So when I sat down to watch the Redskins-Patriots game yesterday afternoon, I was under no illusions that the ultimate outcome of the game would be anything other than a Skins defeat, but wow, what domination. I had read, of course, about how good the Pats were and seen the highlight reels, but this was the first game of theirs of watched this season and it was a thing to behold — I find myself seized by a vague, nameless horror so mystical and well-nigh ineffable that I almost despair of putting it in a comprehensible form. Good luck, Colts....
« More Good News From Somalia | Main | The Madness of Iraq »
Shock and Awe
29 Oct 2007 09:43 am
Comments (51)
I find myself seized by a vague, nameless horror so mystical and well-nigh ineffable that I almost despair of putting it in a comprehensible form.
H.P. Lovecraft: screenwriter for NFL films.
Now that is a mashup I'd pay to see.
They succeed in very bizarre and spectacular ways. Heretofore in 103 games Tom Brady had 3 rushing touchdowns. He had 2 yesterday, and the backup QB rushed for one.
Can someone lunge to the sidelines and "accidentally" take out Belichick? I understand that he's pissed at the league for you know, punishing him for cheating, and I even understand running up the score against the Jets, for being such douchebags about it, but what the hell did Joe Gibbs ever do that would make someone want to run up the score on him?
but what the hell did Joe Gibbs ever do that would make someone want to run up the score on him?
Accept a job from Dan Snyder.
If this were a different era, and you had guys like Jack Tatum or Dick Butkus or Jack Lambert or Ray Nitschke still around-- if Tom Brady walks onto that field at 38-0, he'd get carried back off.
The always unreliable Sam Smith is talking a Kobe-Gilbert trade...
Anything to keep him off of the Bulls. If my least favorite player goes to my favorite team, I may snap.
They pulled off yesterday's blowout minus a couple of key offensive performers. Ben Watson (5 touchdowns) and Sammy Morris (two 100-yd rushing games) have been on the injured list for two weeks. Richard Seymour played his first game of the season yesterday, and was only in on about a third of the defensive snaps. As he returns to all-pro form, the Patriots defense will go from very good to excellent.
The Patriots' chief enemy right now is boredom and complacency from lack of competition. Their division is dreadful and is basically wrapped up. I think this is why Belichick kept the offensive motors running full out long after the game was over yesterday. He's keeping the players sharp, motivated and interested by challenging them to exceed personal and team performance benchmarks in each game, and by letting them know that they are going to play all out from opening kickoff.
As perverse as it sounds, I was actually thought the Redskins' defense looked decent yesterday. They did a much better job on the Patriots' deep game than most other teams have. But by dropping the middle linebackers deep into coverage, they left a lot of openings in the 5-15 yard range in the middle of the field for Faulk and Welker.
One espn.com writer referred to Belichick's resolve to "lay waste to the NFL," which I think pretty much describes what's going on. It's not that Belichick hates each individual coach or team, it's that he's clearly lost whatever piece of his psyche kept him a person. He is not a man any more, but a demon, requiring no sustenance - and emitting no substance - other than his own blind, unending, burning rage.
I'm a Pats fan, by the way. (Also: the Colts make me nervous.)
but what the hell did Joe Gibbs ever do that would make someone want to run up the score on him?
At some point, the Skins game became the best available practice for the Colts. I can certainly see the argument for keeping that machine running at top performance leading up to next Sunday. Gawd, that's going to be a fun game.
Yeah, those Colts suck. All a really great, dominating team has to do in an important game is get them down early by some big margin and they fold like a cheap lawn chair. 21-3 ought to do it I'd say..............
what the hell did Joe Gibbs ever do that would make someone want to run up the score on him?
Not have a reasonable defense, apparently. Quitting while you're ahead is for losers -- bring on the 100-point game!
"He is not a man any more, but a demon, requiring no sustenance - and emitting no substance - other than his own blind, unending, burning rage."
See, this is great, and this is why I hate/love/hate the Patriots. Fundamentally I hate them, of course (as all non-Pats fans are now required to do) but I love having an evil, unstoppable demonic force to root against. It just makes things more fun.
And on another note, I haven't heard much of the usual Sportswriter(tm) bitching about "parity" in the NFL this year, which is a good thing. The Pats help prove that the current FA/salary cap system works and allows both small-market teams AND evil demonic forces to thrive.
Steve duncan, that's exactly why the Pats have been "running up the score", Bill never wants that to happen again.
One should remember columns by the pair of assholes Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon last week opining that the Deadskins had a decent shot at winning on Sunday. Their chances were slim and none and slim was on the bus headed out of town by the second quarter. The dynamic duo are challenging Mike Lupica as the most incompetent sports writer in any newspaper in the country.
He's let his anger take over and gone to the dark side. It's Anakin Skywalker in the nursery all over again.
On the other hand, that whole stealing signs this was so completely bogus that I hope the Pats win every game for the next five years and destroy all interest in the NFL. Signes are by there very nature public. I'm not supposed to watch? Or rather, I can watch and note but not record? What a load of crap. I think I'm might be going over to the dark side. Where's my black cape.
I aknowldege that my last post had some typos. It doesn't mean I don't know the difference between "there" and "their."
I acknowledge that my last post had some typos. It doesn't mean I don't know the difference between "there" and "their."
Gol Darn it! How do you work this stupid computer thing anyway!
I find myself seized by a vague, nameless horror so mystical and well-nigh ineffable that I almost despair of putting it in a comprehensible form.
As Mike suggests, "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Patriots Foxborough wgah'nagl fhtagn" does the trick.
Meanwhile, some of us are patiently waiting for the Old Ones' cetacean followers to rise again from the depths ... which, given the draft picks Miami is likely to get after this season, may be sooner than one might anticipate.
Matt gets a bonus from The Atlantic for the number of posts in his comment section. CW gets a percentage too evidently.
I never understood the "don't run up the score" argument in pro sports. This isn't Bumpkin State vs. LSU, or Pop-Warner-Team-With-250-Lb-Fourth-Grader vs. Other-Little-Kids. We're talking about professional athletes. The way to not have the score run up on you is to play some defense and earn your salary.
The Pats are putting in the backups. But they're certainly not changing their strategy. Professionals play every play at full speed, whether they're up 40 or down 40.
The sign-stealing controversy was also pretty ludicrous; they got a fine, as they should have. Let's reserve the outrage for point-shaving and steroids, please.
And, of course, I'm a Pats fan.
The Pats are putting in the backups. But they're certainly not changing their strategy. Professionals play every play at full speed, whether they're up 40 or down 40.
Posted by cure | October 29, 2007 11:51 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cure, the Pats were up 38-0 near the end of the 3rd quarter. 5 miniutes into the 4th Brady was still playing. Two points: First, that does constitute running up the score. If you genuinely want to give the second string QB real game experience 38-0 is more than enough cushion to justify a substitution. Secondly, why are you risking injury to Brady with a 38 point lead in the 4th quarter?
I'd second the Jack Tatum message from above. For that matter, if I were a defensive coordinator and the Pats kept Brady in with a 30 point lead in the second half, I'd say "eff it" and blitz 7 or 8 guys every single down.
You're going to lose the game anyway, might as well try to get in as many shots on Brady as you can. And if there are a couple of late hits or personal fouls, well football's a rough game.
One espn.com writer referred to Belichick's resolve to "lay waste to the NFL," which I think pretty much describes what's going on. It's not that Belichick hates each individual coach or team, it's that he's clearly lost whatever piece of his psyche kept him a person. He is not a man any more, but a demon, requiring no sustenance - and emitting no substance - other than his own blind, unending, burning rage.
Exactly so, I am only surprised he didn't sow salt on Fedex field.
Yes, I'll agree with the Jack Tatum strategy. That's the real way to handle this.
My biggest Pats running up the score problem this year was actually last week. They had brought in Cassell, up 42-14 in the fourth quarter. He threw a pic that was returned for a touchdown. They then brought back in Brady, to make sure they won by a hugely dominant mark rather than just the very good 42-28, or let Cassell get some more snaps in.
Next week will be fun.
Yeah; I've been saying for a long time that Yglesias should make a move towards the Lovecraftian...
"I am only surprised he didn't sow salt on Fedex field."
Love it! Belichick as Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus Major. Or maybe Heinz Guderian.
I recall, however, that on 11/1/2004, the New England Wehrmacht brought a 21-game streak to Three Rivers Stadium...
I am not a Pats fan and I find their fans' minimization of a very serious and indefensible cheating incident to be pretty pathetic, but I am a little confused as to how the "right" way to respond to a team running up the score (thereby hurting the other team's feelings) is to attempt to physically injure their quarterback (thereby actually hurting someone.)
Isn't that, I don't know, really stupid?
APS
I don't think it was what Joe Gibbs had done to them as much as knowing that they'd have to compete with the Red Sox for attention this weekend. It's gotta suck being such a dominant team, yet not getting the full attention of your town until the season is halfway over.
If I wasn't worried that people might actually believe it, I would think it was hilarious that some people actually think responding to the offense of unethically continuing to play well by trying to end people's careers is OK. This is sort of like responding to a country having a higher GDP than you by nuking it.
Either way, it's wrong and pathetic. The Patriots are great. Stop resenting greatness so much you're willing to countenance intentional causing of serious injury. If you don't like it, root for the Colts, or the Dolphins, or the Steelers, or the Giants to knock them off, but root for them to do it straight up.
I would think that good liberals like Matthew would simply want to tax the successful teams like the Pats a high percentage of their points and redistribute those points to bad teams like the Dolphins or Rams. That's what libaralism is all about, right?
Seriously, though, I agree with those above who don't see the issue with professionals continuing to play hard until the end. This isn't Pop Warner league. We don't need a mercy rule.
Isn't that, I don't know, really stupid?
tell it to Matt Schaub, who has suffered two helmet-to-helmet blows the last two weeks when defenders took free shots at him. the 15-yard penalty is considered cheap for knocking the starting qb out.
If this were a different era, and you had guys like Jack Tatum or Dick Butkus or Jack Lambert or Ray Nitschke still around-- if Tom Brady walks onto that field at 38-0, he'd get carried back off.
Ah yes, the fine Jack Tatum who broke a defenseless Daryl Stingley's neck and paralyzed him for life in a meaningless exhibition game.
What happened to Stingley was a tragedy, but not a dirty play by Tatum. There's no such thing as a "meaningless" exhibition game when your owner is speculating that you're getting too old for the game as Al Davis had been that summer.
And while I generally subscribe to the theory that that it's the job of the defense to prevent the opponent from running up the score, going for it on fourth down with a 45 point lead in the fourth quarter is more than a little classless. If there's such a thing as karma, it's going to be a sight to see when it catches up with Belichik.
I don't think you go out to intentionally hurt a guy. There is a difference between the kind of cheap shot Buddy Ryan ordered on a kicker all those years ago and bringing seven on a blitz. Just like you don't throw up and in to hurt a guy, but to keep him from diving across the plate. You can get the point across without attempting to injure a guy. Though I admit sometimes in getting either point across sometimes guys will get injured.
During the pregame introductions at their first Super Bowl a few years ago, the Patriots chose not to take to the field individually when their names were called. Instead, they ran onto the field together to showcase their solidarity and team ethic.
Later, Rush Limbaugh described the Patriots entrance as "un-American" and "socialist".
Conclusion 1: Socialism works!
Conclusion 2: The Bengals took Limbaugh seriously.
It's not Lovecraft, it's Melville, from Moby Dick.
I had to search it out online myself. I, too, thought Matt was quoting something that I was already supposed to know, and I also thought it had a certain Lovecraftian sound to it. But the source turns out to be Herman, not H.P.!
I am a little confused as to how the "right" way to respond to a team running up the score (thereby hurting the other team's feelings) is to attempt to physically injure their quarterback (thereby actually hurting someone.) et al...
You know, the lack of reading comprehension or basic literacy around here can be truly astounding. I never said it was right or moral or whatever. I said that that's what would happen, in a different era, and would correct the behavior. Would I shed a tear for the Stetson man? No.
Ah yes, the fine Jack Tatum who broke a defenseless Daryl Stingley's neck and paralyzed him for life in a meaningless exhibition game.
Don't criticize Tatum, criticize football.
"...a very serious and indefensible cheating incident..."
How is stealing signs a searious cheating incident? Is some guy is tugging at his collar then wipping his nose on the sideline, why shouldn't I try to figure out what it means? What should I do, avert my eyes? That's ridiculous. And the fact that it was vidio tapped makes no diffference that I can see. It's OK to steal signs with a still camera or by pencil and paper, but not video: that's just too efficient.
That whole thing was a joke and people who profess outrage are just like the republicans who profess outrage at that Petraus ad or whateverr the latest Republican outrage is.
"I am only surprised he didn't sow salt on Fedex field."
Love it! Belichick as Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus Major.
Wrong Scipio--Africanus won the Second Punic War, but the alleged "sowing with salt" (no contemporaneous mention) would have occurred after Carthage was taken by siege in the Third Punic War by Scipio Amelianus
It's not Lovecraft, it's Melville, from Moby Dick.
Odd - I don't find it in the searchable online text at Princeton (searching for "nameless" or "horror"). Cite please?
That said, if ever somebody would be expected to own a meaningfully underlined copy of Moby Dick, that somebody would be Heather Duke ... er, I mean, H.P. Lovecraft.
Count me among those who aren't too fussed by the Patriots running up the score. If they want to "make a statement" by risking injury to their stars in order to humiliate the other team, that's their business. Instant Karma may yet get them. If not, there's nothing to be gained by whining.
As a Colts partisan, I admit to being somewhat awed by the Patriots' scorched earth campaign this year. That's a frighteningly good football team on both sides of the ball. But I like the way the Horseshoes are grinding out wins with a ball-control offense and solid defense, and I think they'll put up a good fight. I'm looking forward to seeing my guys defend their crown and their perfect record as home underdogs.
The Colts are still the champs until someone knocks 'em out. It's been a fun ride.
If the Redskins had defenders comparable to Tatum, Butkus, and Nitschke, they wouldn't have gotten their asses kicked.
I agree, Matt must have been citing Melville. Lovecraft would have said "a nameless, eldritch horror"
Why did she highlight "Eskimo"?
"And the fact that it was videotaped makes no difference that I can see. It's OK to steal signs with a still camera or by pencil and paper, but not video: that's just too efficient."
I just would like to add: the problem with camera was the fact that it was located on the field. Had they been taping a few yards back, in the stands, no rule would have been breached.
Freddie:
"If this were a different era, and you had guys like Jack Tatum or Dick Butkus or Jack Lambert or Ray Nitschke still around-- if Tom Brady walks onto that field at 38-0, he'd get carried back off."
Michael Wilbon repeated this, almost verbatim, on PTI last night. Either he, or someone who writes for him, reads Matt's comments.
rea:
Thanks for the correction. Like most laypersons, Roman names usually defeat me...
All of this stupid macho blather about "they should have taken Brady out" ignores the fact that the pitiful Redskins barely got a sniff of him the whole game. Their moronic game plan seemed to revolve around having their overrated safeties lay big hits on the Patriot receivers. All game long they were winding up for the big hit and MISSING and then failing to tackle properly.
As for poor, poor Joe Gibbs, does anyone remember the 42-10 Super Bowl win over the Broncos where Gibbs left Doug Williams in the game late and added a meaningless 4th quarter touchdown? That wasn't the only blowout of his career where that sort of thing happened, either.
Great teams will blow teams out. The difference with this Patriots team seems to be that they're able to do it consistently.
It's fun to watch. Spare me the pussified whining. This team reminds me of the 1986 Celtics, and there is no higher praise.
From Paul Zimmerman today, another example of why Saint Gibbs the SuperChristian gentleman has no valid complaint against the Patriots:
"In 1991 I was covering Atlanta-Washington in the playoffs. I talked to the Falcons' defensive end, Tim Green, and he said, "Ask Glanville about Joe Gibbs throwing the out and up in the fourth quarter when they were ahead, 42-17. He's been using that as a motivational tool all week."
The Redskins' out and up went for 64 yards and a touchdown to Art Monk in that November meeting and moved the score to 49-17. It ended up 56-17. So when I talked to Falcons coach Jerry Glanville that evening in his hotel suite I asked him about it. His eyes narrowed.
"That's just football," he said. Then he flashed rage.
"You came in here to stir things up, didn't you, didn't you?" he said. I told him I heard he'd been bothered by it.
"Get the hell out of here," he said, and next thing I knew my notebook and I were out in the hall."
Comments closed November 12, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
You're probably right, but then again, every couple of years there are teams that look unstoppable in Week 8 and then, things change. Last year the Chargers couldn't be stopped (the selfsame Patriots stopped them). In years past the Colts were unbeatable. The Vikings were crazy good a few years back (with the Patriots' wide receiver) and they're still looking for their first title. Nobody, not the 1972 Dolphins, not the 1984 49ers, nobody dominates for 16, 17, 18 weeks in a row.
Posted by Martin | October 29, 2007 9:56 AM