Posted on 11/29/2005 11:13:51 AM PST by Ultra Sonic 007
Yeah those pesky Texans keep trying to hog the bottom of the barrel...AWB
No, but it gives one a good indication of how good a team really is. For example, the Falcons had a couple of ugly wins over Miami and the Jets. The Falcons won, so they they got to add another "W", but it was a sign that not all was well with the team. Predictably, the Falcons lost their next two games when they were matched up against better opponents.
When a team makes a habit of winning ugly, it will almost invariably come back to bite them as the season progresses. Future opponents will spot the weaknesses and exploit them more and more.
That being said, I don't think that Seattle as made a habit of winning ugly this year.
The home thanksgiving game is a pretty big advantage for them as they don't have to travel for the short week. Losing that game was huge.
I don't understand why teams don't put more effort into acquiring better field goal kickers before the season starts. Without Vinetari, the Patriots probably don't have superbowl victories. Akers with the Eagles has also come up huge. A kicker is worth about 2 or 3 wins a year - even more when the team is primarily a defensive one.
True, but the Giants may have scored touchdowns anyway on those drives - just not on those particular plays.
I blame the coaching staff of the Giants for the loss and not the kicker. At the end of the regulation, the Giants had another time out and plenty of time to run 2 or 3 more plays to get the ball closer. A coach should never stop a drive to kick a 40+ yard field goal. Even the Patriots with Veniteri keep driving until they run out of time.
Herman Edwards made the same mistake in the Jets' playoff game with the Steelers last year.
The Falcons had ugly games against bad teams, that's a bad sign.
Sometimes a team is just going to play ugly, some days the game plan doesn't work right or the bounces go against you. Finding a way to win those is generally a good sign (unless the opponent stinks in which case we have to question how it got ugly in the first place), and especially for Seattle who have traditionally lost those ugly games.
And Marty Schottenheimer in the playoff game versus the Jets......
Good teams find a way to win out even when they are having bad days. 'Iffy' teams need to play well to win. And bad teams find a way to lose, witness the Redskins! They got a bad day from Brees with 3 INTs, contained Tomlinson for three-quarters of the game, and had a shot to win at the end of regulation. Instead, they lose in OT! I'm finished with them!
I had forgotten about that. I think that some coaches are really good at game planning and motivating their players but are terrible when it comes to tactical decisions - especially in big games.
Mark Richt at UGA and Bobby Bowden are prime examples of this.
I've never understood why teams don't just let a team score when time is running out, the opponent just needs a field goal and the ball is on the 10 yard line. The Falcons made this mistake against the Patriots this season. The Patriots just let the time run down and kicked the go ahead field goal with about 5 seconds left.
Wrong. See post 30.
I still wish the Giants good luck against the Cowboys.
Yeah. The fact it's being disputed is kind of silly anyway; I mean, the Seahawks won, right?
It's in the books...and I think most would agree it was a compelling and entertaining game.
I've been a Giants fan since the 60s, a season ticket holder and totally devoted to them. Shockey's end zone catch was not a TD, Toomer's was.
I agree with you, and admire you for your honesty.
My Seahawks in the top 3 of one of these things, FINALLY!!! And here I picked Carolina to represent the NFC...JFK
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.