Is TMQ Right? (1 Viewer)

I'll tell you what he is right about. This:

This independent Web site, noted by many readers including Valerie Rutledge of Aspen, Colo., maps out what parts of the country get which game. On Sunday only the Ohio Valley, Pacific Northwest, southern California, Nevada, Alaska and parts of Texas, North Carolina and Illinois saw Bolts at Bengals. Hawaii and most of Texas saw Jersey/B at New England, the farm belt saw Kansas City at Miami, New Orleans and Michigan's Upper Peninsula inexplicably saw Bills at Colts. Please, National Football League -- junk the secondary markets rule, which is a vestige of the days when television jammed things down viewers' throats and viewers were supposed to accept it without protest. The secondary markets rule is especially offensive because the NFL continues to grant a monopoly over its Sunday Ticket package -- a fabulous product that allows viewers to pay to see any game -- to DirecTV, the satellite provider. DirecTV is great, but since millions of American households cannot receive DirecTV, this monopoly effectively bars viewer choice, even to viewers who happily would pay extra.
Or is this a case of when Jim Mora said "You think you know what you are talking about, but you just...don't....know."

Check out this link, there are three Saints-Steelers references, but particularly the one about the punt in the 4th quarter. I suppose it may be easier to game manage from the comfort of your living room.

Yet we were on a scoring drive late in the 4th down by 7 and if not for a fumble probably score to tie the game. To me it seems he got lucky with his "game over" prediction. Firstly, there was 11 minutes to go so time wasn't a large factor. We were down by 14 not 28 and 11 minutes is time enough for 2 scoring drives (as we proved - there was time if we don't fumble). Personally I think he just says he writes that kinda stuff down because how is he following 5, 6, 7 games at once to follow the ebb and flow of every game like that? And for him to solely speak on "rules" he made up (Kick Early Go For It Late is one of them) he would have to be paying intense attention for certain circumstances. I think he goes back later to find them and only mentions when he's right. But that play had nothing to do with why we lost. If we don't fumble the ball, we're right there to score another TD, tie the game, and have the momentum going into overtime having scored 14 unanswered points.
He's nuts. The Saints were only down 7 with nearly 11 minutes left.

Punting was fine.
I actually kind of agree with him. I thought for sure that they were going to go for it right there. I mean, it was an either way kind of call. I can understand a punt, and I can understand going for it. However, I have gotten the vibe from Payton this season that he is more aggresive and will go it there.

But again, I think that a draw on 3 and 6(7) to Deuce wouldve been a good play. With an "obvious" pass play being what the Pitt def was looking for, Deuce shouldve been able to pick up either enough for the first or at worst get the Saints in a 4 and short situation. Then either a rollout pass with Brees or a swing pass to Bush shouldve been enough....but hey, I am not the coach and I dont second guess Payton. But I think either call was really ok in that situation.

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Top Bottom