That's not football.

[Sugar]

Re: That's not football.

I think it would be completely assinine to let a team score willingly or to stop at the one to run the clock. You score a TD when you can. You stop the the other team when you can. Period.

That's an interesting opinion.

Not sure why he gets the eye roll.

We talk about the NFL not being what it used to be and now we see teams lying down or contemplating falling at the 1.

The next trick will be opponents carrying the RB into the end zone so he can't fall at the GL.

The eye roll has to do with the opinion of an internet poster like him or you or me v experienced and championship level coaches and their strategies. Any of us can say that it isn't football, but it obviously is- like it or not.

[NW Steeler]

Re: That's not football.

I think it would be completely assinine to let a team score willingly or to stop at the one to run the clock. You score a TD when you can. You stop the the other team when you can. Period.

That's an interesting opinion.

Not sure why he gets the eye roll.

We talk about the NFL not being what it used to be and now we see teams lying down or contemplating falling at the 1.

The next trick will be opponents carrying the RB into the end zone so he can't fall at the GL.

The eye roll has to do with the opinion of an internet poster like him or you or me v experienced and championship level coaches and their strategies. Any of us can say that it isn't football, but it obviously is- like it or not.

So you are rolling your eyes at YOUR opinion as well? I thought that was what this board was for, to express people's opinions. Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe that had Tomlin had been in the Pats position yesterday and had allowed the Giants to score he would have been flamed mercilessly on this board today. But that is just my opinion.

[NC Steeler Fan]

Re: That's not football.

Count me among those that understand you might CONSIDER what
would happen if you leave 50+ seconds on the clock for your opponent.

However, by NO MEANS do you pass up a sure TD.

And, by NO MEANS do you not try to stop a TD.

THAT AIN'T FOOTBALL, PERIOD.

And, what message are you sending your defense to even call that on the field?

Kudos for the runner for taking the points...

[DukieBoy]

Re: That's not football.

That strategy was neither weak, nor lame. It was what had to be done.

Weak and lame is when your "go-to" receivers suddenly can't catch a cold with the game on the line.

Weak and lame is that ridiculous safety call for intentional grounding because a WR didn't turn up field.

when people look back at the game winning TD...

it's weak....

and lame.

weak and lame is letting a guy who already fumbled waltz into the endzone instead of trying to force a fumble or block the FG.

I also think taking a knee at the 1 yard line would have been weak and lame, so I'm glad Bradshaw fell into the endzone. A lot can happen without scoring there...penalties, fumble, blocked FG, etc. Could you imagine if they took a knee and the FG was blocked or shanked? Several would be out of a job in NY this morning.

Right. Remember Bettis' goal-line fumble in that city some years back?

[NW Steeler]

Re: That's not football.

Right. Remember Bettis' goal-line fumble in that city some years back?

That was the first thing I thought of too.

[Sugar]

Re: That's not football.

[quote=NW Steeler]

I think it would be completely assinine to let a team score willingly or to stop at the one to run the clock. You score a TD when you can. You stop the the other team when you can. Period.

That's an interesting opinion.

Not sure why he gets the eye roll.

We talk about the NFL not being what it used to be and now we see teams lying down or contemplating falling at the 1.

The next trick will be opponents carrying the RB into the end zone so he can't fall at the GL.

The eye roll has to do with the opinion of an internet poster like him or you or me v experienced and championship level coaches and their strategies. Any of us can say that it isn't football, but it obviously is- like it or not.

So you are rolling your eyes at YOUR opinion as well? I thought that was what this board was for, to express people's opinions. Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe that had Tomlin had been in the Pats position yesterday and had allowed the Giants to score he would have been flamed mercilessly on this board today. But that is just my opinion. [/quote:1t1hxgky]

In some ways, yes, I was. The strident language against some of the brightest minds in football is silly, IMO. I'm sure that Tomlin would, indeed, have been "flamed" had he pulled the same thing- whatever that is worth. He still would have been right. Of course, that's just my opionion.

[SanAntonioSteelerFan]

Re: That's not football.

This apparently isn't a newfangled strategy or a sign that the apocalypse is upon us. I read today that Green Bay also let Denver score in a Superbowl long ago, with the same strategy the Patriots* had yesterday. Same results (it didn't work). [url="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/sports/football/super-bowl-46-after-giants-surreal-touchdown-debates-on-the-strategy.html?hp"]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/sport ... gy.html?hp[/url]

FWIW, my family up in NJ was moaning and cursing big time when he scored ... everybody thought he should have layed down or something ... "Oh, no, Marcia's* gonna beat us now!!".

I texted them, don't worry. He doesn't have the answers to the test this time!!

[Steelerphile]

Re: That's not football.

Letting the player score was the right move. It was a lower percentage play to block a FG than it was to get the ball back to Brady with more than a minute. The only problem was that I think Brady was dinged up from a prior sack and wasn't oeprating at full capactiy. Still Welker dropped a very catchable ball. You never know what happens if he makes that play.

You do things in the last throes o9f a game that you wouldn't during normal play. It doesn't make it not "Real Football" by letting the player go into the
EZ in that situation.