Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
It isn't about perfection it is about making a statement. They certainly have every right to do it, but it doesn't make it right and it doesn't make it a good story.
I thought they got paid to win the games. Not sure where the stat for crushing is or how many more bonus points you get for winning by 7 TD's than you do for winning by 3. Does that mean that the Pats didn't do their job against the Colts because they didn't crush them? They sure seemed happy for it. Perhaps Randall Gay should give back his pay check for not doing what he was paid to do and crushing the Colts.
I still say it's pretty gutless to say I need my ego stroked some more so I better heave up another 3 TD's and make sure we win by 42 rather than just winning with class and going with a solid win by 21/28 points.
|
It's got nothing to do with ego stroking. I don't think you understand it. This isn't peewee football where you're trying to protect little boys from having their confidence and fun shattered. These are grown players who get paid big money to put up points. The Patriots pride themselves on perfection, and as soon as the coach says, "OK boys, we've put up enough points, let's just half ass it for the rest of the game so we only blow them out by 21 points rather than 40", what kind of message do you think that sends to the players?
Put it another way, if you were a paying customer at a Flames game, and the Flames had a 4-0 lead, would you be fine with them just spending the last 15 minutes of a game dumping the puck into the other zone and not fore checking hard? Or to make a similar case comparison: the Pats were at a 4 and 1 and decided to go for the touchdown instead of kicking a field goal. If the Flames were on a power play, would you like them to just pass the puck around without shooting it?
I don't understand these arguments for them blowing teams out. If the other team doesn't want to get blown out, maybe they should play better defense, instead of complaining about how good the other team is.