Buftex Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Yeah, I'm sure that is all he thinks about ... "how can I screw a team that hasn't beat me in a decade or so?" I really believe that BB believes (and I think he is right to some degree) that if he makes the concept of playing the Pats seem like a daunting task. for the opposition, they tend to collapse a little quicker, in general, when there is adversity to overcome. The old cliche is that football is 20% physical, and 80% mental. The physical game is on the players, and the mental part is on the coach... how much of an edge is it, every week for your team to come out and know they can put up 35 points on anyone...and, conversely, your opponent thinking "jeezus, they can score 35 points on anyone....we can't let them get up on us by more than 10..." I really don't think BB runs up the score to show up his opponent, but, moreover, he just attempts to give his team the mental edge every week. He gives him teams the mindset that "they can't stop us", and his opponent thinks in the back of their mind "we can't stop them" How often do we, as fans, say, "they aren't really that good...you just have to get in Brady's face, their defense sucks, etc etc etc..." But the result is always pretty much the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You herd it hear last Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 If he thought he could affect it, and cause that effect, then yes. But no, I don't think it would be effective. You can probably tell from my affect, but you'd probably need a picture for that. You dig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Well he lost his starting Tight End and key to his offense for the rest of the regular season because he was running up the score. By the way, for you Bill lovers, if he's such a defensive genius, why can't they stop anybody for years now, even with all that talent. Brady made a lot of lucky people in the NFL look great. Romeo Crennel? Charlie Weis? Belichick? All failed head coaches without Tom Brady. Agreed. His Defense has been poor overall (screw the slanted stats) and he hasn't won a SB since Spygate. Gronk will not be catching a touchdown or blocking for Tom Brady and Hernandez is it? His top 2 TE's are now out for the next game or 4 The fallout could be huge for the Patriots, who still are not sure if Aaron Hernandez will be ready to go Thursday against the Jets. Hernandez continues to be bothered by a severe ankle sprain he suffered in Week 2 against the Arizona Cardinals. He returned briefly for two games, but hasn't played since Oct. 21 against the New York Jets. Belichick said Monday that a decision on whether Hernandez will be available for Thursday night's game will be made later in the week. And while Hernandez said that Gronkowski's injury puts pressure on him and his teammates to step up, the tight end group remains confident in its abilities. -------------------------------------- Dear NFL Gods make it so the Cheatriots fall hard. Buffalo need a Colts victory. With the current NFL 6-3 can be a fluke. What was Buffalo last season before the fall with injuries? 5-2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffBill Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 We have a heard that usually when a team is blown out, they come back the next week with something to prove. Do you think Belichick intentionally ran up the score on the Colts knowing they were facing the Bills the following week? If so, this guy is light years ahead of any other coach. You have too much time on your hands? Belicheat runs up the score on anyone he can, and always has, always will-even if it does cost him his best players to injury. The Bills probably don't even enter his mind, over the past decade or so, the Bills have almost been another bye week to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInUticaTampa Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 he obviously did everything he could to run up the score so one of his star players would get hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 I don't think BB really cares. He was just being his regular arrogant self. There was no reason to keep Brady in after scoring 45 so late in the game. Shows you how little they think of Mallett, who got onto the field on their final series, and just handed the ball off 3 straight times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Well, it seems that last night the Pats delivered the best possible response to the whole running up the score fisaco by scoring 35 points in 1 quarter of play against the Jets, including 21 points in just 53 seconds, proving that, in the NFL, anything can happen and that no lead is safe. Time for the haters to stop hating on BB for such nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Well, it seems that last night the Pats delivered the best possible response to the whole running up the score fisaco by scoring 35 points in 1 quarter of play against the Jets, including 21 points in just 53 seconds, proving that, in the NFL, anything can happen and that no lead is safe. Time for the haters to stop hating on BB for such nonsense. When have you ever seen the Pats play as stupid as the Jets last night? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 When have you ever seen the Pats play as stupid as the Jets last night? PTR What does that matter? The point is last night's game demonstrated to all who watched that it is possible to score points in bunches such that no one should never take a lead for granted in the NFL. BB knows this; he's a NFL historian for crying out loud. Maybe now, those haters who hate on him for such nonsense, will finally realize it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I really don't think BB runs up the score to show up his opponent, but, moreover, he just attempts to give his team the mental edge every week. He gives him teams the mindset that "they can't stop us", and his opponent thinks in the back of their mind "we can't stop them" How often do we, as fans, say, "they aren't really that good...you just have to get in Brady's face, their defense sucks, etc etc etc..." But the result is always pretty much the same. I think this a good point. You stay sharp and consistently good by continuing to execute each play, each drive for the whole practice and the whole game. Plus, I think a lot of coaches have the attitude that this is pro football, the players are paid to play for 60 minutes. This isn't some top ten college team playing St Mary State that should ease up on a physically outmatched opponent. There isn't a need to clear your bench so the seniors can get in the game. It's pro football -- enough with the whining. And for the specific criticism of the Pats, they ran the ball on almost every play in the 4Q last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 This is somewhat f a silly thread. BB run up the score at every point he can every week. Did everyone see the Jets game last night? Our game, and so on. Going back to that undefeated season they ran up the score for almost every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I think this a good point. You stay sharp and consistently good by continuing to execute each play, each drive for the whole practice and the whole game. Plus, I think a lot of coaches have the attitude that this is pro football, the players are paid to play for 60 minutes. This isn't some top ten college team playing St Mary State that should ease up on a physically outmatched opponent. There isn't a need to clear your bench so the seniors can get in the game. It's pro football -- enough with the whining. And for the specific criticism of the Pats, they ran the ball on almost every play in the 4Q last night. Furthermore, playing to the end teaches your team how to finish, a trait that is very important to BB's coaching philosophy. Such a philosophy seems to have caught on in New England as evidenced by the stats shown on TV last night ...... the last 2 seasons his team finished the 2nd half of the regular season without losing a game. 16-0. And, that trend is continuing this year as well as they are 3-0 the second half of this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWings Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I really don't get the displeasure when a teams offense plays all out until the end of ball games. Why should it be expected of the winning offense to stop trying? If they stop trying should the opposing defense not be expected to also not try? And, what about the winning team's defense! Should they stop trying too and just let the opposing offense score at will? There's two schools of thought on this... 1 - Yes, if you're going to complain about the opponent running up the score, then stop them. Last night, Belichick told the NBC sideline reporter that he won't stop trying because he remembers the Buffalo-Houston comeback game. That's understandable (and legit at halftime), but the Bills started that comeback early in the 3rd quarter while all of Houston's starters were still in the game. It's not like the Bills got some momentum because Houston started playing all of their 2nd stringers. This leads to.... 2 - When you're well ahead late in the 4th quarter (let's say by 3 TDs) and controlling the game, you don't need to keep the first team in there. It was 52-24 against Indy last week when Brady was still throwing - THAT'S running it up. In 2007 when the Patsies were running it up on everyone, they were going for it on 4th down deep in the opponent's territory while they were ahead by 28 points and controlling the game in the 4th quarter. That's also running up the score. That's classless and unnecessary. Sure, if you don't like it, then stop them...but you've already proven that you can't, so why keep throwing the ball or going for it on 4th down? Because you're an arrogant POS who has to show the league that you're in control. I've heard many say this and agree with it - Belichick will get his when someone has the chance to run up the score on him. And I will be quite happy about it if it does happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 There's two schools of thought on this... 1 - Yes, if you're going to complain about the opponent running up the score, then stop them. Last night, Belichick told the NBC sideline reporter that he won't stop trying because he remembers the Buffalo-Houston comeback game. That's understandable (and legit at halftime), but the Bills started that comeback early in the 3rd quarter while all of Houston's starters were still in the game. It's not like the Bills got some momentum because Houston started playing all of their 2nd stringers. This leads to.... 2 - When you're well ahead late in the 4th quarter (let's say by 3 TDs) and controlling the game, you don't need to keep the first team in there. It was 52-24 against Indy last week when Brady was still throwing - THAT'S running it up. In 2007 when the Patsies were running it up on everyone, they were going for it on 4th down deep in the opponent's territory while they were ahead by 28 points and controlling the game in the 4th quarter. That's also running up the score. That's classless and unnecessary. Sure, if you don't like it, then stop them...but you've already proven that you can't, so why keep throwing the ball or going for it on 4th down? Because you're an arrogant POS who has to show the league that you're in control. I've heard many say this and agree with it - Belichick will get his when someone has the chance to run up the score on him. And I will be quite happy about it if it does happen. The problem is when is enough, enough? Is there a specific time in the game where you propose a coach should call of the horses? And what should he tell his team to do ..... play at only, what, 75% effort so as not to embarrass the other team anymore? Would that not be an even more embarrassing thing to do to your opponent? And should the effort reduction only be required of the leading team's offense? Or does the HC also have to temper back the efforts of his defense too? Should ther be a mandatory "no blitz the QB" and "don't intercept a pass" or "recover a fumble" rule implemented on his defense too? Once the HC of the team leading calls off his horses, is the offense and defense of the trailing team still allowed to perform at full effort? I think it would be wiser to just call the game over when the lead in the game gets to be a certain amount! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clearwater cadet Posted November 23, 2012 Author Share Posted November 23, 2012 Yes, of course. No one denies this. The real question is why? Is he placing a large bet on the over or is it something more sinister? Ever notice stock market trends the morning after the Bills fail to cover the spread? I've said too much already. Of course he did. The Bills are always on his mind. He stays awake at night worrying about the Bills and figuring ways out to stop them. That has to be listed among the top ten dumbest things I have ever read Yeah sure he does NOT Yes.. because I'm sure Belichick lies awake at night worrying about what the cellar dwellers in his division are doing. That what I love about this place, someone puts up a well thoughtout thread (and there are many on two bills drive), which would be to nice to hear everyones point of view and no one responses, but you put up a dumb/ sh#t idea like this and all the half wits on twobillsdrive come a runnin and can't wait to tell you what a idoit you are. This thread is still going 4 days later? common on. No wonder ralph sells so many tickets, if the team became good, no one would go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DallasBillsFan1 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Yes, you are most likely right. If you want to win and create advantages for your team in the future, you must be calculated. Is Belichick aware that the Colts play the Bills the week after??? OF COURSE he is. The players need to be focused week to week, a head coach needs vision. I think sports is 90% mental and 10% physical ability. Coaches should use psychology during the game (calling TO right before field goal attempt) and throughout the season to give advantages to their team (running up points to rev up Colts for the forthcoming Bills game - a divisional opponent). So, YES, I think you are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I wait for the day I see threads accusing the Bills of running up the score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 The problem is when is enough, enough? Is there a specific time in the game where you propose a coach should call of the horses? And what should he tell his team to do ..... play at only, what, 75% effort so as not to embarrass the other team anymore? Would that not be an even more embarrassing thing to do to your opponent? And should the effort reduction only be required of the leading team's offense? Or does the HC also have to temper back the efforts of his defense too? Should ther be a mandatory "no blitz the QB" and "don't intercept a pass" or "recover a fumble" rule implemented on his defense too? Once the HC of the team leading calls off his horses, is the offense and defense of the trailing team still allowed to perform at full effort? I think it would be wiser to just call the game over when the lead in the game gets to be a certain amount! You keep making the same point over and over. No, it is much worse to keep scoring on a beaten team who has already proven they cannot stop you. You run the ball, you don't frantically keep throwing with your starter. You show some class and respect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Since when does Belicheat need an excuse to run up the score? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 You keep making the same point over and over. No, it is much worse to keep scoring on a beaten team who has already proven they cannot stop you. You run the ball, you don't frantically keep throwing with your starter. You show some class and respect... Duh! What if they have proven that they can't stop the run? Should you be expected to only pass on them then Re: proven. The day a HC lets his guard down and allows his team to stop playing because they have proven to be superior is the day said coach should retire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts