|
|
Chief X_Phackter 10-30-2007, 02:57 PM Ghetto, I think you're taking Beemen's comments out of context if you are somehow suggesting that he has no concept of human compassion based on this particular argument. Two men slammming into each, pointing fingers, and talking smack for 60 minutes doesn't seem compassionate to me anyway.
I'm of the opinion, that compassion and some of these other human virtues are either overshadowed or a non-issue in the realm of competative sports. They must recede to the backgroud to some extent in order to fully compete. I'm not saying that you don't understand this, it's just that discussion crosses some gray territory that's all, and the tendacy is to lump it all together.
Does Belichick lack humility and compassion? Not one of us here can answer that with 100% certainty because we don't know what he's like when he steps away from the arena of competition. Does he lack sportsmanship? Now that's a horse of a different color. And I think we're confusing sportsmanship with other human virtues. Sportsmanship, and correct me if I'm wrong, says that as long as I'm abiding by the rules, then everything is good.
He lacked sportsmanship and judgement when he was caught cheating with the cameras - unfair advantage. Running up the score? Hmmm...don't know, because their was no unfair advantage.
Other than they were clearly the superior team.
Beemnseven 10-30-2007, 03:00 PM I can't remember where I read this, but it might have been here.
Somebody said that what the Patriots did was akin to defeating a boxer, and then kicking him in the head when he's down on the mat. Why not do that? Because there are times when a REAL MAN stops caring about his own ego, to spare the embarrassment of others.
No, that analogy doesn't fit. Once the boxer is on the floor out cold from a punch, the boxing match is over. In football, the game isn't over until the final gun sounds and the clock reads 0:00.
The Patriots did not physically attack or try to maim any Redskin players on the field. Scoring touchdowns is perfectly within the rules of the game regardless of the time on the clock.
GhettoDogAllStars 10-30-2007, 03:00 PM Well it is also against the rules.
True. It's just an example (and a poor one at that).
What do you have to say about sacrificing your own ego to spare the embarrassment of others? Is it okay to embarrass others to boost your own ego?
Beemnseven 10-30-2007, 03:03 PM True. It's just an example (and a poor one at that).
What do you have to say about sacrificing your own ego to spare the embarrassment of others? Is it okay to embarrass others to boost your own ego?
You call it "sacrificing your own ego". I say it's players doing their job.
Why aren't you as upset with the Redskin defensive players who so clearly didn't do theirs?
GhettoDogAllStars 10-30-2007, 03:03 PM Ghetto, I think you're taking Beemen's comments out of context if you are somehow suggesting that he has no concept of human compassion based on this particular argument. Two men slammming into each, pointing fingers, and talking smack for 60 minutes doesn't seem compassionate to me anyway.
I'm of the opinion, that compassion and some of these other human virtues are either overshadowed or a non-issue in the realm of competative sports. They must recede to the backgroud to some extent in order to fully compete. I'm not saying that you don't understand this, it's just that discussion crosses some gray territory that's all, and the tendacy is to lump it all together.
Does Belichick lack humility and compassion? Not one of us here can answer that with 100% certainty because we don't know what he's like when he steps away from the arena of competition. Does he lack sportsmanship? Now that's a horse of a different color. And I think we're confusing sportsmanship with other human virtues. Sportsmanship, and correct me if I'm wrong, says that as long as I'm abiding by the rules, then everything is good.
He lacked sportsmanship and judgement when he was caught cheating with the cameras - unfair advantage. Running up the score? Hmmm...don't know, because their was no unfair advantage.
I hear what you're saying. I just don't think there is EVER a good reason to throw your principles out the window. Regardless of what you are trying to accomplish. Then again, I hate Machiavellian reasoning.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha 10-30-2007, 03:06 PM Wow. So many different ways to go here...
First, I disagree with your premise that Bill Belichick ran up the score. He didn't. He sent his backup quarterback out there when the game was well in hand, and Cassel still scored a touchdown. So it really wasn't Bill Belichick. It was Matt Cassel doing what he's supposed to do..
Yeah, because it wasn't obvious by midway through the 3rd quarter that we were going to lose. Did you really think we had any chance in hell to win the game after midway through the 3rd quarter? If so, pass the joint because I've been looking for some good s--t.
What purpose did he serve? Well, let's see... as a head coach, his job is to lead the team to victory. Not to show "humility" as some have argued. And you call it "needless". Didn't the Detroit Lions just set an NFL record by scoring 34 points in the fourth quarter this year against the Bears?
See my above response.
A player "risks injury" each time he steps foot on the field, no matter what the score is.
A football game is 60 minutes long. Nowhere is it written that you're supposed to stop scoring ( you call that 'running up the score' ) after a team is ahead by a certain number of points or after you're at a certain point in the game.
Unless you disagree with my points above, then Belichick needlessly exposed his players to injury. He did it for some other reason than to win.
GhettoDogAllStars 10-30-2007, 03:07 PM You call it "sacrificing your own ego". I say it's players doing their job.
Why aren't you as upset with the Redskin defensive players who so clearly didn't do theirs?
I say if your job requires you to embarrass others, then you:
1.) Don't care about other people's feelings.
OR
2.) Care about their feelings, but are willing to overlook that so that you can earn money.
Either way, it's wrong.
Also, I am upset with the Redskins. What gave you the impression that I wasn't? Just because I am upset with BB and the Pats doesn't mean I'm not upset with the Redskins. Don't distract from the real issue: humility.
TheBigD 10-30-2007, 03:10 PM No, that analogy doesn't fit. Once the boxer is on the floor out cold from a punch, the boxing match is over. In football, the game isn't over until the final gun sounds and the clock reads 0:00.
The Patriots did not physically attack or try to maim any Redskin players on the field. Scoring touchdowns is perfectly within the rules of the game regardless of the time on the clock.exactly what I said check my post (http://www.redskinswarpath.com/371235-post326.html), and for you Beemnseven, check my other post (http://www.redskinswarpath.com/371489-post364.html).
ArtMonkDrillz 10-30-2007, 03:11 PM Wow. So many different ways to go here...
First, I disagree with your premise that Bill Belichick ran up the score. He didn't. He sent his backup quarterback out there when the game was well in hand, and Cassel still scored a touchdown. So it really wasn't Bill Belichick. It was Matt Cassel doing what he's supposed to do. I really don't think anyone is saying that Matt Cassel scoring is running up the score. However, keeping Tom Brady, the clear cut league MVP to date, in late in the 4th quarter of a (at that point) 38-0 game and having him go for it on 4th down when they could have easily just kicked a field goal is running up the score.
Sure, the backup should try to score so they can prove what they're capable of, but Brady doesn't need to prove shit.
What purpose did he serve? Well, let's see... as a head coach, his job is to lead the team to victory. Not to show "humility" as some have argued. And you call it "needless". Didn't the Detroit Lions just set an NFL record by scoring 34 points in the fourth quarter this year against the Bears? You're right, a comeback is a concern. But, prior to them going for it on 4th we had fumbled the ball in three straight possessions. Also, they were averaging something like 7 yards a carry and there were only like 8 minutes left in the game so they could have easily run the clock out.
Also, if we did show some signs of life they could have just put brady back in like they did in Miami.
A player "risks injury" each time he steps foot on the field, no matter what the score is. Was it worth the injury risk to have Brady in there with a 38-0 lead in the 4th quarter?
A football game is 60 minutes long. Nowhere is it written that you're supposed to stop scoring ( you call that 'running up the score' ) after a team is ahead by a certain number of points or after you're at a certain point in the game. Like we've been saying, it's one of those unwritten rules that we really should have enforced late in he game with a huge blind side hit to brady after he threw that his meaningless last touchdown. Too bad we didn't.
altima98 10-30-2007, 03:13 PM Yes the Pats ran it up, so what. There either that damn good or we suck that bad. Crying about running up the score is for loosers, if you don't want them to run it up so do something about it. STOP THEM.
The last touch down was scored by there backup quarterback rushing in against the #3 defense... Stop Crying and DO SOMETHING ABOUT it....
|