- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: could the saints realistically be 13-3...
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:07 am to Sophandros
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:07 am to Sophandros
WHERE??
Where have I said ANYTHING but the fact that his missed FG cost us the win??
I never claimed that the loss was his fault.. NOT ONCE.
Its a fact that his missed FG prevented us from winning.
Where have I said ANYTHING but the fact that his missed FG cost us the win??
I never claimed that the loss was his fault.. NOT ONCE.
Its a fact that his missed FG prevented us from winning.
1
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:09 am to Catman88
You agreed with the poster who claimed that Hartley was the reason that we lost, thus I assumed that you felt the same way. Since you also refused to acknowledge that there were many other reasons unrelated to Hartley which led to the loss, I was led to believe that you blame the loss on Hartley. If you feel that Hartley was NOT the reason we lost the game, then all you have to say is that there were many other factors that led to the loss.
Pretty fricking simple, really.
Pretty fricking simple, really.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:09 am to Sophandros
quote:
Yes, I can read. You and others on this thread blame Hartley for the loss. Plain and simple
Well obviously you struggle at a basic reading level then.
Post exactly what I said that blamed the loss on him?
His missed FG is the reason that we didnt get the WIN.. NOT the reason we got the loss. Do you not understand that concept?
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:10 am to Sophandros
quote:
I assumed that you felt the same way. Since you also refused to acknowledge that there were many other reasons unrelated to Hartley
That is utter BS. Go back and read my first post. May want to read it a couple of times so it sinks in.
I'll even help you out..
quote:
No a missed VERY EASY FG did in fact prevent them from winning. There is no debate to that. Could they have won it in other ways? Yes
This post was edited on 12/13/10 at 10:13 am
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:14 am to Catman88
Then I stand corrected. You have no problem with saying that we lost the game because we gave up 200 yards rushing, turned the ball over 3 times, and allowed them to convert half their 3rd downs and two fourth downs. In fact, you agree with that so much that you tried to argue otherwise.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:19 am to Sophandros
I only stated that had they given up 90 yards rushing we still dont know really if they would have won. Would we had a much better chance? yes but we just dont know.
Thats the what ifs of football. We could look at the Zona game and say many what ifs.. But there is no disputable 'what if' in GH's missed FG. If he made it the Saints would have won. No debate.
And I really dont know who you are talking about that comes here every other year. I post on the Saints Rant as much as I post on Tiger Rant. Which isnt as much as I used to but certainly not every other year.
No FG kicker ever really does enough in a game to ever get blammed for a loss. But I do believe that they can be blamed for not getting the win when they have the chance. (ETA a realistic chance at that too)
Thats the what ifs of football. We could look at the Zona game and say many what ifs.. But there is no disputable 'what if' in GH's missed FG. If he made it the Saints would have won. No debate.
And I really dont know who you are talking about that comes here every other year. I post on the Saints Rant as much as I post on Tiger Rant. Which isnt as much as I used to but certainly not every other year.
No FG kicker ever really does enough in a game to ever get blammed for a loss. But I do believe that they can be blamed for not getting the win when they have the chance. (ETA a realistic chance at that too)
This post was edited on 12/13/10 at 10:22 am
Posted on 12/13/10 at 10:38 am to Catman88
quote:
No FG kicker ever really does enough in a game to ever get blammed for a loss. But I do believe that they can be blamed for not getting the win when they have the chance. (ETA a realistic chance at that too)
We agree on this. My bad for being a douche earlier.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:01 am to Sophandros
his missed field goal is not the problem actually, If we would have beat the lowly cards we would control our own destiny.. Losing to the cardinals is much worse than missing a high pressure kick against division opponent.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:02 am to Sophandros
quote:
You don't make sweeping changes to "correct" an anomaly.
Please use some logic in explaining how a team with 5or6 less wins should be the home team. Anamoly or not, this needs to be fixed. How does winning a shitty division warrant a home playoff game. Making the playoffs is the reward there. How does this not make sense to some people. Maddening.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:06 am to Catman88
All the arguing about the stupid kick.
Beat a FAR inferior Arizona and Cleveland and we are 12-1 and sitting pretty.
It's football. Stuff happend. Prior to the season I said 11-5 and we make the playoffs and I'll be happy. Right now, I'm happy. I'm not having visions of 8 Super Bowls in a row, I just want a consistent, good, playoff team. Of course I'd like to win mulitple Super Bowls, but to just have a good team for more than a one year blip is the first step to that.
Beat a FAR inferior Arizona and Cleveland and we are 12-1 and sitting pretty.
It's football. Stuff happend. Prior to the season I said 11-5 and we make the playoffs and I'll be happy. Right now, I'm happy. I'm not having visions of 8 Super Bowls in a row, I just want a consistent, good, playoff team. Of course I'd like to win mulitple Super Bowls, but to just have a good team for more than a one year blip is the first step to that.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:07 am to ShlikStyck
Yeah. Missing a FG under 30 yards in the NFL for the win is no big deal at all.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:16 am to cyogi
Like the Redskins kicker did vs. us last year?
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:18 am to IlikeyouBetty
quote:
You don't make sweeping changes to "correct" an anomaly.
Please use some logic in explaining how a team with 5or6 less wins should be the home team. Anamoly or not, this needs to be fixed. How does winning a shitty division warrant a home playoff game. Making the playoffs is the reward there. How does this not make sense to some people. Maddening.
I don't get the notion that changing nothing in the current set up, but giving the team with the best record in the playoffs home field in every game, somehow constitutes "sweeping changes."
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:24 am to Y.A. Tittle
It's a sweeping change because it renders the division format moot.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:27 am to Sophandros
quote:
It's a sweeping change because it renders the division format moot.
No it doesn't. If you win the division you can still make the playoffs over a team with a better record in another division who doesn't.
You just don't get the extra reward of getting a home playoff game against a much better team in another division.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:29 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
somehow constitutes "sweeping changes."
I disagree that this constitutes "sweeping changes". I'm not saying that division winners should not make playoffs with inferior records. That, to me, would be "sweeping changes". Why should a team with a better record not get homefield? And "because that's the way it's always been" is not a good answer.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:29 am to IlikeyouBetty
Yeah, I was agreeing with you.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:34 am to Y.A. Tittle
Sorry Y. A. reply to wrong guy.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:46 am to IlikeyouBetty
PEOPLE! If you don't have faith that the Saints can overcome road games in the playoffs then you are not fans.
Our away record is better than our d(h)ome record.
Our away record is better than our d(h)ome record.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 12:05 pm to Catman88
Saints fans complaining about being 12-4 13-3 and playoff seating. (LOL) damn we have come a long damn way in last few years.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News