ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football Saints' Onsides Kick Dirty, Per Retard (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=223213)

Cave Johnson 02-10-2010 01:33 PM

Saints' Onsides Kick Dirty, Per Retard
 
Any contrarians willing to step up and defend this guy's position?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...was-dirty-pool

Ah, what could take away the joy of watching two great quarterbacks duel it out in a Super Bowl, having a snack at half-time anticipating seeing Peyton Manning and the Colts drive down field with the first second-half possession after making their usual adept adjustments during the break?

Dirty pool by Sean Payton, in the form of an onside kick to start the second half, could take away that joy.

When the Saints won the coin toss and elected to receive the ball to start the game, they made their choice. The other team gets to receive the ball to start the second half, but the Colts never received the ball. It was stolen from them on a cheap and dirty onside kick.

Although it was a legal play by existing NFL rules, there has always been an unwritten rule, a gentleman's rule that you do not attempt an onside kick to start a half.

At any other time on a kickoff, fine, but when you win the coin toss, you only get to receive the ball to start a half once. You don't get to break the rack in nine-ball 2 times in a row.

That would be greedy.

While many see Sean Payton's gamble as a tribute to his genius and will hail him for his aggressiveness, I see it as blemish on an otherwise respectable game between two evenly-matched teams.

To be a true champion, you play the game between the lines. There is no need to resort to cheap tricks. Let there be no mistake: the Saints outplayed the Colts and deserved to win for the most part.

I say for "the most part" because the game was in the balance until late in the fourth quarter. During Sean Payton's Monday morning news conference on NFL network, he appeared humble.

Perhaps he felt somewhere inside that his decision did not need to be made to win, but since it had been made, a lot of people will forever associate this game and him as a coach with that play.

As I see it, the play did not determine the ultimate outcome. It could be argued by some that it greatly affected the outcome.

If the Colts had received a regular kickoff, and they had scored a TD, it would have been 17-6 Colts rather than the 13-10 Saints that it did indeed become when the Saints drove the field.

That does not mean that the Colts would have won.

The Saints could have mounted a comeback. After all, they showed that they had the greater will to win, the greater hunger to lift the Lombardi trophy.

Was it really a gamble by Payton?

With the Colts adeptness at making half-time adjustments, it was looming pretty large that they were going to drive for a touchdown on their first second-half possession.

If the Colts were likely to score anyway, gambling on an onside kick that could have given the Colts the ball at the Saints own 40-yard line didn't really have that much downside anyway.

Finally, there is the question of who actually recovered the ball. The ball bounced around a few times and led to one of the ugliest and worst regulated scrums in NFL history.

The officials did very little to pull players off the pile. Small fights were breaking out at the sides without flags being thrown. The last we saw of the ball on replays it was between the legs of one prone Saints player and Hank Baskett was diving on top of it.

Is this what we want in a Super Bowl?

To throw scraps of food into the air of a courtyard and watch wild dogs go at it. The onside was not only a blemish on the game for being a cheap and dirty parlor trick. It was also a blemish because it was not a clean play. It was not a clean recovery of a live ball. Is that what we wish to see in the NFL on its greatest stage?

I think not.

My proposal then is that the NFL needs to make a rule change to prevent what happened in Sunday's Super Bowl between the Colts and the Saints from ever occurring again.

Starting next season, an onside kick may be attempted on any kickoff except for those starting a half. There's no point in having a coin toss if the team that wins it can decide, "Screw it! We are going to take the ball to start the second half too."

DaFace 02-10-2010 01:36 PM

http://www.famesters.com/files/image....thumbnail.jpg

seclark 02-10-2010 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 6522280)

^yep^
sec

BTAU 02-10-2010 01:38 PM

:rolleyes: Sounds like somebody is bitter about losing a chunk of change on the Colts.

sedated 02-10-2010 01:38 PM

sounds like a (12-year-old) Colts fan with sand in the vag.

|Zach| 02-10-2010 01:39 PM

This is a completely horseshit article.

What an Embarrassment for the writer.

Amnorix 02-10-2010 01:39 PM

ROFL

Red Brooklyn 02-10-2010 01:40 PM

I didn't read the whole article because I couldn't stomach the bullshit after the first couple of paragraphs. Good job Payton. Good job saints. **** off bleacherreport.com writer.

I do have one honest question though... to those of you who have been around the game longer than I...

is there really a sort of unwritten "gentleman's agreement" regarding opening half onside kicks? And do you ever think we'll see a rule change to outlaw them?

Cave Johnson 02-10-2010 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 6522296)
This is a completely horseshit article.

What an Embarrassment for the writer.

I'd be willing to bet the house that Steve Montana is a nom de plume.

Dartgod 02-10-2010 01:42 PM

ROFL

Stuff like this makes the Saints win all the more delicious.

B_Ambuehl 02-10-2010 01:43 PM

Cheap tricks:

Like your offense snapping the ball for the sole purpose of getting a penalty called on the defense cuz one of their guys 50 yards away is trying to get off the field but still has one foot inbounds when the ball is snapped?

Like intentionally using the officials as screens for your receivers when they go over the middle in the short passing game?

Like being such crybabies you alone sway the competition committee into changing the rules against receivers to better suit your offense?

Like being such a crybaby there are one set of rules for your quarterback and his BF buddy Brady, and a different set of rules for everybody else?

fuck the colts and any beta pillowbiter who wants to cry or make excuses for them. They're already the cheapest most rule manipulative team around and have been for ages.

siberian khatru 02-10-2010 01:44 PM

Gentleman's agreement my ass.





And no smart remarks about gentlemen agreeing on my ass, thankyouverymuch.

wild1 02-10-2010 01:44 PM

"unwritten, gentlemen's rule"?

Earthling 02-10-2010 01:45 PM

Of course he didn't mention Mannings penchant for hiking the ball quickly to catch 12 defenders on the field as a big lineman is waddeling off to the sidelines. Gentlemans agreement indeed...LMAOLMAO

The Bad Guy 02-10-2010 01:45 PM

It's like KnowShit wrote that.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.