reporters throughout the game adds little to nothing.
Posted on 23-Feb-09 at 12:54 pm | PermalinkThe Fox Robot.
Really? They're still trotting that out? I guess it was sort of cool when CGI was still a weird, unknown entity. But now 6-year-olds can do more on a cell phone than that robot. And half the time he's swinging a baseball bat. WTF?
Posted on 23-Feb-09 at 9:39 pm | Permalink1) Whenever an announcer mentions the "this team wins more often when they run the ball more" stat to imply that the team should run more. That is possibly the single most misleading and misused stat in the history of sports, yet I still hear it referenced all the time.
2) When the offense goes to no huddle but the TV producers are busy showing the coach on the sideline, and they miss the snap.
3) When they don't put the yellow line in the right spot. It's especially bad when they screw it up on replays.
finally, a couple coaching/strategy gaffes that get me worked up...
4) The following situation seems to come up a lot: Team X is down by a touchdown with a minute to go, with the ball at their own 20 yard line and no timeouts. They complete a pass for 15 yards down the middle of the field, which is fine, but then THEY DON'T SPIKE THE GODDAMN BALL! They hurry to the line, run a crappy play, get another 8 yard completion as the clock continues to run, and before long they have 20 seconds left and no chance to win the game. Just spike the ball next time. I'm begging you.
5) The twin sister of #4. Team X is down by 10 points with 20 seconds left at the other team's 30 yard line. Instead of kicking the field goal first, they keep trying to score the touchdown and they run out of time. You were already in field goal range! Just kick the goddamn field goal while you still have a few seconds on the clock, and then worry about the onside kick and the hail mary. Christ.
Posted on 24-Feb-09 at 12:32 am | PermalinkMy favorite is DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. Wouldn't it have been fitting if the S.B. game would have been tied, and gone into overtime. Then the Steelers win the coin toss and decide to go on OFFENSE. And you can bet that that is exactly what they would have done. Yes, Defense can win Championships, as long as their OFFENSE can OUTSCORE the other Teams' Offense.
Posted on 24-Feb-09 at 6:06 am | PermalinkAdam--#14-----Trust me, you don't have to remind anyone on this blog that FOOTBALL IS A TEAM GAME. We all understand that. But you have to admire a QB that accomplishes things that others FAILED to do. For example: Elway leading his Team to 5 Conf. Champ. game Wins. I still hate the guy for what he did to my Balt. Colts in '83, BUT---that was quite an accomplishment and I give him alot of extra credit for doing it.
Posted on 24-Feb-09 at 4:09 pm | PermalinkI play football in the UK. You guys would love it here, as our refs do some of your suggestions.
Posted on 25-Feb-09 at 8:16 am | PermalinkTrying to get an official to throw a flag on someone is itself penalised under the 'unsportsmanlike conduct' banner.
And as a team captain, I've asked for a measure in a game in order to buy some time to go over to the sideline to speak to coach, but the offical has looked along the LOS, and said no as it's clearly not close, then whistled the ball in.
I think this comes from the fact that soccer referees are now expected to have a no-nonsense attitude, and as that's the main game in our country, our football officials pick it up.
How about this factoid from the pregame show of Super Bowl 39: Record of teams who win the coin toss: 19-19
WOW! It took 38 years of Super Bowls to prove that a coin toss was random. I think that takes the cake as worst stat ever.
Posted on 25-Feb-09 at 6:55 pm | PermalinkDenny - I totally agree that team success is, and should be, an important part of a QB's legacy. I was just saying that it's silly to judge a QB solely on wins and losses without taking context into account.
Glad you mention Elway. He's one of those guys who had relatively poor stats but managed to will his teams to victories that other QB's would not have. And that is what makes him a Hall of Fame player.
One last peeve: Why does the underdog get to choose their uniform in the SuperBowl? I think the team with the better record has earned the right to wear their home colors if they so choose. The lesser team is always "officially" listed as the home team, when logically it should be the other way around.
Posted on 25-Feb-09 at 8:23 pm | PermalinkAdam---I agree with you about the context issue and that is what helps to make Elway's 5 Conf Champ. wins that much more impressive. He had an avg. Comp. % of 53%, 10 TD's and only 3 INT's, 1293 yds passing and another 153 yds. rushing, an avg. Passer Rating of 93.0, and he led his Offense to an avg. of 29 p.p.g. The Broncos won those 5 games in part because of Elway's good play, and not in-spite of his bad play.
Posted on 26-Feb-09 at 8:52 pm | PermalinkYou know - its funny. I must be the ADD football fan, because my pet peeve is that I don't get enough info about a guys numbers, and more importantly - teams numbers for how they are doing. I like to see more stats, context specific stats and not, as someone mentioned, "This team is the #1 defense in the league." I like to know how both teams do on certain downs and yardage, I like to know if someone has a specific statistical advantage, and I like to see how it plays out play by play. But this was a great post, and awesome comments.
Posted on 10-Mar-09 at 10:45 am | Permalink