Peyton running up the score...

[amfootball]

Have you never seen a team come back from a three touchdown deficit in a quarter and a half? We've seen teams come back from that kind of deficit in half a quarter. And we've seen this Eagles team score points in bunches. Many times we've seen teams look like trash in the first half, then come back to make a game out of the second half. A team scoring three or even four touchdowns in a quarter plus is nowhere near unprecedented. So no, 35-13 isn't enough, not with 23 minutes left in the game.

 

I don't really have a big issue with running up the score. I don't like it, but I'm not one who goes on a crusade when I see it happen. I didn't start this ridiculous thread. But to me, there's a difference between putting the game away, and rubbing it in. To me, Manning's final possession put the game away. It used up half of the third quarter, and ended in a touchdown, and then he sat for the rest of the game. Everything that happened after that is immaterial; the Broncos had already pulled their starting quarterback.

22 points is a blow out. Eagles were doing zilch all day. I agree it is not the most agregious example of running up the score but it was still it.

 

I have no issue with it and would have been fine if Manning stayed in longer and threw another two TDs. Like I said, he and Brady have done it the most last 10 years because they are that good and in the end it is not their issue. When you start playing to not hurt the other team's feelings injuries happen.

[BOTT]

I don't really care if teams run up the score, but let's not act like we don't know it when we see it. When a team sends in BROCK OSWEILLER for the entire 4th quarter, that might be a hint a team isn't running up the score.

Some people really enjoy playing dumb for.....entertainment value....I guess?

[chad72]

I love, love, LOVE the debate here. Good to see that most are keeping their heads and are consistent with what they were saying about the '07 Patriots. But I also knew, after week 1, that this would eventually come up with the Broncos.

 

It's probably not the last week that they'll be piling on huge leads, either. I'm just so very entertained listening to the rationales and strategy breakdown. And while most are consistent, some of you are doing everything possible to disassociate Manning with such Patriot-esque behavior. 

 

There's a difference between sealing the game and running up the score.

 

Of course there is! If it's Peyton Manning (for some of you), it's sealing the game, if it's Brady, then it's GOT to be running up the score!" LOL...

 

Personally I love it and mean no disrespect here. I'm genuinely entertained by the backpedaling. Let 'em win every game by 100 points. These aren't kids. They're professional football players. 

 

The irony is Wes Welker is part of both these historically scoring offenses.

 

If Peyton is throwing it out there with a 5 TD lead even early in the fourth quarter, people have merit to what they are saying.

 

I remember a Patriots-Dolphins game where the Pats sat Brady late in the 3rd qtr. after they were up 42-14 or something like that and then Cassel was playing. Suddenly, Miami scored 2 TDs in a row and the score was 42-28 (Pats fans can jog my memory for sure), and then Brady came back in for a cameo to seal the deal at 49-28 or something like that. So, 4 TD leads are not as safe as you think especially late in the 3rd quarter. Once it got to a 5 TD lead, Peyton did not take a snap, which seems like par for the course. Besides, the 5th TD lead happened due to an ST score, not Peyton throwing.

 

If Chip Kelly had taken Vick out when the score was 42-13, I bet Peyton would have been taken out too but then, I don't blame the Eagles for trying and thus the Broncos had to make sure the cat was in the bag too.

[amfootball]

The irony is Wes Welker is part of both these historically scoring offenses.

 

If Peyton is throwing it out there with a 5 TD lead even early in the fourth quarter, people have merit to what they are saying.

 

I remember a Patriots-Dolphins game where the Pats sat Brady late in the 3rd qtr. after they were up 42-14 or something like that and then Cassel was playing. Suddenly, Miami scored 2 TDs in a row and the score was 42-28 (Pats fans can jog my memory for sure), and then Brady came back in for a cameo to seal the deal at 49-28 or something like that. So, 4 TD leads are not as safe as you think especially late in the 3rd quarter. Once it got to a 5 TD lead, Peyton did not take a snap, which seems like par for the course. Besides, the 5th TD lead happened due to an ST score, not Peyton throwing.

 

If Chip Kelly had taken Vick out when the score was 42-13, I bet Peyton would have been taken out too but then, I don't blame the Eagles for trying and thus the Broncos had to make sure the cat was in the bag too.

Good points but when was the last time Vick led a 22 point come back with a quarter and a half to go?  Not sure he ever has. If it was the Saints or the Falcons or Green Bay. Ok. But Mike Vick? On the road? Come on. They were running it up.

[bavanlan]

The irony is Wes Welker is part of both these historically scoring offenses.

 

If Peyton is throwing it out there with a 5 TD lead even early in the fourth quarter, people have merit to what they are saying.

 

I remember a Patriots-Dolphins game where the Pats sat Brady late in the 3rd qtr. after they were up 42-14 or something like that and then Cassel was playing. Suddenly, Miami scored 2 TDs in a row and the score was 42-28 (Pats fans can jog my memory for sure), and then Brady came back in for a cameo to seal the deal at 49-28 or something like that. So, 4 TD leads are not as safe as you think especially late in the 3rd quarter. Once it got to a 5 TD lead, Peyton did not take a snap, which seems like par for the course. Besides, the 5th TD lead happened due to an ST score, not Peyton throwing.

 

If Chip Kelly had taken Vick out when the score was 42-13, I bet Peyton would have been taken out too but then, I don't blame the Eagles for trying and thus the Broncos had to make sure the cat was in the bag too.

 

 

Good points but when was the last time Vick led a 22 point come back with a quarter and a half to go?  Not sure he ever has. If it was the Saints or the Falcons or Green Bay. Ok. But Mike Vick? On the road? Come on. They were running it up.

 

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271021015

 

Brady vs. the ever dangerous Cleo Lemon.

[Dustin]

Good points but when was the last time Vick led a 22 point come back with a quarter and a half to go?  Not sure he ever has. If it was the Saints or the Falcons or Green Bay. Ok. But Mike Vick? On the road? Come on. They were running it up.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Miracle_in_the_New_Meadowlands

 

Close enough?

[chad72]

Good points but when was the last time Vick led a 22 point come back with a quarter and a half to go?  Not sure he ever has. If it was the Saints or the Falcons or Green Bay. Ok. But Mike Vick? On the road? Come on. They were running it up.

 

I am sure football stat aficionados can dig up a case where someone who had never made a big comeback in the past with a quarter and a half to go did so. When your offense is that good and the other offense is hyped up to be good with a penchant for scoring quickly with not much time between plays, beginning of 4th qtr. is where calling the dogs off makes sense, personally.

 

Plus, I am sure the Broncos will have the same scenario play up vs the Jaguars too. If they are up 42-3 at the half, the big question is, would it be insulting to the Jaguars and not worth the money for those attending the game if the Broncos started with Osweiler in the second half? Would be a valid question to ask, right?

 

It is not like the Broncos would have clinched anything to rest their starters but then Gabbert has never made a comeback from that large a deficit. If Brady and the Pats have sealed the game by quarter 4 during their 2007 run, I never had an issue with them calling their dogs off. But in the second half of any 4th qtr, if they have a 3 TD lead and Brady throws for a TD, I have an issue with that. Would have the same issue with Peyton too, no doubt.

[amfootball]

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271021015

 

Brady vs. the ever dangerous Cleo Lemon.

lol. Cleo Lemon. Best name ever. Amazing how some guys were ever QBs.

 

FYI - I am not debating Brady. Just last night's game. It was running up the score IMO and I can pull dozens of games over the years where Manning has done it as well. Both are too tough to stop especially with lethal offensive weapons around them. Heck, Brady put up 30 last night throwing to some guy named Mulligan who I think Bill pulled out of the stands. lol.

[Gramz]

Back to the OP.....

 

Just exactly what would have them do...??   Say, we're sorry we're scoring every way possible,   returning kickoffs,  blocking punts and returning for TD, and our QB is on    so, we're just gonna let you score a few to make you all feel better.

 

I think Not.. This is the NFL.    And for the record, as so many others have stated,  when the game clearly seemed to be "put away"  Peyton came out, with another Quarter left to play.  That is Not Running up the score.

[MAC]

22 points is a blow out. Eagles were doing zilch all day. I agree it is not the most agregious example of running up the score but it was still it.

 

I have no issue with it and would have been fine if Manning stayed in longer and threw another two TDs. Like I said, he and Brady have done it the most last 10 years because they are that good and in the end it is not their issue. When you start playing to not hurt the other team's feelings injuries happen.

Of course it was a blow out, but it wasn't running up the score. The ONLY thing that the Broncos did that might even conceivably fit into that category was the blocked punt. Teams don't always try to block punts, it was a conscious decision. They could have played back and worried about ball control with such a lead, but for some reason they were aggressive.

 

The Eagles couldn't finish their drives, but they were moving the ball with ease throughout the first half, and the Broncos were only up by one score at half-time - and that included a kick-off return. You are talking about the second leading offense in the league with a coach who ran the highest scoring offense in college - not the Jaguars. The game wasn't "over" until the Broncos finally managed to stop the Eagles twice while scoring on three straight possessions. Peyton then immediately came out of the game. One TD earlier would have been dangerously early, one TD more would have been uncomfortably inappropriate. The Broncos did nothing wrong. I couldn't care less about what the backup QB did for either side because it's a meaningless exhibition at that point. It's a rare chance to even see what the backup can do. Personally I would have been standing on my head and screaming if they had been stupid enough (or cruel enough) to bring Peyton back in. That's not an appropriate risk to take with your star QB, and it's not sportsmanlike.

 

I understand that the Pats have played many games similar to this, in which they scored so many points so fast that the opponent was overwhelmed, and that the Pats did the right thing at the end. However you are glossing over the fact that there have been several cases in which they put their foot on peoples throats. I don't think that they were trying to build statistics so much as to punish certain teams/coaches. Perhaps it was personal with BB - I don't know - but it was ugly. I don't care to search box scores to pick them out, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I have NEVER seen a Peyton led team do that. I could actually dig up examples of the Colts running out the clock within easy TD range - trying so hard NOT to score that it was awkward.

[amfootball]

Of course it was a blow out, but it wasn't running up the score. The ONLY thing that the Broncos did that might even conceivably fit into that category was the blocked punt. Teams don't always try to block punts, it was a conscious decision. They could have played back and worried about ball control with such a lead, but for some reason they were aggressive.

 

The Eagles couldn't finish their drives, but they were moving the ball with ease throughout the first half, and the Broncos were only up by one score at half-time - and that included a kick-off return. You are talking about the second leading offense in the league with a coach who ran the highest scoring offense in college - not the Jaguars. The game wasn't "over" until the Broncos finally managed to stop the Eagles twice while scoring on three straight possessions. Peyton then immediately came out of the game. One TD earlier would have been dangerously early, one TD more would have been uncomfortably inappropriate. The Broncos did nothing wrong. I couldn't care less about what the backup QB did for either side because it's a meaningless exhibition at that point. It's a rare chance to even see what the backup can do. Personally I would have been standing on my head and screaming if they had been stupid enough (or cruel enough) to bring Peyton back in. That's not an appropriate risk to take with your star QB, and it's not sportsmanlike.

 

I understand that the Pats have played many games similar to this, in which they scored so many points so fast that the opponent was overwhelmed, and that the Pats did the right thing at the end. However you are glossing over the fact that there have been several cases in which they put their foot on peoples throats. I don't think that they were trying to build statistics so much as to punish certain teams/coaches. Perhaps it was personal with BB - I don't know - but it was ugly. I don't care to search box scores to pick them out, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I have NEVER seen a Peyton led team do that. I could actually dig up examples of the Colts running out the clock within easy TD range - trying so hard NOT to score that it was awkward.

Not personal but a different philosophy I think. Bill always says that football players play. And I remember specifically in 2007 him saying many times that he left the starters in well into the fourth so they would learn how to play a 60 minute game. He did not want them getting comfortable thinking one half or three quarters would be good enough come playoff time. He was right as they needed to play full games down the stretch to beat the eagles, ravens and giants that year and then in the playoffs against the Jags and Chargers. I guess you can look at it however you want but Bill cares about winning and building a mindset and that can look ugle I suppose at times but hard to argue with the results.

 

In the end both QBs have done it a ton.

[Yehoodi]

i will look after work and get back to

you

 

great thank you . . .

[Yehoodi]

Sure, why?

 

Brady went out in the third quarter against that 59-0 drubbing of the Titans in a snow storm that same year. I don't see the problem. (At least I'm pretty sure that was 2007 as well.)

 

I don't have double standards with these things. Everyone interprets running up the score differently, though. To me it's when any starting QB is still in the fourth quarter at any given point they're up by a 25ish point margin. 

 

I can't justify any score as running it up when there are 15 mins or more to play. This is regardless of the score up to that point, as a lot can happen in football.

 agreed and thank you . . . and think what some folks can not see, and I have had this same discussion with pats fans, is some folks, not you here, complain about things and perhaps do not look at the entire picture . . . for example that buffalo game we are discussing, the TD came in the 4th qtr . . .  the pats had taken the ball on a long time killing drive (and one the was designed to shorten the game and therefore stop the hurt) . . . it started in the 3rd Qtr and dumped into the 4th and some might just look at the score in the fourth and kind of assumed it all happened in the 4th and was all midway through the 4th and thus might be deemed as inappropriate . . . but to the contrary it started late in the third . . . also it was only his second possession of the 2nd half, so there was a degree of inertia that Brady would play at least a few possessions . . . trouble was there was an intervening D td that gave them more points . . .

 

perhaps the pats should of sat Brady late in the 3rd, but given it was his only 2nd possession, I don't fault them for bringing in Brady . . . perhaps they could of pulled Brady mid drive, but how often does that happen, a QB being pulled mid drive  . . . so it looks bad as the TD was scored mid way through the 4th, but when one steps back and looks at it, it is not as bad as is sounds . . . and even if one wants to fault them, it is only a possession or two all season, and if we were to look at every week, one will very likely find one, two or even three games where the winner is up big and perhaps has their QB in the game one possession too many . . .

 

its kind of like Manning's 7th passing TD, when it was merely a screen pass that went for a TD, the broncos at that point really were not trying to run a fast possession to score and then get the ball back, but passing, as it was effective at the time, and it broke out for a TD . . . a person just looking at the box score might cry running up the score, others who look at it in context will say no . . .like me . . . some might argue Manning perhaps should not be in the game, but they were only up by 2 scores with 5 min and change to play, so do not might him being in the game at that point . . .  

[Yehoodi]

How about this one. i looked for literally two minutes finding it

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010120600/2010/REG13/jets@patriots

 

great thank you . . . I was kind of focusing on 2007, but fair enough . . . I remember this game and curious too why Brady was in the game on the last possession . . . it is a divisional game after all . . . and I am sure those are little different . . . also too if we look at Brady's entire career we might find a game or two like this . . .

 

my point was only that was we just need to be consistent . . .and really does not matter to me what standard that we use, just apply the same yard stick to each team . . . that is all . . . and I think if we stepped back and looked at 2007, 2004 and 2013 we would find the teams pretty much acted the same way . . . a few games with big leagues where perhaps the Qb should of been bench . . . indeed with respect to 2004 we will find a game not too different that the one your referenced, a divisional game in which our team was up very big, put up a 40 burger and had our QB in the game the entire game . . . with Indy it was the 49-14 Houston game . . .  

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2004111402/2004/REG10/texans@colts#tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

[Yehoodi]

^That would be a prime example of running it up to me.

 

The closest Peyton came to it this year was the Ravens game with his 7 Touchdowns. Even then, the Broncos were up by 18 going in to the fourth. The Ravens continued to fight and scored 10 points, the Broncos responded with 14 in the 4th quarter. Nothing wrong with that.

 

There was the Giants game where, thanks to ref Gene Steratore, the Giants had 16 points instead of zero going in to the fourth. The Broncos had 24 going in to the fourth. 8 point difference. If Steratore weren't so determined to screw over Denver, the game would have been 31-0 going in to the fourth and Manning wouldn't have played a snap. Can't have the "Manning Bowl" with only one Manning playing all game, though.

 

The Raiders was 30-14 going in to the fourth. Both teams got a TD in the fourth, with the Raiders doing it first.

 

yes Manning did get 7 TDs and yes his last TD was on a screen pass that was broken for a TD, can not anticipate this happening, like I mentioned a few post ago, and agree with you, they were only up by 15, two scores, with 5 plus mins, even thou you got the ball still time for Balt to win . .. and it was not like the Broncos were running a no huddle two minute drive or something . . . and it does not bother me that they were passing, as the prior possession three runs (from what I remember) ended up in a 3 and out . . . so you gotta do what you gotta do and the Broncos needed to have a drive to all but kill the time in the game . . .but "unfortunately" it was broken for a TD . . . so it looks bad if one looks at it too quickly, but in context they were just running an offense to try to end the game, its not their fault they busted the play for a TD 

 

I did not watch the end of the Oakland game so can not comment, but it did not seem like too big of a deal from the broncos end . . .

[BPM_Colt]

I was always a Colts/Manning fan and didn't "jump ship" to Denver like many have.

 

It's awesome to see what Manning is doing, because I personally don't care a bit if you are up 70-0 and still playing to put up points. The defense consists of professionals that get paid to stop the offense.. If they don't do that, then it is their problem.

 

 

That being said, if this were Brady/Pats everyone would say he is "running up the score." However, it doesn't sit on Manning's shoulders, he isn't the one who makes the substitutions for the team

[bayone]

great thank you . . . I was kind of focusing on 2007, but fair enough . . . I remember this game and curious too why Brady was in the game on the last possession . . . it is a divisional game after all . . . and I am sure those are little different . . . also too if we look at Brady's entire career we might find a game or two like this . . .

 

my point was only that was we just need to be consistent . . .and really does not matter to me what standard that we use, just apply the same yard stick to each team . . . that is all . . . and I think if we stepped back and looked at 2007, 2004 and 2013 we would find the teams pretty much acted the same way . . . a few games with big leagues where perhaps the Qb should of been bench . . . indeed with respect to 2004 we will find a game not too different that the one your referenced, a divisional game in which our team was up very big, put up a 40 burger and had our QB in the game the entire game . . . with Indy it was the 49-14 Houston game . . .  

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2004111402/2004/REG10/texans@colts#tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

 

dont know if u saw it but i always maintained BB & Brady were smart to try situational football , new plays with a good lead to learn what works & when for future use as needed, if it worked and they scored on it , its another weapon in the arsenal when something different is needed 

[GoPats]

The irony is Wes Welker is part of both these historically scoring offenses.

 

If Peyton is throwing it out there with a 5 TD lead even early in the fourth quarter, people have merit to what they are saying.

 

I remember a Patriots-Dolphins game where the Pats sat Brady late in the 3rd qtr. after they were up 42-14 or something like that and then Cassel was playing. Suddenly, Miami scored 2 TDs in a row and the score was 42-28 (Pats fans can jog my memory for sure), and then Brady came back in for a cameo to seal the deal at 49-28 or something like that. So, 4 TD leads are not as safe as you think especially late in the 3rd quarter. Once it got to a 5 TD lead, Peyton did not take a snap, which seems like par for the course. Besides, the 5th TD lead happened due to an ST score, not Peyton throwing.

 

If Chip Kelly had taken Vick out when the score was 42-13, I bet Peyton would have been taken out too but then, I don't blame the Eagles for trying and thus the Broncos had to make sure the cat was in the bag too.

 

Oh the Patriots ran it up BIGTIME in 2007. Of course they did. I'd never deny that. That season was kicked off with Spygate in week one and from that point on the Patriots went out and tried to beat everyone by 50 points. I'm not one of those fans who equates class with taking your foot off the gas. If we're talking about 12-year-olds that's one thing. For what these guys get paid, you could humiliate me on national TV every Sunday, and I'd be smiling all the way to the bank! 

 

You're right about the Pats-Miami game. Cassel threw a pick-six to Jason Taylor and all of a sudden the Dolphins were within 14 or something along those lines. 

 

I just think it's funny. A whole lot of Indy fans were frowning upon these lopsided scores six years ago. (Not you, of course!) But now, it's OK, it's just "sealing the game." Because, God knows, Peyton would NEVER throw for a TD score unless it was completely necessary to win. LOL...  ;)

[Gavin]

All this because a defense did not execute?

[Gavin]

I hope he achieves all of this.....

 

 

“Through four games, Peyton Manning is on pace to go 468-of-624 (75.0 percent) for 5,880 yards with 64 touchdowns and zero interceptions.”

Im personally hoping for a pick or 2 when we play the Broncos otherwise I agree

[Superman]

22 points is a blow out. Eagles were doing zilch all day. I agree it is not the most agregious example of running up the score but it was still it.

 

I have no issue with it and would have been fine if Manning stayed in longer and threw another two TDs. Like I said, he and Brady have done it the most last 10 years because they are that good and in the end it is not their issue. When you start playing to not hurt the other team's feelings injuries happen.

I disagree. I don't think, even with a team that isn't playing well, that a three touchdown lead with 23 minutes left is safe. That final drive with Manning in sealed the deal. It took up 7 or 8 minutes, it extended the lead, and after that, there was zero danger.

This is independent of my thoughts on running up the score. I'm not the one who is fussing over this. I just don't think going up four scores on a drive that started midway through the 3rd quarter is running up the score.

[Superman]

I love, love, LOVE the debate here. Good to see that most are keeping their heads and are consistent with what they were saying about the '07 Patriots. But I also knew, after week 1, that this would eventually come up with the Broncos.

 

It's probably not the last week that they'll be piling on huge leads, either. I'm just so very entertained listening to the rationales and strategy breakdown. And while most are consistent, some of you are doing everything possible to disassociate Manning with such Patriot-esque behavior. 

 

There's a difference between sealing the game and running up the score.

 

Of course there is! If it's Peyton Manning (for some of you), it's sealing the game, if it's Brady, then it's GOT to be running up the score!" LOL...

 

Personally I love it and mean no disrespect here. I'm genuinely entertained by the backpedaling. Let 'em win every game by 100 points. These aren't kids. They're professional football players.

I just think it's funny. A whole lot of Indy fans were frowning upon these lopsided scores six years ago. (Not you, of course!) But now, it's OK, it's just "sealing the game." Because, God knows, Peyton would NEVER throw for a TD score unless it was completely necessary to win. LOL...  ;)

This cracks me up, GP.

I've never been upset about the Pats scoring, whether it's running up the score or not. I think there are differences between what Manning's Colts did in 2004 and what the Pats did with Brady in 2007, and I think there are a few good examples of that. And I've pointed those out in the past.

If someone says about me "these situations are the same, and you're only calling them different because you're a Manning fan," then I disagree.

[GoPats]

This cracks me up, GP.

I've never been upset about the Pats scoring, whether it's running up the score or not. I think there are differences between what Manning's Colts did in 2004 and what the Pats did with Brady in 2007, and I think there are a few good examples of that. And I've pointed those out in the past.

If someone says about me "these situations are the same, and you're only calling them different because you're a Manning fan," then I disagree.

 

 

This cracks me up, GP.

I've never been upset about the Pats scoring, whether it's running up the score or not. I think there are differences between what Manning's Colts did in 2004 and what the Pats did with Brady in 2007, and I think there are a few good examples of that. And I've pointed those out in the past.

If someone says about me "these situations are the same, and you're only calling them different because you're a Manning fan," then I disagree.

 

I'm just 100% amused, that's all. It's just a fun topic! 

[DILLIGAFER]

I was always a Colts/Manning fan and didn't "jump ship" to Denver like many have.

It's awesome to see what Manning is doing, because I personally don't care a bit if you are up 70-0 and still playing to put up points. The defense consists of professionals that get paid to stop the offense.. If they don't do that, then it is their problem.

That being said, if this were Brady/Pats everyone would say he is "running up the score." However, it doesn't sit on Manning's shoulders, he isn't the one who makes the substitutions for the team

Where is that pot stir icon?

[18Manning]

I hope he achieves all of this.....

 

 

“Through four games, Peyton Manning is on pace to go 468-of-624 (75.0 percent) for 5,880 yards with 64 touchdowns and zero interceptions.”

Me too. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy (I'm not being sarcastic).

[amfootball]

I disagree. I don't think, even with a team that isn't playing well, that a three touchdown lead with 23 minutes left is safe. That final drive with Manning in sealed the deal. It took up 7 or 8 minutes, it extended the lead, and after that, there was zero danger.

This is independent of my thoughts on running up the score. I'm not the one who is fussing over this. I just don't think going up four scores on a drive that started midway through the 3rd quarter is running up the score.

Tomato, tamato. In the end there are stronger games to point to for running up the score. I have no issue with it either. Score 100. Not his issue. Offense is on the field to score.

[-JJ-]

Oh the Patriots ran it up BIGTIME in 2007. Of course they did. I'd never deny that. That season was kicked off with Spygate in week one and from that point on the Patriots went out and tried to beat everyone by 50 points. I'm not one of those fans who equates class with taking your foot off the gas. If we're talking about 12-year-olds that's one thing. For what these guys get paid, you could humiliate me on national TV every Sunday, and I'd be smiling all the way to the bank! 

 

You're right about the Pats-Miami game. Cassel threw a pick-six to Jason Taylor and all of a sudden the Dolphins were within 14 or something along those lines. 

 

I just think it's funny. A whole lot of Indy fans were frowning upon these lopsided scores six years ago. (Not you, of course!) But now, it's OK, it's just "sealing the game." Because, God knows, Peyton would NEVER throw for a TD score unless it was completely necessary to win. LOL...  ;)

I don't think it had anything to do with Spygate. That's just not Bill's MO.

Washington was the most obvious game and that was practicing 2 new plays withj 2 new WRs (Welker and Moss) with passes at the goaline. I saw those two exact passes played for real the following 2 weeks for when the game was on the line.

One of the definitions of running the score is intimidation. Brady said as much in that famous WEEI radio interview that went viral. Was there intimidation? There most certainly was. I watched teams get out of what they do best to TRY and counter NE that year and play right into our hands.

Only 3 teams did not and thus were not intimidated which I highly respected. That was the Steelers, Eagles, and Giants. The Steelers & Eagle games were fiercely competitive and they only lost by a FG or TD. Same with Giants in the regular season last game.

But the other teams were intimidated and it only made it worse for them.

Mission accomplished

[PonyUp]

I'm surprised they didn't hang 70 on the Eagles. That Chip Kelly offense is going to get them destroyed by the better QB's.

[Superman]

Tomato, tamato. In the end there are stronger games to point to for running up the score. I have no issue with it either. Score 100. Not his issue. Offense is on the field to score.

That's fine. There's a couple different topics going on right now. I don't really care about either of them, I just have an opinion. I think sportsmanship says that you don't run the score up on your opponent, even at the professional level. But it doesn't really bother me when teams run the score up. If you don't want to be scored on, have some pride and come up with a stop. I didn't complain when the Saints did it to us in 2011, and I didn't really think much of the Pats blowing us out last year (not saying they ran it up, but some fans here complained about it; I don't really care).

But I think there's a difference. Like you said, this Broncos game isn't really that great an example of someone running up the score. Extending to a four score lead in the 3rd quarter isn't running up the score. And it's not like they went hurry-up and were throwing the ball down the field. It was a time-consuming drive with a lot of short passes, and finished with a 4 yard catch for a touchdown.

And by the way, this has nothing to do with Manning vs. Brady. In 2009, the Patriots beat the stuffing out of the Titans, 59-0. They weren't running up the score. They were up big at the end of the first half, then the starters stayed in in the 3rd quarter. I have defended that since it happened. It was simply putting the game away. People look up the score and automatically think they ran it up, but they didn't. They just dominated from opening kickoff.

[Superman]

I don't think it had anything to do with Spygate. That's just not Bill's MO.

Against the Jets in particular? I think it had EVERYTHING to do with Spygate.

[amfootball]

That's fine. There's a couple different topics going on right now. I don't really care about either of them, I just have an opinion. I think sportsmanship says that you don't run the score up on your opponent, even at the professional level. But it doesn't really bother me when teams run the score up. If you don't want to be scored on, have some pride and come up with a stop. I didn't complain when the Saints did it to us in 2011, and I didn't really think much of the Pats blowing us out last year (not saying they ran it up, but some fans here complained about it; I don't really care).

But I think there's a difference. Like you said, this Broncos game isn't really that great an example of someone running up the score. Extending to a four score lead in the 3rd quarter isn't running up the score. And it's not like they went hurry-up and were throwing the ball down the field. It was a time-consuming drive with a lot of short passes, and finished with a 4 yard catch for a touchdown.

And by the way, this has nothing to do with Manning vs. Brady. In 2009, the Patriots beat the stuffing out of the Titans, 59-0. They weren't running up the score. They were up big at the end of the first half, then the starters stayed in in the 3rd quarter. I have defended that since it happened. It was simply putting the game away. People look up the score and automatically think they ran it up, but they didn't. They just dominated from opening kickoff.

Let me guess. The other thread you don't like is the Manning legacy one? ;)

[amfootball]

Against the Jets in particular? I think it had EVERYTHING to do with Spygate.

Nah. Bill just understands that it makes the rest of the league happy when the Pats pummel the Jets. The Boston/NY hatred dates much farther back then spygate.

[Yehoodi]

dont know if u saw it but i always maintained BB & Brady were smart to try situational football , new plays with a good lead to learn what works & when for future use as needed, if it worked and they scored on it , its another weapon in the arsenal when something different is needed 

 

yes they actually ran a play late in a game in 2007 to test it and then ran it again in the playoffs . . .

[Superman]

Let me guess. The other thread you don't like is the Manning legacy one? ;)

No, I meant there are a couple different topics in this thread. 1) Did Manning run up the score; 2) What's wrong with running up the score.

And I don't mean to say that either of them bother me. I just don't think it's a big deal either way. I'm not going to think any more or less of Peyton Manning based on the substance or outcome of this debate.

[Superman]

Nah. Bill just understands that it makes the rest of the league happy when the Pats pummel the Jets. The Boston/NY hatred dates much farther back then spygate.

No, that was a middle finger directly at Eric Mangini for ratting them out.

[Yehoodi]

No, that was a middle finger directly at Eric Mangini for ratting them out.

 

actually no, the Jets jets jets jets-  Pat rivalry goes back long before Spygate . . . long before . . . and as AM said it is also a Boston NY thingo too which is older than the present Pats/Jets rivalry . . .

[Superman]

actually no, the Jets jets jets jets-  Pat rivalry goes back long before Spygate . . . long before . . . and as AM said it is also a Boston NY thingo too which is older than the present Pats/Jets rivalry . . .

So? You guys are acting like I'm not aware of a Jets/Pats rivalry, or like I'm not aware of the NY/BOS sports rivalry which only goes back over a 100 years, or like I'm not aware that Belichick spurned the Jets...

Belichick hadn't expressed any ill will or gone after the Jets in years previous. But in 2007, Mangini ticked Belichick off.

[-JJ-]

Against the Jets in particular? I think it had EVERYTHING to do with Spygate.

Possibly some players. Bill just isn't about the past or revenge. Only the now. He not only preaches this to his players but also around the community with the numerous benefits he does.

Plus revenge has to be planned. You can't just summon up big scores.

[jvan1973]

Possibly some players. Bill just isn't about the past or revenge. Only the now. He not only preaches this to his players but also around the community with the numerous benefits he does.

Plus revenge has to be planned. You can't just summon up big scores.

against the mangini jets it was a pretty normal occurrence. I'm sure bill was ticked eric ratted him out. How could he not be. It cost him a pretty big chunk of change, and has now tainted his legacy whether fair or not

[Yehoodi]

Supes, I think if you look at the two years of our beloved teams more closely and as an third party independent observer, your opinion will be different . . . so you I ask you a question after reviewing our teams actions insofar as the back up are concerned and how we acted when the games where in hand . . .

 

TEAMS BACK UP CONTRIBUTION

 

In the first 15 games of the respective seasons the teams back-ups contribution is as follows:

 

Colts back ups (all Sorgi)

 

 3 games

33 snaps

5 possessions

2 knee downs

*Total time as QB of record 38:50 mins

 

 

Pats back ups (Cassell and Gutierrez)

5 games

37 snaps

8 possessions

1 kneel down

Total time as QB of record 34:50 mins**

 

 *Time of record is the time the QB came into the game and was the QB for the team, so for example if a back up came in at the 7 min mark of the 4th and played the rest of the game I have that as 7 minutes at time of record . . .

 

 **the pats back-up time in the game would have been longer but Cassel threw a pick six and Brady came back in the game for one possession in the Miami game, Cassel pick six made the game a 21 point game with 10:30 mins to go  . . .

 

GAMES IN HAND (3 EACH)

 

Each team had games in which they pulled ahead late in the game (leading be a score or two and go a third one late in the 4^th).  Also, each team had three games in which their QB was in a game past the point of no return for the opponent.  The games are as follows:

 

New England

 

Buf game 1

Pats up 38-7 Brady got the ball with 0:23 in 3^rd for his 4^th possession of the half and ran a 5 min drive and scored a passing TD then came out

 

Wash Game

Pats up 45-0 and on his 2^nd possession of the half Brady took the ball at the 2:02 mark of the 3^rd qtr and drove a 9 min drive for a passing TD, then came out

 

Buf  Game #2

Leading 49-10 Brady took the ball for the 2^nd possession of the half at the 6:02 mark and drove a 6 min drive for a rushing TD, then came out . . .

 

Indy

 

Hou Game
Colts lead the game 42-14, Manning never came out of the game, a late pick six by Carr made it a 49-14 win

 

Chic game

Leading 34-3 Manning took the ball for his 3^rd possession of the half at the 4:52 mark of the 3^rd and ran a 4 min drive resulting in a rushing TD, then came out

 

Det Game

Leading 34-9 manning took the ball for the 3^rd time of the half and at the 5:27 mark of the 3^rd and ran a 3 min drive resulting in a passing td, then came out . . .

 

Each team had three games in which perhaps some may question why the teams QB was in the game for his last possession, but each team had 3 each . . . other than the hou game, all the possession started in the 3^rd qtr with two of the pats involving Brady second possession of the half . . .

 

So I ask you then, as an independent observer of the fact pattern, if Team B has its back up in more games and essentially for the same number of snaps, time and actually more possessions as Team A’s back up, and each team has a possession in three games in which the game had gone past the point of no return for the team and they have their starting QB in the game, noting that Team B’s QB was only in for his second possession in two of the three said games . . . how it is then in your mind that Team B acted any different than Team A?

 

This cracks me up, GP.

I've never been upset about the Pats scoring, whether it's running up the score or not. I think there are differences between what Manning's Colts did in 2004 and what the Pats did with Brady in 2007, and I think there are a few good examples of that. And I've pointed those out in the past.

If someone says about me "these situations are the same, and you're only calling them different because you're a Manning fan," then I disagree.

 

sorry I got your quote at the end . . .

 

my opinion will never change, the pats did not do any thing different that the colts, both had great offenses that were on fire for two years, lead by HOF QBs and if they each had a few games which there was a single possession in which some might say they should of been of the bench . . .but for me the 04 colts or the 07 pats, three possession do not define a season . . . most every team each year will have a game or two in which they had a possession when perhaps the starters should not have been in the game . . . the 04 colts and the 07 pats had three each . . .

 

EDIT: Sorry for the long post, but I felt the need to get all of the facts into the post to give the full view of the two season in questions . . . as you know I have a thingy with the "running up the score" label and how some try to add it to the 07 pats . . . but they were simply a powerful team that did what others have done in the past . . .