Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Super Bowl LI (51) NFL Championship Game Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On ‎2‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 8:56 PM, RockThatBlue said:

I still think the Warriors choke job was worse, as that one lasted 3 games. This one is probably worst in NFL history

 

Yeah that was pretty bad. Up 3-1 with HCA. Cavs had to win Game 7 at Golden State and still did, Warriors didn't score in the last 5 minutes of the game. Also the Yankees being up 3-0 on the Redsox in the 2004 ALCS and losing 4 straight + the Yankees had Game 7 at home. How about the Indians being up 3-1 in last years WS, Cubs had to win Game 6 and Game 7 on the road to pull that off. Football wise Falcons blowing a 28-3 lead is the worst though IMO. I thought in 2006 when we played the Pats in the Title Game was a huge choke by the Pats, they were up 21-3 at one time and 21-6 at Half. Colts ended up winning the game scoring 32 2nd Half points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Falcons, IMO, didn't "choke" in the traditional sense. The only thing that I think was really foolish on their part was not running the clock down as much as they could on each play in the 4th quarter. But I don't think the aggressive play-calling was completely dumb. Easy to say it was, now that we know how it worked out, but at the time, I was begging for them to be TOO conservative, which is often how these things go. They stayed aggressive because that's who they are and that's what got them there. They didn't execute when it mattered most. 

 

The Atlanta defense, put simply, got gassed. Endurance is not a skill or talent, it's the result of hard work and conditioning, and the Patriots out-lasted the Falcons. Nothing really changed in terms of scheme or strategy. The Patriots just started winning the one-on-one battles they had lost for the better part of three quarters. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

The Falcons, IMO, didn't "choke" in the traditional sense. The only thing that I think was really foolish on their part was not running the clock down as much as they could on each play in the 4th quarter. But I don't think the aggressive play-calling was completely dumb. Easy to say it was, now that we know how it worked out, but at the time, I was begging for them to be TOO conservative, which is often how these things go. They stayed aggressive because that's who they are and that's what got them there. They didn't execute when it mattered most. 

 

The Atlanta defense, put simply, got gassed. Endurance is not a skill or talent, it's the result of hard work and conditioning, and the Patriots out-lasted the Falcons. Nothing really changed in terms of scheme or strategy. The Patriots just started winning the one-on-one battles they had lost for the better part of three quarters. 

 

 

IMO the Patriots had the better team so technically some may not look at it as a choke. When a team loses a 28-3 lead though most people would say it is. When my Cubs won the WS, I thought they should've being the best team all season but when they were down 3-1 without HFA, the Indians basically choked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

The Falcons, IMO, didn't "choke" in the traditional sense. The only thing that I think was really foolish on their part was not running the clock down as much as they could on each play in the 4th quarter. But I don't think the aggressive play-calling was completely dumb. Easy to say it was, now that we know how it worked out, but at the time, I was begging for them to be TOO conservative, which is often how these things go. They stayed aggressive because that's who they are and that's what got them there. They didn't execute when it mattered most. 

 

The Atlanta defense, put simply, got gassed. Endurance is not a skill or talent, it's the result of hard work and conditioning, and the Patriots out-lasted the Falcons. Nothing really changed in terms of scheme or strategy. The Patriots just started winning the one-on-one battles they had lost for the better part of three quarters. 

 

 

 

Yes, the Falcons continued to do what they do, and perhaps that is not a bad thing.  How many times have we seen teams, with a lead, run three run plays to try to get first downs and end the game, and then they have to punt and the other teams gets the ball back. Some fans have said why not just keep running ones offense. 

 

If one is in a rhythm of hiking the ball at a certain time then maybe waiting can be an issue too.  The Falcon passed a lot late in the game and on the Jones catch drive there were at the 22 yard line cause on one play they ran a lot of deep routes freeing up the underneath for the RB (plus a blown coverage by the Pats), then Ryan those a pass (instead of running himself) to Jones that could of been picked if thrown a foot lower.  


So they are what they are.  As for taking three run plays and kicking a FG, they may of been thinking pats might get a TD and onside kick (See Seattle/GB '14 NFCCG) and thus would get two more possessions.  A first down would eat up more clock and a TD would essentially end the game with time to get it and make it a 15 point game. 

 

Given the fact that all year with teams first and 10 on the 22, there were about 108 times this happened and no one punted in any of these 108 times till the SB.  So i can see Atlanta's thinking.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2017 at 0:09 PM, Yehoodi said:

 

Yes, the Falcons continued to do what they do, and perhaps that is not a bad thing.  How many times have we seen teams, with a lead, run three run plays to try to get first downs and end the game, and then they have to punt and the other teams gets the ball back. Some fans have said why not just keep running ones offense. 

 

 

Right, exactly what I was saying... and this is usually what we see from NE opponents. They sort of turtle and just "play not to lose." If the defense knows they're just burning clock, getting three-and-outs becomes easier. So I give credit to Atlanta for not playing it too close, and for being aggressive when a lot of teams wouldn't have the cahones to do that. Like I said, they were just a play or two short. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2017 at 11:27 AM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

IMO the Patriots had the better team so technically some may not look at it as a choke. When a team loses a 28-3 lead though most people would say it is. When my Cubs won the WS, I thought they should've being the best team all season but when they were down 3-1 without HFA, the Indians basically choked.

 

Well let me ask this as a comparison...

 

In the '06 AFC Championship game, the Patriots lead the Colts 21-3 at one point and 21-6 at the half. But of course Indy came back and won it. 

 

Was that a choke job by the Patriots? Or a great comeback? 

 

It's kind of a fine line you know? And I think in just about every case, it's a little of both. One team usually steps up their execution while the other team starts making mistakes. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoPats said:

 

Well let me ask this as a comparison...

 

In the '06 AFC Championship game, the Patriots lead the Colts 21-3 at one point and 21-6 at the half. But of course Indy came back and won it. 

 

Was that a choke job by the Patriots? Or a great comeback? 

 

It's kind of a fine line you know? And I think in just about every case, it's a little of both. One team usually steps up their execution while the other team starts making mistakes. 

 

 

Yeah I agree, I think it's a little of both. The Colts wore down the Pats in that 2nd Half much like the Pats did the Falcons. We are talking about Tom and Peyton though so anything is possible with them. I honestly felt like the Colts had the better team that 1 year but losing a 21-3 lead can be looked at as a choke. Like you said it's a fine line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2017 at 5:58 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

 I honestly felt like the Colts had the better team that 1 year

colts were better that year.  who did the pats have on offense besides brady?

 

i think the favored team has won every colts/patriots match up in recent memory

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

colts were better that year.  who did the pats have on offense besides brady?

 

i think the favored team has won every colts/patriots match up in recent memory

Pats still had a Good Defense and BB on the sideline so nothing was a given. I agree the Colts were better that season. Still barley won and that was our SB season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On Sunday, February 05, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Tsarquise said:

This game wasn't even about Tom Brady. 

Then what, pray tell, was it about? Brady had 466 passing yards (285 in the 4th quarter and OT alone).

We get it; there's a lot of Brady hate here but c'mon; what happened that day was astonishing.

In 50 Super Bowls the largest comeback was 10 points.

NO ONE will ever come back from 25 pts. down to win a SB again. That's an absolute lock.

 

And for everyone that wants to hand all credit to Belichick; take a look at BB's Head Coaching record in 6+ seasons without Brady? It's about 8 games under .500.

Now he's 100+ games over .500, has five SB rings and is considered the Greatest Ever.

You can make a STRONG case it was Brady who made Belichick, not the other way around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • "Rousseau, who opted out of the 2020 season, had 15.5 sacks in 2019, though he's still raw."   I'm not a draft guy and I don't pretend to be one, but when I see "HE DIDNT PLAY LAST YEAR", that's a bit of a red flag for the first round pick.  (and he's raw, way to really sell the pick.. lol)
    • I am sure the Colts are well aware of Wentz’s flaws and did their homework on him before the trade.  The Colts brain trust clearly feels like they can fix them or they wouldn’t have traded for him.  So let’s see if they can.  They have a good track record in terms of getting the most out of their players.  
    • Here's Mel Kiper's new mock draft: https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2021/insider/story/_/id/30957145/nfl-mock-draft-2021-mel-kiper-new-predictions-all-32-first-round-picks-including-mac-jones-trey-lance-three-trades   The Colts' pick:   Some interesting moves/picks: - Atlanta moves to 2 to pick Zach Wilson - Jets pick Kyle Pitts at 4 - 49ers trade up to 7 for Justin Fields - Carolina pick Mac Jones at no. 8 - Pats trade up to no. 9 for Trey Lance - Caleb Farley falls to 15 to the Broncos - Kadarius Toney goes no. 20 to the Bears - Colts pick Gregory Rousseau with Kwity Paye and Jaelan Phillips still on the board - Landon Dickerson still goes R1 (to the Steelers(24) despite his injury - Walker Little sneaks into R1 to the Chiefs    
    • I'll add that the Eagles didn't really stress the want to get rid of Wentz as early as others like Stafford.  I'm sure some teams were holding out a little longer to see if Watson, Ryan, Wilson or others would really be available.    Add in that many of the teams in need of a QB have good draft position to get one and this offseason was kind of a "perfect storm" for lots on interest in any 1 QB.  There are still so many QB's possibly available.  Darnold, Cam, Winton, Trubisky, Foles, Fitz and several others.   Granted those are not the caliber of Wilson and Watson. 
  • Members

    • richard pallo

      richard pallo 2,567

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CR91

      CR91 6,351

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Aces101

      Aces101 196

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fisticuffs111

      Fisticuffs111 1,988

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Flash7

      Flash7 1,107

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mel Kiper's Hair

      Mel Kiper's Hair 2,140

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DynaMike

      DynaMike 33

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • WarGhost21

      WarGhost21 936

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MarquisJ

      MarquisJ 359

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BlackTiger

      BlackTiger 55

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...