Peyton running up the score...

[Le Neon]

Manning set the record in week 16.  In week 17 he threw two passes, neither one was a TD.  

 

Brady threw 2 TDs in week 17 against the Giants.  Sometimes I wonder if that additional exposure to the Patriots offense helped the Giants solve it in the superbowl.  Not that sitting ever helped Manning and the Colts...

 

Didn't he get pulled early from a few games the year he broke the TD record?

 

 

Yes...

[Yehoodi]

Maybe the reason you're not getting a consistent answer is because this board is made up of many different people with different viewpoints.

 

What's really strange is that you can't seem to defend the Patriots without bringing up the Colts. If you don't think there's anything wrong with the way the Patriots handled the end of games, then just say that. You're here trying to convince people that what the Colts did was exactly the same as what the Patriots did, and it's not going to fly. Not necessarily because anyone is applying a double standard -- it's bad because it's the Patriots, it's okay if it's the Colts -- at least not in my case. It's because, in my case, I don't agree with your conclusion.

I watched both teams play every game in both seasons, and I believe the Patriots had a middle finger to the world, while Brady was chasing the touchdown record. I know that the Patriots won more games in 2007, had a wider average margin of victory, clinched a playoff berth and playoff seeding earlier than the 2004 Colts, and still attempted a hundred more passes. I'm not saying any of that is wrong. I'm just saying that my opinion is that the Patriots were on a different mission than the Colts, and it showed in the way they handled the end of games and the end of the season.

You and I are not going to see this the same way. You should come to terms with that.

But what I think you should really try to do is be at peace with the Patriots 2007 season. It was a great season, Brady had a great year, they were on the verge of being the single most dominant team in NFL history, and as a fan, you should be proud of it. I find the "so what? We were great and no one could stop us" response to be much more honest.

 

Very well. I stand corrected.

 

I thought I remembered you saying that.

Side note: Careful with that emoticon... jp

 

 

That's NOT the issue. You can leave your starter in and not run up the score. If you're running the ball every down, that's not running up the score. Pulling the starter is part of the picture, but it's not the entire picture. That's just one example of the several logical fallacies upon which you've propped your argument. It's a red herring. 

 

I am a peace with the 2007 season and not sure what makes you think that I am not (well other than the loss in SB 42 ), although I do find the need to correct people when I feel they are incorrect or have a wrong impression as to the facts of the season.  And yes if you recall I do think the hit on Brady the following season had something to do with the impression people got from that season, old news to a degree now but still sticks in my craw, having lost a season to some stupid anti-patriot impression, so when see people making light of the subject I chime in . . . I only chimed in here as you made a comment (I believe to AM) that you were not bias in thinking that the two seasons were different, and I felt that you were . . . also we had a discussion within the last six months to year on this topic but only dealt with two games, Det-Indy and Wash-Pats, in the "we were classy pats are evil thread" that you and had a discussion separately and as it was limited to just one game I did not have an opportunity to get your feedback on the two season and found an opportunity here . . .

 

. . . as Denver appears to be on fire this season this topic might come up here and there . . . to date, and as I stated I do not think that the Broncos have ran up the score, just playing there powerful offense . . . however, moving forward, it will be interesting to see if they have lead past the point of no return what happens and what some of the opinions will be though . . .    

 

as you have seen me on several occasions on this forum I enjoy engaging in discussion and endeavor to leave my jersey away from my computer and state was is correct and just regardless of the subject or whom we are talking about . . . I just find it interesting that people can look at the same fact pattern and come to different conclusions . . . to me it is as simple at 2+2=4 . . . regardless of who is doing the adding or the color of the numbers it is still 4 . . .

 

Supes, I only chime in as you enjoy going back and forth with you and I generally receive a lengthy response from you, and we never had an opportunity to discuss the entire seasons . . . for me they did the same thing . . . yes the Pats were disappointed with some of the feedback from other teams in the league, but I am not sure if the two teams (Buf/Wash) they had big leads on in three games had said anything against the Pats in Spygate . . . if they did I stand corrected . . . so to say they had it in for those teams is a little bit of speculation . . . but on a bigger scale the fact that you are disappointed in some of the teams does not mean you want to embarrass them, sure nothing wrong with wanting to pound them, but not to embarrass . . . it one thing to pound someone and its another to embarrass them, what one might think if BB, he still respects what is correct, yes he might have it in for one team the Jets, but not all teams . . and it was not like they had more possession than the colts . . . it would be one thing they had more games in which they had big lead and Brady had one possession per game or if he was in two possessions in the games we mentioned, maybe you could bring up the Spygate factor .  .  but when they have the same number of possession (3) and the team without a axe to grind has the same number, you mitigation point becomes much more tougher to argue as the teams looks just like its mirror image, that is a great offense that is going to get 2-3 questioned possession over the coarse of the year . . .    

 

. getting back to the hockey fight analogy it is one thing to pound someone mano mano during the fight but another to punch when he is down . . . there are rules and even the "bad" ones do not do things to embarrass people . . . and when one steps backs and see that "bad" are not doing things any different than the "good" ones, then one really should not try to impose evil thoughts on them . . .if the "good" ones take a extra swing at a player who is down on the ice on three fights and "bad" ones do to, you can't just off the cuff say the bad ones did it for given reason . . . now if the bad ones keep punching after the first punch on the ice, then that is different . . . sometimes when you are in a hockey fight and are swinging it tough to hold up that last swing as the opponent is going to the ground . . . likewise it tough to step back and look at yourself, your team and score and realize, hmm, maybe we are in one possession too many . . .

 

You may cast off the backup contribution if you wish, it does not matter to me how you view it . . . I only brought that into the equation as there are many who like to make an off comment/conclusionary statement that "Brady was still in there when Cassell should have been" "and we/they pulled Manning from several games" thereby trying to given an impression that the later was pulled more and therefore the Colts went easy on the opponent and "took off the gas" . . . . meaning trying to make a linear correlation between usage of backups and who was running up the score . . . and all I did was point out the fact that both teams use their backup in a similar capacity; and as such, debunked that theory . . .

 

It is very difficult to try to say if my team is "trying to score" or not trying to score, invariably that runs down ones opinion and therefore brings in the potential of bias . . . I for one can state that I don't think the pats were trying to score in the 3rd qtr of the Mia game, but others may different, fair enough . . . also, I think it is difficult to present that argument when ones team actually scores . . . in the 6 possessions in question the team scored on five of them, NE 3 and Indy 2, with the remaining game being the one in which Manning was in the entire game (Hou) . . . so even though we might endeavor to argue our team was not trying to score, when they actually score, it makes ones argument tough if not impossible as a mitigating point . . .

 

for what it is worth there have only be a few 2nd half comebacks beyond 24 points and the few that existed where done by HOF QB and/or great offenses . . . as and such the 6 games in question were beyond the point of not return in my book . . . the opponent were not Montana or the early 90s Bills in those game . . . and each team had their starter in for one possession . . . and with two of the games for the pats only involving Brady's second possession of the half . . . I know you make a point of the Pats and Spygate, but if we look back most people should not have a problem with a team throwing out their QB for just  a second possession of the half . . . well at least as not as an indication that they want to embarrass the opponent . . . as some point you gotta realize if the player slips on the ice and the opponents throws an extra punch before realizing what is happening you have to look at it in context . . . and not so sure you can ask BB to react that fast and pull Brady . . . not to say that there is a rule about wait to the 4th to pull a starter, but to a degree when its you only 2nd possession and its still the 3rd qtr, I think it is tough to pull the starter . . .

 

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, I am sorry but I do think that you are looking at things in light of one jersey or the other or both, yes you may have a opinion of the two teams, but when one looks at the facts objectively, in my mind there is no difference. I think the Pats did not act any different than the colts, they both had leads in 3 games, played their started in one possession in each that might seem extra, they both scored on at least two of those possessions, and used the backed up in the other possession in games in when they were leading short of each team using the starters in the 6 possession mentioned . . .  this is how I view things . . . it did not hold it against the 2004 colts, nor the 2007 pats, and to date the 2013 Broncos . . .

 

and yah, I choose that smiley face kind of quickly . . . :thmsup:   

[Yehoodi]

Never once have you seen me say there is anything wrong with running up the score. Some Head Coachs have different interpretations of what a 'safe lead' is. And to your point, yes Belichick liked to use these situations to try different things.

 

My issue is with amfootball once again displaying their trollish behavior when comparing to very different situations. Manning came off the field when the game was done, not a minute after, but of course amfootball will not acknowledge that.

 

The thing is, most of us here are huge Manning fans, so yes, we want him to break the TD record. A TD record that I still believe should be his. Whether Brady was running up the score in 2007, or whether he was 'trying things' in a game situation, is irrelevant. The fact is he scored quite a few garbage time TDs that year. Manning has yet to do that this year, because there has still been the potential of a comeback.

 

I agree with you that Manning has been fine this year . . . well I have not being in the game when he should not have been, altho he was up by 22 late in the third and had a scoring drive, but that happens, it was close, but it was only a three score lead, they pulled him in the 4th up 36 which is understandable . . .  . . . the Denver D kept Baltimore in the game thereby requiring Manning to be in the game and throw that last TD . . . which was a broken play and was not Manning running a 2 minute offense to score and hope to get the ball back before the game was over . . . it was a screen pass that went for a TD while Denver was only up by 15 at the time . . .

 

We will have to see if Manning can break the 50 mark this year, he is well on his way and has the potential, it will be a lot of fun to keep track of his performance . . . it will be interesting to see how many overall TDs the Broncos get . . . as we are moving more to a passing league we are seeing a lot of teams having many more passing TDs than rushing TDs and will be interesting to see how that it unfolds . . .

 

Yes you are all Manning fans  . . .

Yes Brady did have a few TDs in 2007 that were on possession that can viewed as past the point of no return and score on all three but only two were via the air . . .I can't really recall any other possession in which he scored like this, most of our games were like the Broncos games, up but a score or two into the 4th and Brady, like Manning needed to be in the game and we scored on some of them . . . so will disagree a bit with you here . . .

 

otherwise it is going to be a fun season . . .

 

 

[amfootball]

I am a peace with the 2007 season and not sure what makes you think that I am not (well other than the loss in SB 42 ), although I do find the need to correct people when I feel they are incorrect or have a wrong impression as to the facts of the season.  And yes if you recall I do think the hit on Brady the following season had something to do with the impression people got from that season, old news to a degree now but still sticks in my craw, having lost a season to some stupid anti-patriot impression, so when see people making light of the subject I chime in . . . I only chimed in here as you made a comment (I believe to AM) that you were not bias in thinking that the two seasons were different, and I felt that you were . . . also we had a discussion within the last six months to year on this topic but only dealt with two games, Det-Indy and Wash-Pats, in the "we were classy pats are evil thread" that you and had a discussion separately and as it was limited to just one game I did not have an opportunity to get your feedback on the two season and found an opportunity here . . .

 

. . . as Denver appears to be on fire this season this topic might come up here and there . . . to date, and as I stated I do not think that the Broncos have ran up the score, just playing there powerful offense . . . however, moving forward, it will be interesting to see if they have lead past the point of no return what happens and what some of the opinions will be though . . .    

 

as you have seen me on several occasions on this forum I enjoy engaging in discussion and endeavor to leave my jersey away from my computer and state was is correct and just regardless of the subject or whom we are talking about . . . I just find it interesting that people can look at the same fact pattern and come to different conclusions . . . to me it is as simple at 2+2=4 . . . regardless of who is doing the adding or the color of the numbers it is still 4 . . .

 

Supes, I only chime in as you enjoy going back and forth with you and I generally receive a lengthy response from you, and we never had an opportunity to discuss the entire seasons . . . for me they did the same thing . . . yes the Pats were disappointed with some of the feedback from other teams in the league, but I am not sure if the two teams (Buf/Wash) they had big leads on in three games had said anything against the Pats in Spygate . . . if they did I stand corrected . . . so to say they had it in for those teams is a little bit of speculation . . . but on a bigger scale the fact that you are disappointed in some of the teams does not mean you want to embarrass them, sure nothing wrong with wanting to pound them, but not to embarrass . . . it one thing to pound someone and its another to embarrass them, what one might think if BB, he still respects what is correct, yes he might have it in for one team the Jets, but not all teams . . and it was not like they had more possession than the colts . . . it would be one thing they had more games in which they had big lead and Brady had one possession per game or if he was in two possessions in the games we mentioned, maybe you could bring up the Spygate factor .  .  but when they have the same number of possession (3) and the team without a axe to grind has the same number, you mitigation point becomes much more tougher to argue as the teams looks just like its mirror image, that is a great offense that is going to get 2-3 questioned possession over the coarse of the year . . .    

 

. getting back to the hockey fight analogy it is one thing to pound someone mano mano during the fight but another to punch when he is down . . . there are rules and even the "bad" ones do not do things to embarrass people . . . and when one steps backs and see that "bad" are not doing things any different than the "good" ones, then one really should not try to impose evil thoughts on them . . .if the "good" ones take a extra swing at a player who is down on the ice on three fights and "bad" ones do to, you can't just off the cuff say the bad ones did it for given reason . . . now if the bad ones keep punching after the first punch on the ice, then that is different . . . sometimes when you are in a hockey fight and are swinging it tough to hold up that last swing as the opponent is going to the ground . . . likewise it tough to step back and look at yourself, your team and score and realize, hmm, maybe we are in one possession too many . . .

 

You may cast off the backup contribution if you wish, it does not matter to me how you view it . . . I only brought that into the equation as there are many who like to make an off comment/conclusionary statement that "Brady was still in there when Cassell should have been" "and we/they pulled Manning from several games" thereby trying to given an impression that the later was pulled more and therefore the Colts went easy on the opponent and "took off the gas" . . . . meaning trying to make a linear correlation between usage of backups and who was running up the score . . . and all I did was point out the fact that both teams use their backup in a similar capacity; and as such, debunked that theory . . .

 

It is very difficult to try to say if my team is "trying to score" or not trying to score, invariably that runs down ones opinion and therefore brings in the potential of bias . . . I for one can state that I don't think the pats were trying to score in the 3rd qtr of the Mia game, but others may different, fair enough . . . also, I think it is difficult to present that argument when ones team actually scores . . . in the 6 possessions in question the team scored on five of them, NE 3 and Indy 2, with the remaining game being the one in which Manning was in the entire game (Hou) . . . so even though we might endeavor to argue our team was not trying to score, when they actually score, it makes ones argument tough if not impossible as a mitigating point . . .

 

for what it is worth there have only be a few 2nd half comebacks beyond 24 points and the few that existed where done by HOF QB and/or great offenses . . . as and such the 6 games in question were beyond the point of not return in my book . . . the opponent were not Montana or the early 90s Bills in those game . . . and each team had their starter in for one possession . . . and with two of the games for the pats only involving Brady's second possession of the half . . . I know you make a point of the Pats and Spygate, but if we look back most people should not have a problem with a team throwing out their QB for just  a second possession of the half . . . well at least as not as an indication that they want to embarrass the opponent . . . as some point you gotta realize if the player slips on the ice and the opponents throws an extra punch before realizing what is happening you have to look at it in context . . . and not so sure you can ask BB to react that fast and pull Brady . . . not to say that there is a rule about wait to the 4th to pull a starter, but to a degree when its you only 2nd possession and its still the 3rd qtr, I think it is tough to pull the starter . . .

 

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, I am sorry but I do think that you are looking at things in light of one jersey or the other or both, yes you may have a opinion of the two teams, but when one looks at the facts objectively, in my mind there is no difference. I think the Pats did not act any different than the colts, they both had leads in 3 games, played their started in one possession in each that might seem extra, they both scored on at least two of those possessions, and used the backed up in the other possession in games in when they were leading short of each team using the starters in the 6 possession mentioned . . .  this is how I view things . . . it did not hold it against the 2004 colts, nor the 2007 pats, and to date the 2013 Broncos . . .

 

and yah, I choose that smiley face kind of quickly . . . :thmsup:   

I have to give to you. Your research on this is unbelievable. I would have never thought that in terms of possessions, scoring drives, etc. This is great stuff and I appreciate the enormous amount of time that this no doubt took to put together.

[Yehoodi]

I have to give to you. Your research on this is unbelievable. I would have never thought that in terms of possessions, scoring drives, etc. This is great stuff and I appreciate the enormous amount of time that this no doubt took to put together.

 

thanks . . . there are a few things that I will take the time to investigate . . . some of the stuff I already had in my head and/or had looked up before . . . alas, I had to do it again to a degree . . . and also need to find the time to draft some of the posts that I draft, can't always do them over a coffee break . ..

[Superman]

And of course both examples are Brady and Manning. lol.

 

Yeah, and that's a good point. Every offense and every quarterback can't do that. But you could lose a fumble, it could go for a touchdown, then you go three and out, the other team scores, then they onside.... anything can happen. My only point is that I don't think the game is necessarily put away with a three touchdown lead late in the third. 

 

And as it pertains to the OP, Michael Vick and the Eagles have shown the ability to put up points in bunches already this season. If you give them a spark, you might not be able to put the fire out.

[Jason_]

there comes a point that youre like, "okay I get it, your team is good"...

 

stop trying to intimidate the rest of the league...

 

There came a point where Luck today knew it was time to put Hasselbeck in. It shows respect to the other team. Not to mention that they did rock, paper, scissors last week to see who would score the touchdown...It seems like the 2007 undefeated Patriots all over again..

 

The last time I remember Peyton doing this was when he went for 49 touchdowns in 2004.

 

Just my 2 cents...

 

good god

 

That decision likely was not made by Luck, That decision likely came from Pagano, Had Luck been given the option I highly doubt he comes out, he is a competitor. He strikes me as a guy that when he has you down he wants to bury ya and keep ya down, thats a good thing

 

thank you!

 

I just noticed this. Manning came out of the game earlier than Luck did, and with a smaller lead.

 

Again, thank you!   

[Yehoodi]

Yeah, and that's a good point. Every offense and every quarterback can't do that. But you could lose a fumble, it could go for a touchdown, then you go three and out, the other team scores, then they onside.... anything can happen. My only point is that I don't think the game is necessarily put away with a three touchdown lead late in the third. 

 

And as it pertains to the OP, Michael Vick and the Eagles have shown the ability to put up points in bunches already this season. If you give them a spark, you might not be able to put the fire out.

 

not only Vick but really any team . . . I was involved in a discussion that you and I briefly discussed a few posts ago with another Pats fan and I always maintained that really any team could do it, and he always said, "but yah Buffalo can't do it" and wouldn't you know that just a few years ago the Pats were up on the bills like 21 or 24-0 in the 2nd and the Bills and Ryan Fitzpatrick came back and beat us, and scored lots of their points in a short period of time . . . and yes it included a scenario like you mentioned a TD, pick six and so on . . .

 

there are only 16 games in a season and with tiebreakers each game is so so very important . . . and up only 22 in the late in the third is not a lock . . . you got to keep on keeping on, and I agree 22 points is not safe against any team, especially Vick and Chip Kelly's offense . . . one can not afford a chance at a lost to make the peanut gallery happy . . .