Payton goes for 2 up 51-29. - New England Patriots Forums

T_Brady12 · 11-24-2008, 10:28 PM

The Saints just went for 2 when they were up 51-29. I want to hear what all the running up the score doofuses have to say about this.

Come on, let it out now. What do they have to say?

Cartwright · 11-25-2008, 07:14 AM

Kinda hard to "run up the score" by choosing to try for 2 versus 1. Just like the Colts did in '05, it made sense for N.O. to try to take it to a 3 TD+(3) 2 point conversion lead.

21 point lead is better than 20
24 point lead is better than 23

You are ignorant to suggest that either of these coaches were trying to rub anything in. If NO's was, Bress would have dropped back and thrown a THIRD 70 yard scoring strike

***KontradictioN*** · 11-25-2008, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cartwright

Kinda hard to "run up the score" by choosing to try for 2 versus 1. Just like the Colts did in '05, it made sense for N.O. to try to take it to a 3 TD+(3) 2 point conversion lead.

21 point lead is better than 20
24 point lead is better than 23

You are ignorant to suggest that either of these coaches were trying to rub anything in. If NO's was, Bress would have dropped back and thrown a THIRD 70 yard scoring strike

And you don't think the Pats would be crucified if they did this? Your blind hatred for this team is showing through. Please don't ever refer to yourself as impartial on this forum again.

Cartwright · 11-25-2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

And you don't think the Pats would be crucified if they did this? Your blind hatred for this team is showing through. Please don't ever refer to yourself as impartial on this forum again.

When were they crucified for going for 2 versus 1?

You guys have a hard time telling the differnce between 55-7 and 51-29

***KontradictioN*** · 11-25-2008, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cartwright

When were they crucified for going for 2 versus 1?

You guys have a hard time telling the differnce between 55-7 and 51-29

Because there is no difference. 51-29 is still very difficult to impossible to come back from in the final quarter. Is there anything else you want to cry about today? Tell me, why the hell are you even here? Are you obsessed or just bored?

Cartwright · 11-25-2008, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

Because there is no difference. 51-29 is still very difficult to impossible to come back from in the final quarter. Is there anything else you want to cry about today? Tell me, why the hell are you even here? Are you obsessed or just bored?

Why am I here? Why are you here? Difficult, but NOT impossible. Colts have erased 17 and 21 point deficits with under 5 minutes to play. Packers are a team that has the skill position players to do the same. Going for two would have given the Saints a 24 point lead. That would require either 4 scores (3 TD's and a FG), or three TD's + (3) 2 point conversions. I guarantee McCarthy wasn't put off by the decision, I doubt a Packer fan was put off by the decision, why would you be. If NE were in that spot, and decided to do the same, no one would question it. To suggest folks would care is actually pretty smug on your part. And I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between a 24 point lead and a 41 point lead, but believe me, there is a HUGE difference.

What exactly IS it that I am crying about?

***KontradictioN*** · 11-25-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cartwright

Why am I here? Why are you here? Difficult, but NOT impossible. Colts have erased 17 and 21 point deficits with under 5 minutes to play. Packers are a team that has the skill position players to do the same. Going for two would have given the Saints a 24 point lead. That would require either 4 scores (3 TD's and a FG), or three TD's + (3) 2 point conversions. I guarantee McCarthy wasn't put off by the decision, I doubt a Packer fan was put off by the decision, why would you be. If NE were in that spot, and decided to do the same, no one would question it. To suggest folks would care is actually pretty smug on your part. And I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between a 24 point lead and a 41 point lead, but believe me, there is a HUGE difference.

What exactly IS it that I am crying about?

Do you honestly think that even if the Packers offense would have scored 21 more points in the 4th quarter that their defense was anywhere near capable of stopping the Saints offense at that point? And you're using the Colts to make your point as well? What makes you think up to this point that Aaron Rodgers is anywhere near Peyton Manning's neighborhood? He's a good quarterback, don't get me wrong. But Manning is one of the all-time great quarterbacks in the game. He's also had more than enough big game experience to pull his team together all by himself. Rodgers is simply not the leader Manning is.

And smug? Nope. I'm just battle weary. If Bill Belichick even so much as farts the wrong way, it's the main storyline on ESPN. Then when you click the link, it's just thousands of people spewing vitriol at this team for any reason other than the fact are that people are just sick and tired of seeing us being successful. If that's why you're tired of us, fine. Just admit it and don't cry about every little thing that we do. That's just annoying to me.

Cartwright · 11-25-2008, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

Do you honestly think that even if the Packers offense would have scored 21 more points in the 4th quarter that their defense was anywhere near capable of stopping the Saints offense at that point? And you're using the Colts to make your point as well? What makes you think up to this point that Aaron Rodgers is anywhere near Peyton Manning's neighborhood? He's a good quarterback, don't get me wrong. But Manning is one of the all-time great quarterbacks in the game. He's also had more than enough big game experience to pull his team together all by himself. Rodgers is simply not the leader Manning is.

And smug? Nope. I'm just battle weary. If Bill Belichick even so much as farts the wrong way, it's the main storyline on ESPN. Then when you click the link, it's just thousands of people spewing vitriol at this team for any reason other than the fact are that people are just sick and tired of seeing us being successful. If that's why you're tired of us, fine. Just admit it and don't cry about every little thing that we do. That's just annoying to me.

You know, anything can happen in the NFL. So yeah, I would not have been surprised. All it takes is a quick score to change the momentum. GB has an opportunistic D as well. Moreso in their secondary, and Brees was done throwing for the night, but who knows.

IMO, BB and the organization brought all this on themselves, but that same ESPN you speak of is all over Cassell and how well he, and the team has performed. Tom Jackson has even massaged a little, so it ain't al that bad.

But, I understand your position, thanks for the honesty, good luck the rest of the way (I sure hope you don't win the Division-that would suck if an @NE scenario were presented), and finally, Happy Thanksgiving.

RunOut · 11-27-2008, 10:04 AM

From what people were saying at the game (I was there), Payton wanted Deuce to break two records: his 54-touchdown record, which he got, and the franchise record for points scored, which is what would have happened had Deuce gotten into the endzone on the 2 pt. try. It is quite possibly his last home game in the 'Dome as a Saint, and I think everyone wanted to send him off right. You wouldn't have believed the noise when he scored his touchdown and when he was introduced. Great game.

Cartwright · 12-14-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

Do you honestly think that even if the Packers offense would have scored 21 more points in the 4th quarter that their defense was anywhere near capable of stopping the Saints offense at that point? And you're using the Colts to make your point as well? What makes you think up to this point that Aaron Rodgers is anywhere near Peyton Manning's neighborhood? He's a good quarterback, don't get me wrong. But Manning is one of the all-time great quarterbacks in the game. He's also had more than enough big game experience to pull his team together all by himself. Rodgers is simply not the leader Manning is.

And smug? Nope. I'm just battle weary. If Bill Belichick even so much as farts the wrong way, it's the main storyline on ESPN. Then when you click the link, it's just thousands of people spewing vitriol at this team for any reason other than the fact are that people are just sick and tired of seeing us being successful. If that's why you're tired of us, fine. Just admit it and don't cry about every little thing that we do. That's just annoying to me.

OK, up by 29, less than 3 minutes to play, and BB throws the red flag.

Please defend..........