What are you talking about? It's exactly because Peyton Manning is that damn good that I believe it makes perfect sense to go for it. If it was JaMarcus Russell (not trying to make fun, just saying) quarterbacking for the Colts, you better believe I punt that football. It's precisely because Peyton Manning is that damn dominant and amazing that I feel the odds of picking up two yards (with Tom Brady) are greater than the defense's odds of keeping Peyton out of the end zone.
Well, If Jamarcus was quarterbacking for the Colts, Bill could have punted on first down and nobody would have given him any grief.
So little time? He had two minutes and a timeout. He had already directed touchdown drives of 1:49 and 2:05 that very quarter, without using any timeouts. The defense was gassed. If you had Tom Brady as your quarterback, with Randy Moss and Wes Welker as your receivers - and were looking at a red hot Peyton Manning on the other sideline - do you really, truly believe your defense has a better percentage shot at denying Peyton with 2:00 and the ball on his 35, than your world-class offense does of picking up two yards on a given play? If you do, that's definitely your prerogative, I suppose. I just disagree.
If you get it...you win. That's great. I think I'd feel better about the Pats doing it if they had a running game. But you can have the greatest QB of all time...or even Tom Brady...throwing that ball, and it's still up in the air. Brady delivered...Faulk bobbled. You put the entire game in the hands of Kevin Faulk. (it was Faulk, right?) If you don't get it...that dominant QB you're talking about only needs to go 29 yards. As opposed to maybe 50 or 60....IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. I just like my chances better that way. If there were 4 minutes on the clock, maybe I'd see it differently.
Hall of Famers choose Manning over Brady There are 20 living quarterbacks in the Professional Football Hall of Fame. We tracked them all down and asked: if you had to choose between Tom Brady and Peyton Manning to quarterback your team, who would you pick and why? When pressed to decide, the tally was 13 1/2-2 1/2, with four abstaining. Manning's work ethic and level of preparation provided the swing factor for several of the Hall of Famers. They were also won over by the freedom Manning has earned to run his system. nbcsports.com
Both were 79 yards. On an average net punt (38 yards), the Colts would've taken over on their own 34, had NE punted (66 yards).
Of course sentiment is going to be in Manning's favor now, given that Brady missed all of last season (zero highlights) and Manning has won 18 straight regular season games courtesy of a soft schedule that would make even Boise State blush. I'd be very curious to see what the results are after the season, though.
At the time, for a brief moment, I thought it was a genius call by Belichick. He knew damn well the Colts were going to score, so even if they don't pick up the 4th and 2, they leave themselves plenty of time for Brady to go down and get a field goal. The only problem is he didn't relay the message to his defense to let them score (I know that goes against all football logic, but Peyton was having his way anyway in the 4th). Burning those timeouts was huge as well.
Two minutes - with a timeout, and only needing 65 yards - for a Manning offense that already goes no huddle the entire game really isn't that daunting. Especially considering they had already had two longer drives using no timeouts in that timeframe.
Agree completely on this. The call on 4th and 2 was excellent. But I think Belichick's coaching was very poor down the stretch elsewhere, because he wasn't consistent to the logic. If you're going to go for it on 4th and 2, why not run the ball on 3rd and 2 - there's a small chance you get lucky and pick up the first, but if you don't, at least you make Indy use its last timeout. Likewise, if you think the odds of Brady picking up two yards are greater than your defense stopping Manning from 65 yards out (I do), then how could you not believe, by extension, that the odds of Brady leading his team to FG range are superior to your D's ability to stop Manning inside the red zone? There's no excuse for New England not to have blitzed every play and jumped every route when Indy took over. Maybe you get lucky and make the play. If you don't, trust your offense. People don't remember this, but a similar Belichick defensive gaffe basically cost the Pats the 2007 AFC title in Indy. It wouldn't have made sense to let Indy score, but he should have used his timeouts on defense (where he'd get the full 40 seconds worth) and given his offense a full 2:00 to try and score a winning TD. Instead, he let the Colts bleed it down to a minute, with Addai scoring the game-winner and giving his offense no legitimate chance. Belichick made his share of very, very dumb decisions last night. It's just the 4th and 2 wasn't among them.
Nice spin. You think 20 Hall of Fame QBs who had to go through the process of having every minute detail of their careers put under a microscope for years and years would be so fickle in their judgment?
Yes. I'm not trying to play the holier-than-thou card, but if you talked to some former players, I think you'd be stunned at how little most of them watch the game in their spare time. Do they know the game well, from an analytical perspective? Of course. But most of them really don't watch all that much, and are very influenced by the media and/or their friends as to their perceptions of current players. I like to think I have a decent understanding of the game, but for example, I sadly really haven't watched that much UH this year. Outside of the Tech and OSU games, I really don't know that much about Case Keenum. So, my opinions are largely shaped by what people in the media and friends (including you) tell me. It's not that I don't know football, it's just that it's hard to make a truly informed decision when you don't regularly watch, so you don't have much choice but to at least partially rely on outside sources. And no, I'm not comparing my knowledge to a Hall of Fame NFL quarterback. I'm just referring to the principle. When you don't regularly watch, these outside items do play a part.
That argument would probably hold more weight if none of the former QBs were still members of the media.
There really aren't that many HOF QBs in the media, and of them, Bradshaw voted for Brady and Young called it a tie. Who's left? Marino and Aikman, I suppose?
By the way, one of them specifically uses the argument I cited: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/33937274/ns/sports-nfl/?loc=interstitialskip
