What defines a true "choke job"?
by Vacafan on Apr 8, 2008 3:46 PM PDT
Email
PrintAfter watching Memphis completely fall apart in the last two minutes of last night's NCAA championship game, several of us got into a water cooler discussion today about what it means to truly "choke." Too often, that word is thrown out there simply because someone is mad a game or series of games ends differently than they'd hoped. However, when a team and/or athlete loses a game or series they were favored to win, this doesn't necessarily qualify as a choke job. In other words, the Patriots did not choke in the Super Bowl this year -- they were simply beaten that day by a team that outplayed them ... had they played again, the result might very well have been different, but alas ....
Anyway, I was wondering if you all had an opinion as what qualified as "choking" ... we decided to today on one rule -- for it to be a true choke job, one team had to have the game or series completely in hand and the only way to lose would be a colossal blunder or series of blunders that allowed the other team to come back. (By the way, not to take anything away from Kansas, but we all agreed that last night's game qualified as a monumental choke job by Memphis ... and it wasn't just the missed free throws. The inbounds pass stolen by Kansas and converted into a 3; Dorsey's unbelievably boneheaded foul; and the cherry on top -- not fouling Kansas before they could get off a desperation 3 at the end of regulation.)
Do you think that any of the A's early 00's playoff failures qualify?? Hard to say ... comments???
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Choke
When a team has something, a game, a series, etc... all but wrapped up, where even if they played poorly, they would win, and still manage to fail and lose, that is a choke.
2004 Yankees was a perfect example. The 2007 Indians was another.
The A's in every playoff series in the 2000's except 06 as well.
I thought about "0-9" a lot ...
I don't think our loss to NY in 2000 counts as a choke ... we were young and inexperienced ... hard to get on our boys too much for that one .... now '01 and '03 you can certainly make a case for (!) Up 2-0 in each case and a huge blunder(s) in each Game 3 that may have prevented us from sweeping.
Although I think I was the most mad in '02 vs. Minnesota (because I think we were so much better than the Twins that year), I don't know if I can call that a choke, either. We were down 0-1, and only up 2-1 before we lost ... I don't know -- it sucked either way, that's for sure.
What do you think about '88 and '90??
VacaAsFan
Baseball does not actually lend itself to true chokes
Why? Because in every game, until the final out is recorded, a team has a chance to win that game. Sure, the Giants coughing up a 5-0 lead to the Angels in 2002 was horrible-- and required some remarkably bad pitching to happen-- but was it a choke?
I tend to think of it as something where you actively gave the game away in a situation in which uber-conservative play would have gotten you the win. Just being ahead, and then falling behind, isn't a choke. It has to involve some kind of blunder. And you can't really play ultra-conservative in baseball. Sooner or later, you have to throw a pitch in the strike zone.
The Sharks series against the Red Wings last season, in which they should have gone up 3-1 and instead dropped three in a row with horrible plays starting with a tying goal in the final seconds of Game 4, was a choke.
You really can't say that Cleveland choked in last year's ALCS. Just being up 3-1 doesn't mean you've won the series. That's why it's best-of-seven. And Boston convincingly pounded them in each of the remaining three games.
The 2003 A's were clearly a choke, given how that series unfolded and particularly how it ended. I guess the Jeremy Giambi play makes the 01 team something of a choke too. I don't see the argument for the other three teams. They just lost their respective series.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
'86 Game 6?
Did Boston gag or did the Mets just refuse to die?
I guess what I am saying is that when a team "blows" a late lead, there is (sometimes) more focus on that, than the comeback.
Did the Yankees choke in '04 or did the Sox build on the momentum of one comback win in Game 4 to pull the ultimate stunner? Remember those two teams had battled to seven games in '03 and were pretty evenly matched.
I'm here to talk about the past.
86 was a choke
First the inexplicable managerial decision to insert Buckner... then the wild pitch that tied the game... and finally, of course, the Buckner error itself. You've got blunders both physical and mental there.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Yeah
I guess when the tying run scores on a wild pitch and the winning run scores on Buckner's blunder, that pretty much defines choke, doesn't it? Still, the Mets did string three hits in a row after getting down to their last out.
I'm here to talk about the past.
Well,
in every case, there's gonna be a team that "comes back" to win ... however, like PT says, the losing team can "help" by committing blunders ... and these often happen because a team or athlete begins to tighten up a bit. You know, when you can't squeeze a cat hair out of your ... well, you know what I mean.
When a team goes up 3-0 and then loses one game, then another, then another ... I think the pressure begins to mount BIG time. This can completely change how a team plays ... and I think it did with the A's in '01 and '03, and the Yankees in '04. When you get so scared that it effects the way you play?? You've entered Chokeland.
VacaAsFan
Houston Street Opening Day
When you give up a HR to Brandon Moss that is a choke job. Had it been Manny, Ortiz, or Tek, you expect something like that, but when it's some AAA temporary call up that beats you, thats a choke job.
Choke job
Any loss that can be blamed on A-Rod by the NY media and fans.
"Evidently, a large number of people said, 'We really need more vermin at the ballpark, Artie.'" - Nick (AN), 10/7/07
Choke job
Any loss that can be blamed on A-Rod when talked about by the NY media and fans.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Requires a colossel, staggering, epic collapse
The choke tag really has to be exclusive and rare to be meaningful--after a fantastic game of ebbs and runs and very high quality play on both sides (especially D), Memphis did not choke. Now, had Kansas gagged up the 28 point lead against the Heels in the semis, that woulda been a choke job.
A single baseball game is hardly ever a choke....it takes the sort of resounding fall only a '64 Phillies can attain. That's what made last year's Mets collapse so enjoyable...they went the whole way to earn the choke label.
There is an A in Whimsy.
You of all people (as a Tar Heel fan) should know that
a single, horrible, moment can be a choke for the ages (even if the game doesn't really turn on it.)
The A's colors are green and gold.
I would call the Webber thing
a "blunder" more than a "choke," meself. Grady Little leaving Pedro in too long was a blunder. The Niners calling a blitz and giving up a game-winning touchdown to Staubach in the 1972 (?) NFC championship was a blunder.
Memphis clearly choked, though. They had to make multiple bad plays to even get into the situation of Kansas possibly coming back-- a terrible offensive possession, a steal and four missed free throws (and the way in which they missed them was as indicative of choking as the actual act of missing them). And then they totally collapsed in overtime, although that might have been fatigue as much as psychic shock.
Definitely one of the epic chokes of all time.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I disagree FreeSeat
Memphis was up 9 with 2:12 to go ... up 7 with 1:30 I believe ... 4 outta 5 free throws missed in the final minute and change .... Dorsey's foul was huge ... not fouling on Kansas' last possession when the worst that could happen is Memphis up one ..with the ball .. and seconds left ...
How is a 9 point lead with 2 minutes to go not "huge"? No, I've watched an awful lot of basketball in my day, and that collapse was about as "epic" as it gets ... and I wanted Kansas to win ...
VacaAsFan
The definition is pretty simple:
Any time I'm disappointed.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
