Poor football losses...

[Demon]

Don't you just hate it when you're watching a football game, and your team loses, but the reason why they lost is evident even to you?

Sometimes a team loses because they weren't good enough, or because the other team was too good. But other times, it's because they're acting dumb or going with one wrong choice (such as using one quarterback when another of theirs might do more efficient for that particular game).

Does this annoy anyone else?

 

[bearsfwd]

Eh, I usually just blame it on the defense. Seeing as the Patriots defense never seems to be that great (compared to the defenses of the Ravens, Steelers, and other equally defensive teams), that's usually my first point of blame.

The only losses that really annoy me are losses against division rivals, most notably the Jets. However, this is only true for football.

-slightly off topic-

For ice hockey, the reason for losses tends to be much more prevalent than in football. More likely than not, you can easily tell when a team is having a defensive meltdown, or the offense is getting shut down big time.

Being a Washington Capitals fan, I know both fairly well. Because of how good their offense is, it's very easy to see when they are having trouble. And since they are very offensive inclined, their defense tends to be somewhat lackluster, which definitely shows a lot of times. I tend to not get so annoyed in these cases, since it's almost expected.

Referees also have a lot of influence in ice hockey. Since unlike football, where it seems like most referees call games the same way, ice hockey refs can go from being very lenient to very strict. A team could play one day and have a ref that will barely call anything. But then, the very next day, they could have a ref that will call anything and everything. Even then, on top of all that, you have the occasional games where it seems like the refs are calling everything against one team while the other team is getting away with murder. And with goals in ice hockey always being worth 1 point, unlike football, which has a ton of different ways to score (6 points, 3 points, 2 points, 1 point), the refs can really change things.

So basically, when the refs end up determining the game, that is by far the most annoying thing to me, as far as ice hockey is concerned.

-end slightly off-topic-

TL;DR - I don't get usually get too annoyed, but it also depends on the circumstances. If the losses are against teams I despise, then I tend to feel a little annoyed. If the team is playing a below average game (not where they just look bad, but where the look like they aren't even trying), that annoys me too.

 

[Demon]

Eh, I usually just blame it on the defense. Seeing as the Patriots defense never seems to be that great (compared to the defenses of the Ravens, Steelers, and other equally defensive teams), that's usually my first point of blame.

For now, I respectfully disagree with your opinion of the Patriots' defense. They seem to have a defensive alignment which works well against most teams, except for the Jets.

To me the Patriots' offense is to blame. Brady lately has been disappointing. Then they kicked out Moss and gave him to the Vikings.

 

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Arsenal 2-3 West Brom
raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaage.

[MODEDIT:] Explain more, please. ^^

 

[CassinoChips]

(such as using one quarterback when another of theirs might do more efficient for that particular game).

You don't yank quarterbacks in and out game by game. Unless you have a specific package/situation where you have game planned to use the backup QB. He's a backup for a reason, and the starter is the starter for a reason. Having two quarterbacks is the same thing as having no quarterback.

To the question in general, yeah, it's frustrating sometimes. But it depends on the reason. If it's because Peyton Manning throws for 350 yards, well.... he's kinda good, so I can understand that. If it's because no-name guy X had 3 interceptions, then you begin to wonder.

 

[Demon]

You don't yank quarterbacks in and out game by game. Unless you have a specific package/situation where you have game planned to use the backup QB. He's a backup for a reason, and the starter is the starter for a reason. Having two quarterbacks is the same thing as having no quarterback.

While this is usually true, there have been some interesting things happening this season.

The Eagles' secondary did surprisingly well.

And the Cardinals pushed their main... what's his name... back after a disappointing loss to San Diego, and then they won against the Saints.

Another worthy but less notable mention is Detroit's one win this year.

 

[bearsfwd]

For now, I respectfully disagree with your opinion of the Patriots' defense. They seem to have a defensive alignment which works well against most teams, except for the Jets.

No, I definitely agree about the defense this year, they are much improved. But the past few years, it has been sorta leaky. Once Bruschi and Harrison retired, they haven't really been the same.