Whining will be LdT's legacy

[spacecrime]

For this play and this game, I agree with LT.
It was a terrible call and if that was the PATS, we would all be pissed off

Yes, I feel for them, and if the Pats lost that way, you're right: I'd be complaining along with most of us here

BUT here's teh point you are missing: The Pats players would not be in front of cameras whining. I would be very disappointed if the Pats players whined like LdT does

If he hadn't told us, I wouldn't even realize that he was a very classy guy.

 

[neuronet]

I know I'd be pissed if it happened to us! Sure, the Dolts defense had two (additional) chances to win the game, and blew it. It was an honest mistake, the ref had a bad angle from behind the QB. Perhaps, though, he should have let the play go knowing it would be reviewed (by then the replay equipment was working).

It would have been cool if the ref got to the mic and was like...ummm, we request that CBS show the play from multiple angles so the review officials can watch it in the tower.

 

[PrairiePat]

Sorry, but I completely sympathize with the Chargers here, and that's coming from someone who despises the Chargers and LdT. Most NFL games are decided by a small handful of key plays - it's inexcusable for the refs to hand not 1, but *2* such plays to the Broncos.

 

[neuronet]

My favorite quote from the article:

To be sure, San Diego got a lousy break. Conspiracy theorists also cite the replay apparatus that malfunctioned in the first half. More to the point, after giving up 31 points in the first half, it's clear the Chargers miss Shawne Merriman. But so what? The Patriots, now 2-0, only lost the best quarterback in football and replaced him with a guy who hadn't started since high school.

Comparison with New England doesn't flatter San Diego. Goof on the Patriots and their coach all you want, but not for complaining. You don't hear them complain.

A couple of years ago, Tomlinson famously protested the manner in which the Patriots celebrated on the Qualcomm field after beating the favored Chargers in the playoffs. Perhaps he was expecting a chant of "2-4-6-8, who do we appreciate ..." Whatever the case, it sounded like whining then.

It sounds a little like whining now.

Until further notice, consider the Chargers severely marked down.

(For the record, I am sympathetic to them, but less so when LT0.0 whines).

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

In all fairness to the Bronco's, Shanahan gave them the opportunity to STOP them on the TD and the incredibly STUPID idea of going to two rather than for the tie.

I understand it was a bad call and I'd be pissed off too, but please - they still had two shots to stop the Bronco's and failed.

That's the bottom line: They Failed to stop the Bronco's from scoring - They can blame the ref's all they want, but the ref's don't play LB or SS.

Agree - Eddie Royal has had DBs for lunch in the end zone the past couple of weeks and he was the reason the Chargers lost like Royal was the reason the Raiders got burned in the secondary the previous week.

The Chargers secondary absolutely sucks in the red zone or shall I say end zone

2 consecutive losses by a WR overpowering the Chargers secondary or getting open enough to grab a TD pass twice and a 2pt conversion in the first 2 weeks is pathetic - SDs secondary coach needs some major work getting his players to cover guys within a 7 yard radius

 

[PromisedLand]

Best quote from the article:

A couple of years ago, Tomlinson famously protested the manner in which the Patriots celebrated on the Qualcomm field after beating the favored Chargers in the playoffs. Perhaps he was expecting a chant of "2-4-6-8, who do we appreciate ..." Whatever the case, it sounded like whining then.
It sounds a little like whining now.

The Chargers do have a right to be miffed, but referees are only human and to err is human. Tell me, Mr. LDT, that you never made a mistake. Tell me, Mr. Turner, ... well it's not even worth asking in your case.

As with the tuck rule call "against" the Raiders in the 2001 AFC Championship Game, this call did not decide the game.

In 2001, the call (which we of course now know was universally confirmed as correct by league officials and others in the know) only gave the Pats a second chance. The Raiders still had the chance to stop the drive - several times, and couldn't do it. The game was then tied and went to overtime, wherein the Raiders had another chance to prevent the Pats from scoring the winning points and failed to do so. Yet how many Raiders players, or fans blame their own defense for that loss?

It was the same Sunday with the Chargers. Denver still had to score a TD from 3rd and goal at the nine - a FG did them no good - and then they actually gave SD a more than fair chance (IMHO) to win in regulation by going for the 2 point conversion. Once again, the SD defense failed to stop them.
So stop your whining and go and make some plays on the field. Thems the breaks. They go for, and against, everyone, given enough time.

And one final point for Mr. Classy: the officials are accountable. As has been widely reported, the league keeps stats on every official, and it has a bearing not only on their assignment to playoff games, but even to their continued employment. I wish I could say the same about baseball umpires.

 

[Deus Irae]

As with the tuck rule call "against" the Raiders in the 2001 AFC Championship Game, this call did not decide the game.

The game was over if the right call was made. That was not the case in 2001.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

I personally thought it was funn y to see him standing on the sidelines...again...

At least he did it with a lot of class.

Standing? Last time I saw him on the sidelines he was sulking sitting down on the bench with his visored helmet and a jacket on in the AFCC game.

They even made an action figure to commemerate his most frequent position.

 

[lostjumper]

The Bronco's scored 39 points right? You can't whine about a call if you give up 39 points. Yes, 1 bad call resulted in the bronco's getting 6 points. The chargers still gave up 32 points all by themselves. If they had made stops earlier the call would have been a moot point.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

It was not "stupid" for Shannahan to go for 2. Most probably he felt that his best weapon vs SD was his O. Probably felt that his D, not that effective, was geting tired. Why let the pure chance of a coin flip strongly influence the OT winner? He's won SBs and has proven to be an elite NFL coach, FAR better than all but a very few.

I think you sort of have to just do the math. First, you have to take into account the possibility of failing on one-point kick after touchdown. I think those are made about .965 of the time. Then you have to take into account your chances of winning in overtime. I don't know what Shanahan thought those chances were. Let's say he thought it was 50/50. That means if you decide to kick there, your chances of winning are about 48.25 percent.

If you think you have a play that has a better than 48.25 percent chance of success on the two point conversion, it seems like the right call to me. If I remember correctly, Denver also had at least one time out left. So, you have to also add in the possibility of recovering an onside kick and getting a field goal. Admittedly, that's a low probability, but they still would have that option and it's worth something if they fail to convert, and it's part of the math (there is a corresponding possibility that you have to take into account on the other side, if you go for one point and miss, you can still onside kick, but this is a much smaller number).

Now, if an honest assessment would have said the chances of converting the two-point conversion was closer to 40 percent, and if Shanahan did it anyway because of his "gut," I have no use for a coach like that. No thanks -- the fact that it worked out notwithstanding.

 

[ScottieC]

It was not "stupid" for Shannahan to go for 2. Most probably he felt that his best weapon vs SD was his O. Probably felt that his D, not that effective, was geting tired. Why let the pure chance of a coin flip strongly influence the OT winner? He's won SBs and has proven to be an elite NFL coach, FAR better than all but a very few.

I hear ya PatsWickedPissah, but this is my thought process:

The Odds to win the Coin toss - 50/50
The Odds to convert the 2 point conversion - 40/60 against converting (or worse).

I understand that he's a good coach, that I'm not arguing. I don't agree with everything Bill does as well, we can talk about the Super Bowl - But I'd rather not. My point is this, if you can take the overtime and the better odds - Take it - Anything other than that is stupid and if they had not converted, no one would be talking about the botched call, everyone would be questioning Shananhan.

Fact is, he called it he got it and he's added another amazing story to his legacy.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Agreed

Besides, it's not like Houcili did the "Lights Out" dance after the Broncos won.

Did anyone catch the "non TD, TD" the Colts got? Face it, in this league both Denver and the Shetland ponies will get the calls. Can't leave yourself any room for error.

 

[Rob0729]

Count me on LT's side on this one. I usually think players who cry about calls just have a loser's mentality who can't accept another team beat them. But in this case, the Chargers would have won the game if the ref didn't blow the call. The ref admitted he made the wrong call too.

That said, the Chargers players should move on from it and focus on the Jets. What is done is done and no use dwelling on it. I can see it going either way on this. Either the Chargers will come together as a team and be totally focused to destroy the Jets or they will completely fall apart. Norv Turner might not be the head coach you want to have in this situation.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Bronco's scored 39 points right? You can't whine about a call if you give up 39 points. Yes, 1 bad call resulted in the bronco's getting 6 points. The chargers still gave up 32 points all by themselves. If they had made stops earlier the call would have been a moot point.

1.) The Chargers won the game on that play. Every other ridiculous "yeah but" by you or anyone else is meaningless. The game was over.

2.) That call was not the only call that the Chargers got hosed on. There was another play that also led to a touchdown for the Broncos, because the replay equipment wasn't working at the time. The Chargers got screwed over in the game.

 

[upstater1]

Kriegel's argument is moronic. The Chargers were 'tough enough' to win the game. They had the game won when they recovered Cutler's fumble. The official screwed them, and admitted he blew the call.

Well, I thought Kriegel was moronic because he claimed everyone saw that it was a fumble. The fact is, in real speed, it wasn't so very obvious. It was obvious only that the ball went backward, which is still possible with a pass if the ball leaves the QBs hands at the top of the arm motion arc. It wasn't obvious to the announcers until they saw the replay. so, yeah, a bad call. But, that happens.

The Chargers put themselves in that position.

 

[Wildo7]

I don't care what anyone says, Ed Hochuli is still the best ref in the NFL. He shouldn't have blown the play dead though, any incomplete pass that looks like it might be a fumble should be played out without a whistle and hen decided on after.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

...The Chargers defense allowed the Broncos to score a touchdown on 4th down, AND allowed a two-point conversion with the same play with the same receiver both times.

Reminds me of when Belichick punked the JEST defense twice with Mike Vrabel.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I agree with the essense of the math arguements. Obviously, Shanny felt that he had superior odds of making the 2 point conversion. Why? Simply based on the way his offense owned the SD D all afternoon including just making a 3rd and 8 into a TD. His offense was on a roll. In contrast, his D could not stop SD consistently and he most likely knew they were tiring, so why let fate expose his D in OT when he had objective evidence (the previous 59 minutes of this game) that his offense could rape and pillage SD?

This was not a Herm Edwards type making a 'gut feel' assessment.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

The mistake wasn't in refusing to give SD the fumble recovery.

The mistake was blowing the whistle in the first place. He should have let the play continue and then rule it an incomplete pass if that's what he thought it was. That way, when the review showed it was a fumble, the other team could have fairly gotten the fumble recovery.

 

[tombonneau]

Hate to say it, but I have to actually agree with Tomlinson here too. The game shouldn't be won on a blown call. But at least the referees were classy in blowing the call.

It wasn't won on a blown call; it was won when San Diego failed to successfully cover a rookie WR as he ran the same route on back-to-back plays.

Good teams overcome bad calls. Period.