The Nation's Tears: Volume II

Status
Not open for further replies.

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,027
The mic'd up is just awesome.

Edelman telling Brady "Let's go win it for your mom."
Hightower yelling "GO HOGAN!! HOLD ONTO THE BALL MOTHERFUCKER!!"
Edelman yelling to get off the field, they gotta review TD and Belichick having to tell him they already did.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,027
I generally like Brandon Marshall but he's covering himself in stupid on Inside the NFL.

"Why would you run it there? A 41 yard FG? That's not easy."
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,502
306, row 14
Edelman was great. "It's not over! Get the fuck off the field!" Then Bill comes over and hugs him and Bill casually is like, "yeah they reviewed it, it's over."
 

mulluysavage

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
660
A dynasty (UK /ˈdɪnəsti/, US /ˈdaɪnəsti/) is a sequence of rulers from the same family,[1]


Jonathan Kraft + Josh + Jimmy or Jacoby
 

Bergs

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
16,673
Edelman was great. "It's not over! Get the fuck off the field!" Then Bill comes over and hugs him and Bill casually is like, "yeah they reviewed it, it's over."
"For your mom. For your mom, bro"...it got awfully dusty in here.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
54,187
San Andreas Fault
Edelman was great. "It's not over! Get the fuck off the field!" Then Bill comes over and hugs him and Bill casually is like, "yeah they reviewed it, it's over."
Brady was the guy telling everybody that it had to be reviewed. Then JE picked up on it and started bossing people around about it. He sounds like a little brother to Tom, waiting for what Tom has to say. After the AFCCG you heard JE ask Tom "are you happy?
I'm not happy yet." Tom said "I"m happy", then JE said "I'm happy". Little twerp, but he's great.
 

Stevie1der

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2009
1,044
Morrisville, NC
Brady was the guy telling everybody that it had to be reviewed. Then JE picked up on it and started bossing people around about it. He sounds like a little brother to Tom, waiting for what Tom has to say. After the AFCCG you heard JE ask Tom "are you happy?
I'm not happy yet." Tom said "I"m happy", then JE said "I'm happy". Little twerp, but he's great.
Yeah, I love the guy unconditionally, but he always sounds a little too aware that he's mic'd up.
 

Otis Foster

rex ryan's podiatrist
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
1,613
Steelers had years of unmitigated misery, pre-Noll/Bradshaw. Ted Marchibroda q/backed them for a while. They drafted Johnny Lattner (ND), he ripped up his knee. They cut Unitas. They were the last team to drop the single wing. They had guys like Sid Watson (Northeastern) and George Sulima (BU) on the roster. The Bell family deserves all the credit in the world for sticking with it.

Digression: I began watching NFL in roughly 1947, post Boston Yanks and long before the AFL. First, it was the old Cleveland Browns. Then, the Giants with the insufferable Chris Schenkel in the booth. I'd hung around lots of NYC kids growing up, and it was constant bragging and chest pounding. Chris made it worse. Then, out of nowhere, a bedraggled Steeler team came in and pounded the Giants 63-7, with the late Jim Finks at QB. IIRC, towards the end of that game, Schenkel sounded like he had a peach-pit caught in his larynx. I reveled in NY misery. From that point on, till the AFL and the Pats surfaced, the Steelers were my team. I still provide secondary support for them, except when playing NEP.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,070
One of the best things about the Seahawks reaction videos from 49 is that almost none of the fans in those videos wore a uniform that predated the new uniforms. All current Wilson/Lynch/Chancellor/Sherman jerseys. I think I remember seeing one woman wearing the mid-aughts jersey for a punter.

This time, even less variety. The one black throwback was still a Devonta Freeman jersey. Just Ryan/Freeman/Jones jerseys. I mean, no one could dust off an old Jamaal Anderson jersey for the occasion?
Or a Harmon Wages prison jumpsuit.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,502
306, row 14
I'd have to look at it a little closer, but I think there is a case to be made that the Amendola 2-point conversion was a lateral/backward pass making any OPI claims moot. Brady was under center, Amendola in motion behind the line of scrimmage. Brady took the snap and threw it, no drop back. It's close.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
12,025
Silver Spring, MD
I'd have to look at it a little closer, but I think there is a case to be made that the Amendola 2-point conversion was a lateral/backward pass making any OPI claims moot. Brady was under center, Amendola in motion behind the line of scrimmage. Brady took the snap and threw it, no drop back. It's close.
The photo and video in the link Theo sent above show it clearly a forward pass.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,672
Quincy, MA
Apologies if this has been posted up thread.

Horrors, the zebras missed two calls in the Pats favor. That NEVER happens.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/several-key-penalties-by-the-patriots-should-have-been-called-late-in-super-bowl-li/
Headline reads several.. article admits it is nitpicking and discusses two. And doesn't bother mentioning that the Pats don't need a 2 point conversion there if the refs hadn't blown the call on the Falcon's PAT earlier.

At least there wasn't a bunch of snark in it as well.
 

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
6,211
Florida/Montana
I've watched Inside the NFL recap three times.
I sure hope Amendola comes back to this team next year. He made so many key catches.
The way Jules plays and gets hit... Danny is great insurance and he looks healthy and quick.
Nink is done. He got beat repeatedly.
 

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
6,211
Florida/Montana
Headline reads several.. article admits it is nitpicking and discusses two. And doesn't bother mentioning that the Pats don't need a 2 point conversion there if the refs hadn't blown the call on the Falcon's PAT earlier.
The refs have to get that call right or it needs to be reviewable. PAT's are important. If TD's are reviewable why not the entire PAT sequence.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
7,832
Needham, MA
Apologies if this has been posted up thread.

Horrors, the zebras missed two calls in the Pats favor. That NEVER happens.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/several-key-penalties-by-the-patriots-should-have-been-called-late-in-super-bowl-li/
Unless you are going to go through the whole game and nitpick calls missed in favor of each team, this is useless cherry-picking.

Even the two calls they point out are hardly proof of anything. On the 2 point conversion it would have offset with the offsides and the Pats get another try. The chop block would have been a setback but the Falcons defense was reeling and it's not hard to imagine them overcoming that and scoring.

Hell in two of Brady's signature 4th quarter Super Bowl drives (Panthers and Seahawks) they overcame offensive pass interference penalties that seemed backbreaking when they happened.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
21,439
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
I generally like Brandon Marshall but he's covering himself in stupid on Inside the NFL.

"Why would you run it there? A 41 yard FG? That's not easy."
People on both sides are being too black and white on this.

Atlanta could not, and should not have, gone completely away from their style just to nurse a lead. if that failed, they would have ripped for being something they werent. That being said, they needed to sprinkle a BIT more running in there. And Marshall is just plain wrong in that instance. You can run, or you can run quick, get the ball out passes that are extensions of the run game. But you cannot 5 step drop a take a sack there. Just cant.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,507
It's not even clear the author is interpreting the OPI rule correctly. Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3(e)(2) of the NFL rulebook notes the following:

Acts that do not occur more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage are not pass interference, but could be offensive or defensive holding
This is followed by Article 4, which the author quotes:

Blocking more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage by an offensive player prior to a pass being thrown is offensive pass interference.

Note: It is also pass interference by the offense to block a defender beyond the line while the pass is in the air, if the block occurs in the vicinity of the player to whom the pass is thrown...
The rule book seems contradictory. But it does not seem reasonable for a blocker to suddenly stop blocking 1 yard downfield when the ball is in the air. More likely, the intention of the 2nd note could be to prevent a blocker coming in and taking out a defensive player shadowing the intended receiver while the ball is in the air, even if the receiver is in the backfield (hence the "in the vicinity" quote). But that didn't happen here.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
25,651
Saskatoon Canada
This is what annoys me about all this stuff. As a kid and teen I read every sports book I could find. I read all the ghost written autobiographies, histories, etc. The guy that got the ege wanted to win was admitred, and the story was once the game was over, and you got away with it that was that. The Celtics turning up the heat in the visiting locker room, Whitey Ford scuffing balls, Nettles corked bat, Bucky Dents corked bat, the dodgers ground crew making sure Maury Wills bunts stayed fair, th giants wetting down the basepath between 1st and 2nd to stop Maury, they Yankees building a park with a short RF, the Red Sox putting the bullpens in RF so Ted would have a shorter fence, the Blue Jays camera in the CF restaurant looking at signs, the Twins turning of the fans when the visitors hit, Villinova being coked to the gills in th greatest upset ever, etc.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
Agreed
They originally were going with the one yard thing pointing out that the guy Hogan is blocking is two yards downfield but then when about 1000 people pointed out that Hogan was essentially within a yard of the LoS they changed the argument to the vicinity notation.
I've never seen that called but I assume it is what you are referring to and not guys several yards away. The term vicinity is obviously very imprecise but as a ref I assume it is one of those "I know it when I see it" things.
The fact that no one other than these two guys is complaining(that I've seen anyway) on such a critical call would tell you all you need to know.

-This is in reply to lexrageorge obviously.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,106
Unless you are going to go through the whole game and nitpick calls missed in favor of each team, this is useless cherry-picking.

Even the two calls they point out are hardly proof of anything. On the 2 point conversion it would have offset with the offsides and the Pats get another try. The chop block would have been a setback but the Falcons defense was reeling and it's not hard to imagine them overcoming that and scoring.

Hell in two of Brady's signature 4th quarter Super Bowl drives (Panthers and Seahawks) they overcame offensive pass interference penalties that seemed backbreaking when they happened.
Agreed. The really egregious part of the Prisco/Brinson article is that they are making a big deal of a play that is not clearly a violation and where Atlanta was offsides so worst-case is Pats get another shot at it. And they are doing this without referencing the blown PAT call that Pereira (and essentially everyone else) agrees gave Atlanta a free point which is why Pats needed to go for two.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,851
Philadelphia
It's not even clear the author is interpreting the OPI rule correctly. Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3(e)(2) of the NFL rulebook notes the following:

This is followed by Article 4, which the author quotes:

The rule book seems contradictory. But it does not seem reasonable for a blocker to suddenly stop blocking 1 yard downfield when the ball is in the air. More likely, the intention of the 2nd note could be to prevent a blocker coming in and taking out a defensive player shadowing the intended receiver while the ball is in the air, even if the receiver is in the backfield (hence the "in the vicinity" quote). But that didn't happen here.
Yup, I think this is one of those areas where they just let anything go that is close to the LoS. I don't think I've ever seen this called on a WR screen where the blocking was occurring a yard and a half downfield instead of a yard.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,027
Even the two calls they point out are hardly proof of anything. On the 2 point conversion it would have offset with the offsides and the Pats get another try.
On the conversion it does say that they'd get a retry, but says something like "The Falcons would be able to catch their breath and design a play..." Uh, they couldn't do that the entire 4th quarter or OT, so there's no reason to believe they'd be able to do it now.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,027
People on both sides are being too black and white on this.

Atlanta could not, and should not have, gone completely away from their style just to nurse a lead.
Yes...but I think there's a difference between "nursing a lead" which to me is more of something you would do up, say, 25 in the 3rd quarter, and something you do with 3 minutes left, in FG range, where a FG puts the game likely out of reach. I don't think running the ball 3 times there is going away from your style. It's winning the game.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
25,651
Saskatoon Canada
That is the conundrum that coaches face. Do I pull the pitcher? Do I milk the clock or do I strike fast and score? Ig you go against the grain, you can catch the team off guard, and make a big play. Dave Roberts gets thrown out everybody complains about Francona, He had the guts and it worked out.

I expect Shanahan feels had his guy executed and blocked Hightower they pick up a gain to put the game away. Even on the holding play, the pass probably got them back to FG range without the penalty. Josh or Bill called a risky fade from the 2, that almost backfired. At the NFL level coaches have plays that they believe in that have to do with the situation, personal etc. Shanahan put the ball in his MVP's hands, because that got him there. Not saying it was the correct move, but I can understand why he did it.

To me the real thing is to see how he learns from it. He has prided himself on his aggressive play calling, will he have the talent to use that style in the future. IMHO what makes Belicek great is the willingness to be almost style free, to change to the opponent. Jesse Palmer was on TSN post game and he said he had BB as the best coach ever before 49 for that reason. He said Chuck Knoll won the same way each time. Bill Walsh was basically the same offence same QB, all through his run. BB does not even do the same stuff week to week.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
21,439
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
Yes...but I think there's a difference between "nursing a lead" which to me is more of something you would do up, say, 25 in the 3rd quarter, and something you do with 3 minutes left, in FG range, where a FG puts the game likely out of reach. I don't think running the ball 3 times there is going away from your style. It's winning the game.
I agree. In that last setup, they needed to be running and throwing safe, quick screen type passes that eliminated the sack risk.

When they were up 25, they needed to be running the ball (and clock) more too. But here is where I give them some leeway.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
21,439
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
That is the conundrum that coaches face. Do I pull the pitcher? Do I milk the clock or do I strike fast and score? Ig you go against the grain, you can catch the team off guard, and make a big play. Dave Roberts gets thrown out everybody complains about Francona, He had the guts and it worked out.

I expect Shanahan feels had his guy executed and blocked Hightower they pick up a gain to put the game away. Even on the holding play, the pass probably got them back to FG range without the penalty. Josh or Bill called a risky fade from the 2, that almost backfired. At the NFL level coaches have plays that they believe in that have to do with the situation, personal etc. Shanahan put the ball in his MVP's hands, because that got him there. Not saying it was the correct move, but I can understand why he did it.

To me the real thing is to see how he learns from it. He has prided himself on his aggressive play calling, will he have the talent to use that style in the future. IMHO what makes Belicek great is the willingness to be almost style free, to change to the opponent. Jesse Palmer was on TSN post game and he said he had BB as the best coach ever before 49 for that reason. He said Chuck Knoll won the same way each time. Bill Walsh was basically the same offence same QB, all through his run. BB does not even do the same stuff week to week.
I mean, watching inside the NFL last night, if Freeman gets even a small piece of Hightower, and buys Ryan another half second, there is a very good chance he connects on a long bomb, possibly scoring a TD. There was single coverage deep and he (gabriel?) had beaten his man
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
I'm enjoying the Shanahan roasting because (a) I do think it was a mistake not to run three times and kick a FG, (b) Shanahans look like aliens to me and (c) I like schadenfredue.

But I think it's a little much. Coaches make hundreds of decisions a game and we are all so outcome oriented.

If Russell Wilson connects with 83, it was curious that he threw, but regardless, they won. How many passes get picked off at the one, anyway?

If Brady does not connect with Amendola on 4th and 3, that they tried a high degree of difficulty trick play on the prior down gets examined more.

If the Seahawks score, that BB did not call a TO at around 50 seconds is declared a gaffe by most fans and mediots.

If Beasley picks off that pass, the play call is put under a huge microscope.

If the Pats connect on the 4th and 3 against the Colts, BB is declared a Big Balled Genius.

Now, sure, you can answer that it was the wrong call or non-call, with a good result, in each case. But the point remains that given the multitude of decisions a coach makes in each case, it's a bit much to excoriate them when better or different execution would have relegated the decision to a footnote.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
Yes...but I think there's a difference between "nursing a lead" which to me is more of something you would do up, say, 25 in the 3rd quarter, and something you do with 3 minutes left, in FG range, where a FG puts the game likely out of reach. I don't think running the ball 3 times there is going away from your style. It's winning the game.
There are examples of teams doing exactly this, missing/blocking the fieldgoal, and the coach getting pilloried. There are examples of teams doing this, the runningback fumbling, and the coach getting pilloried. There are examples of teams going up two scores with less than 4 minutes left and still losing - the coach gets pilloried. There are examples of teams in this sort of situation scoring touchdowns and putting the game away.

The fact is, that for most people, it was a bad decision mostly because it didn't work. It's all post-hoc

If they convert for a first down there, they eat all the patriots time outs, take another minute+ off the clock, and the game is effectively over. If they kick the field goal, the Patriots are down 11, with probably 3 minutes left and 2 timeouts. It took them 2:00 to score a TD in real life, with them allowing the clock to run several times. Kicking the FG just forces the Patriots to recover an onside kick, and judging how the game was going, they probably win if they recover it. If the Patriots are really really efficient, there's a chance they can get the ball even if they don't recover.

I have no problem with Shanahan thinking that his best-in-football offense had a better chance of converting for a first down than his bad STs had of stopping an onside kick. We know his defense wasn't stopping shit at that point.

EDIT:

It was an issue of execution - even with the shitshow on 2nd down - if the holding on 3rd doesn't get called, they're still probably able to kick a field goal and go up 11. Pretty much everything had to go wrong, and it did.
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
9,078
I can't tell if that is a deflection of the question or an answer to the question.
I prefer the latter.

INT. BELICHICK HOUSEHOLD, 2005. STEVE BELICHICK SITS ON COUCH. BILL BELICHICK WALKS IN.

STEVE BELICHICK: Hey Dad, can I borrow the car so I can go see Revenge of the Sith with some friends?

BILL BELICHICK: I’m just here to talk about football right now.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
3,410
In the simulacrum
The first play is never called a foul in today's NFL. The blocks were right at one yard, that's too close to nitpick.

The second play is very clearly a foul.
Is this all they've got? Really. As mentioned, the first play never, ever is getting called. Come on. And while the second play is a foul, it is sort of astonishing that there are not another 20 plays at this level.
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
9,078
Agreed about the first play, but I was pretty surprised they didn't call a chop block as the second play was happening live. You see that called pretty often in the NFL these days when it happens, and players are well-trained to avoid that sort of penalty.
 

Doug Beerabelli

Killer Threads
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I mean, watching inside the NFL last night, if Freeman gets even a small piece of Hightower, and buys Ryan another half second, there is a very good chance he connects on a long bomb, possibly scoring a TD. There was single coverage deep and he (gabriel?) had beaten his man
I don't know if this was even a thought, but Freeman looked wide open after missing the block. If Ryan sees that and dinks a pass over Hightower's head to Freeman, it's off to the races.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Gerry Austin speculated that refs are usually looking for a chop block in scrums and when players are engaged. That play happened quickly in the open field, Andrews and Mason hit Jones simultaneously so the officials arent primed to look for a chop block. Think it was a foul though.

If that play at the goal line was OPI the 2013 Broncos would have racked up a league record 397 penalties.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
50,294
Gerry Austin speculated that refs are usually looking for a chop block in scrums and when players are engaged. That play happened quickly in the open field, Andrews and Mason hit Jones simultaneously so the officials arent primed to look for a chop block. Think it was a foul though.

If that play at the goal line was OPI the 2013 Broncos would have racked up a league record 397 penalties.
I'm guessing that's the number of attempts Manning had that year?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,027
I don't know if this was even a thought, but Freeman looked wide open after missing the block. If Ryan sees that and dinks a pass over Hightower's head to Freeman, it's off to the races.
Freeman turned around and ran back towards Ryan as Hightower ran by and ends up standing over Branch as he recovers the fumble. And remember the blocking scheme per Shanahan--Freeman should have been blocking. Not chipping and certainly not letting him fly by. Ryan had no reason to look that way.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.