Richard Sherman won't let go and it's a problem

[dynasty13]

18 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

what a shock, patriots fans dont like people calling this a choke

 

everyone has pretty much made up their mind about this, and it is a matter of opinion

 

What it comes down to is that some people want to undermine the efforts of the team and their comeback in order to justify just how it's possible that they won another championship. Could the outcome have been different should a different play have been called? Sure. Is it likely? Sure. Could the Patriots still have won if things were called differently? Sure, that is also a possibility. You can't assume anything in this game. 

 

The fact is that in both cases, the team fought back from the two biggest deficits in Superbowl history to make it a game. That alone is a big deal, and in no way should be put on the back burner to the fact that there was a more probably path in defeat. It's very easy to say the Patriots 'should have' lost. There are other games where I could make a case that the Patriots 'should have' won. But that's why they play. It has nothing to do with a little brother complex, we've been on top of the sports world for over a decade and we have come to take it for granted. We realize that we aren't likely to see another run like this, so it's important to us as fans to see this team gets the credit it deserves. No more, no less.

[aaron11]

Just now, dynasty13 said:

 

What it comes down to is that some people want to undermine the efforts of the team and their comeback in order to justify just how it's possible that they won another championship. Could the outcome have been different should a different play have been called? Sure. Is it likely? Sure. Could the Patriots still have won if things were called differently? Sure, that is also a possibility. You can't assume anything in this game. 

 

The fact is that in both cases, the team fought back from the two biggest deficits in Superbowl history to make it a game. That alone is a big deal, and in no way should be put on the back burner to the fact that there was a more probably path in defeat. It's very easy to say the Patriots 'should have' lost. There are other games where I could make a case that the Patriots 'should have' won. But that's why they play. It has nothing to do with a little brother complex, we've been on top of the sports world for over a decade and we have come to take it for granted. We realize that we aren't likely to see another run like this, so we want to make sure this team gets the credit it deserves. No more, no less.

i still think seattle should have ran it

 

nothing will ever change that

[BlacknGold77]

7 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i still think seattle should have ran it

 

nothing will ever change that

 

by your own logic, the Colts in 06 were gifted the AFCCG.  After all, with the lead the Patriots had the only way they lost was because they choked the game away.  nothing the Colts or Manning did contributed to the win

[dynasty13]

7 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i still think seattle should have ran it

 

nothing will ever change that

 

Yup, they probably should have. 

 

But that's just one play in a game full of critical moments. You can say they should have ran it, I can say they shouldn't have even made the clown catch that put them there. Both plays are just part of the larger narrative that is the game. 

[aaron11]

5 minutes ago, BlacknGold77 said:

 

by your own logic, the Colts in 06 were gifted the AFCCG.  After all, with the lead the Patriots had the only way they lost was because they choked the game away.  nothing the Colts or Manning did contributed to the win

this doest not bother me, nor does it change how i feel about the seahawks and patriots game

 

sometimes games are won or lost on the last play, and that is what matters most.  what happens prior to to that can be made irrelevant in the clutch moments

[footballhero1]

37 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i still think seattle should have ran it

 

nothing will ever change that

They should have ran it. My objection just is that they were planning on running it twice right after. They just wanted to give themselves an extra play. If they threw the ball 3 times and the third was intercepted we could criticize the mentality. 

 

But its not not entirely fair to look at the play in a vacuum and ignore that that you LIKELY can only get two runs in and you still were able to and the pass was just buying an extra play. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

 

Valid point to an extent...but at the same time, many many football games come down to one play here, one play there, one call this way, one call that way. You can look at any result of any game ever and question why a decision was made, but by doing that you are also making the case that a different result was guaranteed should they have made said decision.

 

What if the Seahawks decided to run the ball there and the handoff was bad, or Lynch got popped and fumbled the ball. Is that not a possible outcome as well? Then the narrative is "everyone in the world knew they were going to run the ball, that was too predictable and the Patriots were ready for it". We are all just 'assuming' that Lynch gets into the endzone if the play call was different....but weirder things have happened, and sometimes we as fans are just left shaking our heads at what we just witnessed. 

 

But when people try to make the case that the Patriots were 'gifted' 2 Superbowls, it undermines the job they did clawing back from the two biggest deficits in Superbowl history. I've said this before and ill say it again: the Patriots could very easily have 7 Championships right now, and they could very easily have zero. One play here, one play there, one penalty here, one play call there...sometime's that's the only difference in the game when the two best teams in the league are battling for the title. 

I don't think they were gifted that SB but they were fortunate to win because of a bad play call. They still made the stop and got the job done. Like you said they have been unlucky as well in both Giants SB's. They could actually have 8 SB wins had they got by Indy in 2006 as that was the real SB.

[southwest1]

On May 26, 2017 at 9:09 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Richard Sherman = great player = drama queen

I used to defend Sherman all the time, but now, I must confess I just can't do it anymore. He's letting that lost SB get under his skin, attacking his QB, & engaging in antics both in words & deeds [dirty hits] on special teams players that are childish & beneath him or so I thought. A mistake on my part. 

On June 1, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Synthetic said:

Can't believe there is such a lengthy discussion on here about "the call" at the goal line. 

 

Had they not blown a 10 point lead late in the 4th quarter, it wouldn't have even come down to that final drive. 

 

Kinda hard to win when your defense blows a 10 point lead at the end of the game and lets the opposing QB carve them to pieces for 4 TD's. 

 

For anyone on the Seahawks defense that blames that 1 call, their hands aren't clean either. They were supposedly a historically great defense and couldn't get it done in the 4th quarter. 

 

Seattle in 2014 showed signs that their defense wasn't all that great. Remember when the Cowboys beat them and then they went that whole long streak beating up on crap opponents. They would've lost to the Packers in the NFCCG if Green Bay wasn't such amazing choke artists and did everything to choke that game away after dominating for 3 quarters and snagging 5 interceptions off Wilson. 

 

 

Right on the money Bogie. There's no way Aaron Rogers & company should have lost that game either. Wilson stunk up the joint with his lousy throwing & yet--The football gods said not today to GB. I'm stilled perplexed by the outcome of that game. I know what happened. I guess I'm just stunned that Seattle got as lucky as they did. 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On 6/2/2017 at 3:07 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They could actually have 8 SB wins had they got by Indy in 2006 as that was the real SB.

 

[footballhero1]

On 6/8/2017 at 11:17 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Don't forget Brady's injury in 08. They would have been favorites that year. So 06, 07, 08, 11 wereball missed opportunities 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, footballhero1 said:

Don't forget Brady's injury in 08. They would have been favorites that year. So 06, 07, 08, 11 wereball missed opportunities 

 

[GoPats]

On 6/10/2017 at 2:17 PM, footballhero1 said:

Don't forget Brady's injury in 08. They would have been favorites that year. So 06, 07, 08, 11 wereball missed opportunities 

 

That '08 schedule was a CAKE WALK too... I mean, they went 11-5 with Cassel. 

 

[BloodyChamp]

I can't believe there are still like 4 people who defend that call. That was such a bad call that in this rare case a whiny football player can whine all he wants about it imo.