VS 
Minnesota Vikings/Philadelphia Eagles
Posted on 01/16/2005 9:02:03 AM PST by CounterCounterCulture
VS
VS 
Boy are you right about that. Michigan's kick return team kept them in the game against Texas (Texas was the latest incident of the BCS defiling the Rose Bowl tradidion). When Michigan needed a score to take the lead, they busted a 50-yarder that took them to the opposition's half of the field.
What I can't stand is those stupid cards that tell you when to go for a two point coversion. You should only go for it late in a game when you need them. Otherwise you just spend the rest of the game chasing points.
Yeah, nothing like blowing a 2 pointer to squander all the momentum your team built up with a TD drive. You want your offense to be hanging out on the sidelines feeling good about themselves after a TD, not being down because they blew the conversion.
I really think they'd be good to simplify the Indy offense, and put both James and Rhodes in the game at the same time in a split or I. You'll notice when it gets cold, NE throws short or to the sidelines to avoid pressure and INTs. Indy needs to put their running game first and let Manning get his yards on second down.
Iso, pass, run, run, pass, run.
I think that another thing that plays into it is that coaches don't want to take the heat if the team turns the ball over when they are already in field goal range. The press would blast the coach for "being greedy".
The articles would say something along the line of "If the coach can't trust his kicker to make a 47 yard field goal, then the coach should have found a better kicker."
Second-biggest. The Patriots were 14-point underdogs that year. But the Jets were 18-point underdogs when they won SB III.
A great example was during last year's Super Bowl. Carolina scores early in the 4th quarter and Fox decides to go for two and they miss. If he had opted to kick the extra point Vinatieri's late field goal would have been to tie the game instead of winning it.
Yes, and I loved every minute of it. The looked uncomfortable in WARM-UPS. I figured we'd know early which way this game was going to go. Either the Pats could stop Manning or not. If they couldn't, then he would roll. If they could, I knew the Colts would get frustrated and quickly lose confidence. When they went 3-and-out on their first possession, I knew it would be a long day for them.
I kept pointing out here on FR that no team since the 93 Cowboys had been given such little respect as a defending SB Champ in a home playoff game. Dallas was the other team not favored by 7+ points in such a situation, as they were only 3-point favorites against the 49ers in the NFC Champ Game. I pointed out that the Cowboys won that game with ease by 17 points. And lookie here, the Pats win by 17.
I don't think there's any stopping NE now. Pittsburgh beat the Pats in the regular season, but NE was without Dillon, and you don't beat Belichik 2 times in a row. It just doesn't happen. No way the Pats are going to lose now to a rookie QB. I also like the Falcons to beat the Eagles in the NFC title game, which sets up a Pats-Falcons SB. If anyone can design a defense to shut down Vick, it's Belichick. Plus the game will be outdoors on grass where Vick's speed will be somewhat negated.
The building of the Patriot dynasty continues. If they win this year it will be 3 SBs in 4 years. The only teams to equal that success over a number of years are the Cowboys in the early-mid 90s when they won 3 of 4, the Steelers in the late 70s-1980 when they won 4 of 6, and the Packers who did well in the NFL before the merger, then won the first 2 SBs. New England will be in elite company.
Yeah that plays into it. The sports press is really fond of criticizing failed risk taking, a coach will take a lot less guff losing with "safe" plays than almost winning with risk.
Luckily after Saturday the majority of the press has been of the opinion that no FG try that starts with the number 4 in the yardage is easy, they've been highly critical of Schott and Edwards for killing their drives for long range kicks. Maybe that will help next year.
True...but remember that John Unitas didn't start in that game. I don't consider that all of an upset, especially in the era where the QB called his own plays. Also remembering the low opinion of the AFL at the time, I think the betting line was skewed a bit.
Although in terms of press predictions, the two games were probably on par...no one was picking either of them.
I guess you are pretty smart for a sports columist afterall. haha Seriously, I totally agree. Manning is a great QB but they should put in a more physical type of offense.
Trading Marvin Harrison would be a great start. His salary totally devestates the salary cap. Cheaper, more physical receivers would greatly improve the Colt's consistancy in hostile games. I believe that Manning's talent would allow them to get by with less expensive recievers.
That's right. Funny that in a game where most teams score at least 17 points most of the time it's the missed 1s and 2s that cost the game. The beauty of football.
It's going to be tought but I think if the Pats don't make any major mistakes like they did last time they'll win. The key is going to be getting ahead of the Steelers and forcing Big Ben to beat them.
The Packers smashed the Chiefs and Raiders in the first two Super Bowls and the Colts that year were considerd to be a better team than either of those Packer teams.
There's also a lot of peer pressure in the NFL, and that's why you see so few basic types of offense, so little variation in formation, little risk-taking, etc. Collegiate coaches are a lot more free to roll out new strategies and systems, and I believe most of the seeds of innovation start in college. Too bad college football is getting like the NFL, with every good team basically running the same thing.
BTW, Young Jim Mora played for my high school coach in Seattle. Coach told me Mora started in the Niners organization getting lunch for the coaching staff.
How many times late in a game does a team just need a field goal after they had squandered many chances to kick one earlier? It's like a baseball team that loses a game by one run when they had runners on base the whole game.
Haha. I'm also a coach, and I know how even the best players can go to pieces if they're loaded down with too much stuff.
Don't get me wrong - Manning is a great player - but that may be some of the problem, in that he's putting so much pressure on himself to do things, when the coaches could help him out by spreading it around.
Edge is obviously losing a step, but with all those great backs they need to learn to pound away. I was a critic of those six TD passes in Detroit, because I felt they could have used the mopup time to work on the running game. Give TOm Moore credit for being agressive, but sometimes you need to scale back.
The Colts remind me of the Chargers of the early 80s. Chuck Muncie was a really good back, but they were just too pass happy.
QBs that aren't the greastest passers in the world but have a great system have thrived in the Superbowl - Bradshaw, Stabler, Plunkett, Brady, etc. I do think that Bradshaw and Aikman are very overrated as passers - Aikman especially. Aikman was never the same after Alvin Harper left and Cowboys didn't have a legitimate second recieiver. Aikman was great when all of his weapons were in place, but was pretty ineffective when things got out of sync.
The colts would benefit, I believe, if they got a really good offensive coordinator that called the plays rather than Manning.
Are you saying that teams should go for longer field goals?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.