Sharper confirms Saints' gameplan was to hurt Favre
Peter King at SI has this in his "Monday Morning QB mailbag - Tuesday edition" from yesterday afternoon:
Darren Sharper told me Sunday the Saints' mission against Favre was, "Cut off the head, and the body will die.'' In other words, beat the crap out of Favre and see how many plays he makes at the end of the game if you physically manhandle him. I can guarantee you that inside the Saints' facility this week, Williams will be telling his men, "See? It worked against Favre; he threw a terrible pass near the end of the fourth quarter because we beat him up all game. We can do the same thing to Manning if we abuse him.''
I've been watching this game a long time, so I'm not so naive to think this has not been in a lot of game plans for all teams at some point or other (including the Vikings'), but ... it's interesting to note that maybe Greg Williams has identified and exploited an unspoken but widely, publicly acknowledged official policy in the NFL: there are a lot of rules that protect QBs during the season (e.g. the "Brady rule"), but I've repeatedly read in print that referees have it "suggested" to them that they try not to throw many "judgment call" flags like that in the playoffs, to "let the teams play" I've heard it called. To me it appears Greg Williams consciously decided to exploit this referee reluctance in his game planning, and try to get away with stuff he knew was pushing the rules. Why not? I suppose, but ... it is troubling, now that we finally have confirmation that it was an intentional, concious goal of the Saints defense to physically hurt Brett Favre.
It will be interesting to see if the refs are so lenient against four time MVP, "greatest QB of all time" (aka leading face of the business) Peyton Manning. The Saints might've gotten away with exploiting this seam in the officiating again if they'd just gone about it quietly like they did against us, but now that Darren Sharper has (predictably) flapped his mouth and spilled this secret, I am betting it gets back to the league office, and the refs calling the Superbowl are told to tighten up again. What if the questionable hits that the led to the "Brady rule" happen again to Manning like they did to Favre, and this time it literally leads to the NFL's biggest star Peyton being "Brady-ied," and perhaps never playing the same again, as may be the case with Brady? Even if you blow off the idea of just protecting the life & limb of the guy wearing #18 for the Colts ... this is also a business, and Manning's career potentially being ended/shortened by a cheap shot like that in front of the biggest audience of the year might harm the draw of the NFL as much as Mike Tyson biting an ear off in living color killed boxing. I don't think Goddell will allow that, hence ... I think the NFL front office will (quietly, not publicly) be sending a memo to the Saints today or tomorrow to not make it an explicit goal to hurt the other quarterback -- "or else."
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
75 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
it was an intentional, concious goal of the Saints defense to physically hurt Brett Favre.
When is it NOT a conscious goal of a defense to hurt the QB? The very design of this game is to attempt to dismember the QB while his big nasties in front of him try to stop you. I know this is going to be a very hated opinion, but this story does not surprise me nor provides me with any further anger. Defenders trying to knock a QB out of the game is nothing new.
If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal
Did you even read my post?
I can’t believe you did, because I acknowledge the very thing you are saying, but you act like I said the opposite, even though I said this in my very first sentence.
I’ve been watching this game a long time, so I’m not so naive to think this has not been in a lot of game plans for all teams at some point or other (including the Vikings’)To think I might “hate” that opinion seems weird, given I just said the same thing!
What my point was, is that most people acknowledge that the referees are told to be more lax in calling the more questionable hits, the ones that they created a lot of special penalties for in recent years (e.g. the Brady rule), and that maybe the Saints exploited this seam. And then I wondered if the NFL might reevaluate what they tell their refs gonig into the Superbowl, in light of this.
just stating my opinion on the matter
whether you think I’m agreeing with you or disagreeing with you is your deal. I said that my opinion would probably be hated because after the game there were a million people here lambasting the Saints for their “cruel” and “vicious” ways.
If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal
and by the way
To further add…
it is troubling, now that we finally have confirmation that
That was what immediately prefaced the original quote. Insinuating that you feel it was wrong of New Orleans. I don’t. So, yeah, I guess I was disagreeing with you. If you don’t find an issue with this, you didn’t do a good job purveying that.
If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal
For the record, I was not one of those posting here complaining about how Saints played. This is my first post that is even the tiniest bit critical about how they played.
But you have me, I guess. While I know that the defense tries to hit the passer, yes it is troubling to me that their coaches are making it their #1 priority to do that at every possible opportunity, and to make each one inflect maximum damage. That this is not just a part of their game plan, but the key to their game plan.
Maybe I am naive, that I didn’t think this was emphasized so strongly every week by every team. Perhaps you are right.
"and by the way"
you again take me out of context – you decided to quote these words of mine:
it is troubling, now that we finally have confirmation that
You then say that this is “Insinuating that you feel it was wrong of New Orleans” But if you had quoted me fully, the couple extra words that started that sentence, then everyone would see that i was NOT “insinuating” this:
Why not? I suppose, but … it is troubling, now that we finally have confirmation that
Everyone would see that I was saying I understood why they did it, and that I was commenting more about the inconsistent refereeing standards between regular season and postseason. It is troubling to me, but I understand why they did what they did, and the refs did what they did (didn’t). But that doesn’t mean I have to be all hunky-dory about it.
I think you are completely missing my point. My post was about the general integrity of the game of football, not the Vikings-Saints game. My entire last paragraph (the majority of my post) had nothing to do with the Viking-Saints game.
Perhaps it cannot be helped that football is ultimately no different than boxing, that at it’s core it’s about administering maximum pain and injury to your opponent. I personally enjoy it more for the strategic “chessgame” aspects, and the acrobatic catches, throws, and cuts, but … I understand that others enjoy the “smashmouth” aspect more. Maybe that what it’s ultimately rally all about, but … please allow that there are some of us that don’t enjoy that part, and (in line with how the league is increasingly calling games, but apparently only during the regular season) don’t like (are troubled by) seeing it so dominant in the gameplan. In any gameplan, not just in Viking games.
A week earlier
Vikings fans were cheering loudly as Tony Romo was being pummeled by the Vikings D line, with the sole purpose being to knock him out. the game
Fast forward a week, and the shoe is on the other foot.
Now suddenly you find the smashmouth part of football not so fun, huh?
Interesting…
that which doesn't kill you, probably hurts like hell.
by JasonAHeath on Jan 27, 2010 12:20 PM CST up reply actions
I am with you. I could probably go find plenty of quotes from Jared Allen about dismantling the opposing QB…he’s kind of a loose canon with his words afterall. This is definitely NOT something new, it is football afterall.
The refs are still VERY much in the game to protect the QB. They called quite a few penalties against the Saints…I think that is something that is missed here. Some of those penalties weren’t even penalties 3 years ago so the refs are still doing a lot to protect QBs even if its perceived that they are “letting the players play”.
OF COURSE you are with him TrevorR
it goes without saying that you enjoyed the punishment Favre took. You made it clear in posts over at Acme in week 8 that you would have liked seeing Favre’s “career come to an end on the Lambeau turf” (or some words very close to that).
I know you’re not the only fan who thinks that way. But just allow that others like me get “troubled” by others who “cheer the laundry” and maybe stop thinking that there are human beings with lives off the field inside those uniforms.
They are paid handsomely for the
violent sport they play and are willing to take the risk of being injured or they would have chosen another profession.
oh crap, I should not have posted that reply
I apologize It was a mistake on so many levels. I had resolved to not reply to any of the Packer trolls here (just ones I think are still reasonable, like packallday), and I didn’t want to stoop to their level of personal attack on other poster (what this particular guy has been doing to me and others all season).
I apologize. I would delete it if I could (maybe I’ll try to ask gonzo to).
You are right
But not with cheap hit. You don’t feel that they were too many cheap hit. I was surfing and i found this.
Posted by Chip Scoggins
Last update: January 27, 2010 – 7:42 PM
10 Comments Add comment Print
Email Share3Add to del.icio.us CloseShare When Brett Favre threw his first interception in the third quarter of Sunday’s loss to the New Orleans Saints, he ended up on the ground in pain after a high-low hit by defensive linemen Bobby McCray and Remi Ayodele. McCray hit Favre in the knees, causing a left ankle injury.
Favre had to be helped off the field and had his ankle wrapped on the sideline. Many people wondered why a penalty wasn’t called on McCray? Hitting quarterbacks in the knees became a point of emphasis this season and that one looked pretty obvious.
The league now admits that the officials missed the call. The NFL’s vice president of officiating Mike Pereira acknowledged during his weekly segment on NFL Network that McCray should have been called for a personal foul on that play. Pro Football Talk has the info right here.
Everybody saw it. The ref did not. how convenience.
I don't find that as confirmation they were trying to hurt him.
Moreso he’s saying, “If the QB plays bad, the offense suffers.” Look at the Minnesota/Dallas game. Romo was rattled, running for his life, and their offense was TERRIBLE.
So, while I’m sure they wouldn’t mind hurting Favre, and every defensive player is doing their best to take the opposing QB out, I don’t see this as “confirmation” of anything.
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jan 27, 2010 9:57 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I would hope that would not be the way to respond to this
I was hoping that the refs would just be consistent in their penalty calling between regular season and postseason, as I wrote. But I can understand this POV, if not agree with it.
I respect your response....
as you appear to not be one of the ones complaining about the Saints tactic being successful, just as a similar tactic was successful for the Vikings last week against Romo. It is the job of the defensive line to get to the quarterback. It is the job of the offensive line to keep that from happening. There was only one late hit on Farve in the game and a 15 yard penalty was called on the play. Even that was more of an “outside the field of play” call than a late hit on the quarterback. Ironically, that hit appeared to have minimal impact on Farve. I was surprised that a “Brady rule” flag wasn’t thrown on the ankle hit, but I suspect that it may not have been thrown as a “payback” for the Roman Harper flag that was thrown and shouldn’t have been. Even Troy Aikman said he thought it was a bad call.
All defensive linemen want to “punish” quarterbacks, but I think that very few of them want to seriously injure them. It’s interesting that Brett Farve isn’t saying the hits he received were “dirty”. It’s the difference between him and Tom Brady. He has a better understanding of the game.
You're team is a bunch of cheap shot artists
Your team plays dirty and we will see you next year.
by medicineball on Jan 27, 2010 9:51 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Much like baseball
where a pitcher will bean an opponent in retaliation for one of his teammates being hit by a pitch our defense should’ve dealt Brees some pain after seeing what the Saints D was doing to Favre. Football is a violent sport and if people don’t like it maybe they should watch something else.
I'm sure they were
but they needed to do a better job of it obviously.
BTW
this was not a dig at you puddn or anyone else for that matter.
load of crap
thats bs, the intentions of a game should never be to hurt someone. there were so many unneccisary hits on favre after the play. maybe our d-line should have picked up little brees and slammed on his head. thats just the difference in culture in our teams. playing a game versus playing dirty.
smoke em' if you got em'
by Torch24 on Jan 27, 2010 10:51 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I love the big hits
as long as they fall within the rules of the game and are not cheap shots. Going after a defenseless QB’s legs/knees are not within the rules of the game since they made the Brady rule.
I don't enjoy watching
players get injured, but I understand that injuries are a part of the game.
There is a big difference between trying to rattle a qb and trying to hurt a qb. If you get a legit shot, then he has to be pounded. This is football and the qb needs to take hits to help the d. But when you are stretching the rules and taking cheap shots, thats not cool. NO did take plenty of cheap shots and bent the rules to try and injure the guy. They were not just trying to rattle him, they were trying to injure him at every turn. They dove at his legs on one play, body slammed him on another, what more do we need to see?
They tried to take KW out as well. I think that d was trying to see how many qb’s they could make retire by inflicting pain. It’s clear to me that this had to come form the coaching staff because fof how consistent it was happeing. I thought Peyton was a class act, but I was wrong.
Like I said, I’m all for nailing the qb and make him hear steps. But I’m not for taking cheap shots to do it. For this reason I hope that sorry ass team gets destroyed and humiliated by Manning. Before this game I was going to root for NO if they won, not now. I hope that franchise reverts back to the bag wearing fans again.
We handed the game to them, we had a chance and blew it. But we get another crack at them next year and pay back a bitch.
by angryguy77 on Jan 27, 2010 12:44 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
"we handed the game to them"
I don’t think you did, I think we slapped it away from you. But if you did, “thank you.”
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
This post said everything I’ve felt about the game. I was a Saints fan until they kept driving Favre into the ground and twisting him backwards after the ball was thrown. They weren’t just hitting Favre, they were twisting and throwing him around and at one point even slammed him into the ground when he was already falling to the turf… totally unnecessary and it was obvious headhunting. I was in support of the Saints until seeing that. Their fans are still alright however.
"Their fans are still alright however"
I’ve hesitated a few days to post this, I want to be careful with this, since there are always bad apples in every bushel. But since you brought it up directly, you should know about this:
When Brett Favre was the recipient of a vicious high-low hit from a pair of Saints defenders and crumpled to the ground in agony, his teammates winced. The hearts of Vikings fans skipped a beat. Head coach Brad Childress lost his breath. Favre’s wife shielded her eyes. And Saints fans cheered.
One of the first people on the sidelines to check up on Favre was long snapper Cullen Loeffler. He went over the training table where Favre was laid out and heard some of the things the fans were saying. He said he’s heard some awful things in the past – it comes with the territory in the NFL – but he was shocked with what he heard.
"It was incredible," Loeffler said. "They were cheering and saying they hoped his leg was broken and he’d never walk again. I know fans are out to cheer for their team, but I couldn’t believe some of the garbage I was hearing. I could have expected something like that from Philadelphia fans because they kind of pride themselves on being jerks and being hard on everybody. They were the guys that threw snowballs at Santa Claus. I get it. But everything we had heard about Saints fans was that they were going to be loud. They were. But some of things they said to Brett was way out of line and really pathetic."
Favre would return to the game, perhaps spurred on by some of the taunts he heard from Saints fans. He’s endured the worst fans have had to offer over the last two decades, but for a player like Loeffler, the fan reaction was an eye-opener. Just as many former players reacted to cheers from the crowd at Veteran’s Stadium when Michael Irvin of the Cowboys was momentarily paralyzed on the turf, Loeffler said what he saw and heard last Sunday was the worst he has ever seen from fans and hopes to never see it again.
"I know fans are passionate about their team, but, in the end, it’s still a game," Loeffler said. "It’s a game that we play and injuries are part of it. But to have fans cheering when you get injured and hope that it is serious enough that you not only can’t play again, but you can’t walk? That was just sick. I know those fans have been through a lot and they love the Saints, but there was no call for that. I’m just glad Brett was OK because he could hear what they were saying just as easily as I could. I would hate to think that his last memory of playing in the NFL would be hearing the stuff he heard. That would have been pathetic."
Although it’s very easy to get on the Saints specifically here, I’m gonna try to stay with the theme I tried to build in the OP: the Saints are not unique in what they are doing, they are merely more single-minded. Every team (& fanbase) is developing an increasing fixation on wishing to see their opponent’s star players maimed. When Brady had his leg grotesquely twisted in week #1 of last year, there was a video I saw of a Jets bar in NY where almost everyone stood up and cheered and high-fived each other when the game report (with the gruesome replay) came on the first time during the Jets game. Later on there actually was a fairly high selling “NY Jets Brandon Pollard Fan Club” tshirt (Pollard ws the guy that rolled his knee).
I would not be surprised if some day an NFL team charter jet will crash on the way to a game, and there will actually be some that cheer it.
I'll say what I've always said about this.
Did the Saints want to hurt Favre and make him pay, sometimes cheaply?
Yes.
Does it bother me? Not nearly as bad as our D not doing the same damn thing back at Brees.
by Jepp The Viking on Jan 27, 2010 12:56 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
As Both a Saints Fan and a Vikings Fan.....
I didn’t cheer when poor Brett kept getting hit, and before the game was over, I was sickened.
The Vikings biggest weakness all year long, in my opinion, has been their offensive line – ask Adrian Peterson if he could find anywhere to run.
I hope BF goes home and gets his sweet wife to take care of him, then retires for good.
thats sound like a true response from a viking fan. Any great fan would want their QB to retire for good after giving them their best shot in 11 years. Have fun with your sainst and hope to God that the colts don’t take a page out of their playbook. I don’t think Brees’ shoulder could take all the cheap shots….
Depressing
This site has rapidly become a bad place for Viking fans to post. I dont think the original post that was made, which IMHO was a great, poignant post, should be ripped apart by people who are Viking fans.
Are you guys Viking fans, or apologists? I’ve avoided posting anything on this site since last Friday cause’ I still cant get the taste of that loss out of my soul.
rip me up “Viking fans”. I’m not going to read your replies anyway. It’ll just bug the hell out of me that a lot, not all, of my “Viking Brothers” like to nit pick at Viking posts.
Good post as usual, puddnhead. Those were CHEAP shots. Theres a difference between getting after the QB like all defensive players are taught, & clearly cheap shotting a guy. I guess you gotta’ do what you gotta’ do, eh Sharper?
by Viking64 on Jan 27, 2010 3:16 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Puddnhead
I’m with Viking64. I liked your post too and thought it was accurate and objective. Keep up the good writing!
"Skol Vikings! Let's win this game Skol Vikings!
Keep up the good whining!!
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
There were two especially cheap hits
I think it was an end around to Percy after Brett handed the ball off he took a step back field and was drilled. Although the idiot Buck said the penalty was for hitting Percy out of bounds the flag was thrown near Brett. This should have been called flagrent and the player tossed or at least the Saints D warned and everything after that flagged. The other really cheap shot was the high low shot. You are just not allowed to go after the QB’s lower legs. He was not being blocked he just dove at the legs. I am all for taking the skirt off of QB’s but there is a difference between legitamte hard shots and cheap shots.
Skol
by SouthernNorseman on Jan 27, 2010 4:10 PM CST via mobile reply actions
regarding Romo hits by Vikes
Am I just biased our did those hits by Vikes on Romo seem more like repeated knock downs rather than attempts at injury? (overall he was sacked more times I think).
Also, in all of this discussion about Saints trying to hurt QBs no one mentioned what they did to Warner too.
There was a penalty where Favre handed off and was drilled by Mc Cray.
You can say what you want, but I think QBs that are in the way on a RUNNING play are fair game (not a passing play) . I don’t mean that a DE or DT can go running after them 12 yards and pop them- clerly no. But, on that play Favre handed off and immediately Mc Cray and he were face to face. Favre could have easily attempted a block. He has done that countless times before while playing for Green Bay. He tried to position himself for a block on the play that Harvin fumbled, but it was a fumble too early for a block. If you watch you will see Favre positioning to help out with a block. You can’t have it both ways. If a QB can throw a block, he is part of the play and you have to take his dress off. Can you imagine if Mc Cray doesn’t pop Favre and the RB reverses field and now Mc Cray misses the tackle because Favre leveled him or even just got in his way? I think QBs who are in the way on a running play are fair game unless they are clearly trying to run away which Favre didn’t and clearly never did in his career. He has thrown blocks often.
Again, no defender should be allowed to run 10 yards and track down a QB to hit him, but this was not the case.
Now, the hi-lo where Hargrove hit Favre near the knee? Clearly a missed call- should have been a penalty. But I think the ref swallowed the whistle for the exact reasoning above- they made a bad call on the penalty where Favre was in the way on the running play and it was a payback situation. Clearly Mc Cray “blew him up” but QBs are only protected 1) after they release the ball on a pass and 2) on a running play where a defensive player goes head hunting out of his way to hurt a QB. If Favre had held onto that handoff 1 second longer, he is fair game and Mc Cray just reacted to who was in his path and Favre could have blocked him and may have. I think it’s unrealistic to expect Mc Cray to wait and find out if he was going to be the victim. No way.
And for the record, when Warner got blown up the week before on an interception- he was trying to make a play- a tackle (Warner was) and he was clearly fair game and it was a clean hit- a vicious clean hit.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
We Shall Cherish Your Post Forever
Or at least until next season, when we repost it after we send Drew to the Mayo Clinic.
by Elgar on Jan 27, 2010 5:58 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
if you coulda you woulda
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
Careful what you wish for, the words chosen last longer than a picture....
They may come back to haunt-ya……
If we woulda this year we may not have had to next year…
But now we do….Remember the Giants game…..
That took many years, but we did exact our exorcism…
It felt good too, one of many such moments this year!
Just sayin’
SKOL!
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Jan 28, 2010 4:01 AM CST up reply actions
next year
Next year when Brees hands off to somebody, we’re going to have Jared Allen absolutely deck Drew Brees.
How do you like that?
Oh you don’t. Ah yes. That’s because it’s a PENALTY. This is a sport. It’s not the Roman coliseum.
by medicineball on Jan 27, 2010 9:49 PM CST up reply actions
This is such monumental garbage.
Didn’t the refs, who you suggest were “letting the players play” throw 3 personal foul/unnecessary roughness penalties on the Saints, 2 of which were for hits on Favre? And weren’t there 2 more pass interference/defensive holding penalties (also judgment calls) and 9 total flags against the Saints? Didn’t I see a ref helping Favre up and tucking his shoulder pad back into his jersey? Didn’t the Saints have twice the penalties that were called against the Vikings? Are you suggesting, honestly, that 4 time MVP and 1 time SB Champion QB Peyton Manning gets more protection than 3 time MVP and 1 time SB Champion QB Brett Favre? Gimme a break. The refs, league wide, protect Favre at least as much (if not more so) than any other QB. That was true when he was in GB and it’s true in MN.
According to NFL.com’s drive charts, the Vikings benefited from the following “judgment” calls:
- 5yd penalty for defensive holding on Gay, 1st down
- 15yd penalty for unnecessary roughness on McCray, 1st down
- 15yd penalty for unnecessary roughness on Casillas 1st down
- 15yd penalty for Roughing the Passer on Hargrove 1st down
- 18yd penalty for Pass Interference on Porter 1st down
And the Vikings put a very similar hit on Brees to the one Hargrove put on Favre, and got no call, which they shouldn’t have, as even former QB Troy Aikman said Hargrove’s hit was clean.
You’re whining is pathetic, but considering the source, hardly surprising. The game plan for at least half the games in any given week is to hit the QB hard and often, yet you seem to think that the Saints did something unusual or wrong last week, most likely because the Saints treated Favre like an opposing player, instead of the God you seem to think he is…
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jan 27, 2010 5:03 PM CST reply actions
+1 +1 and another +1
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
-3 more...
for a total of -3.
By the way, please feel free to remove yourself from our site.
Thank you.
Personally...
I didn’t see anything in his story that was complaining about the fact that NO was trying to hurt Brett…as a matter of fact he states that he wasn’t surprised about the fact that that is the game plan for most teams.
There were lots of other teams’ fans during the year that hoped that their team would injure Brett so that he would have to retire. Personally I find that to be extremely lame. As a Vikings fan I’ve watched the Green Bay version of Brett manhandle the Vikings for many years, and I can honestly say that I never once hoped that we injured him so badly that he would have to retire.
I disagree.
“To me it appears Greg Williams consciously decided to exploit this referee reluctance in his game planning, and try to get away with stuff he knew was pushing the rules. Why not? I suppose, but … it is troubling, now that we finally have confirmation that it was an intentional, concious goal of the Saints defense to physically hurt Brett Favre.”
I’m sorry, but that’s complaining. So is this:
“What if the questionable hits that the led to the “Brady rule” happen again to Manning like they did to Favre, and this time it literally leads to the NFL’s biggest star Peyton being “Brady-ied,” and perhaps never playing the same again, as may be the case with Brady?"
I suppose we can give him credit for not using profanity or hoping the Saints plane crashes on the way to Florida, but it’s still whining.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jan 27, 2010 6:49 PM CST up reply actions
Well isn't that wonderful...
that you disagree with me as well. I’m so happy that you have your opinion and that you were able to come over to our site and try to convince us that you are correct.
Please feel free to return to the Green Bay site and talk about how Viking fans are a bunch of whiners who have never won a Super Bowl.
Thank you for visiting.
I'll go where I like.
And I like this site.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jan 27, 2010 7:35 PM CST up reply actions
BE COMFORTED
I know it’s tough. When I was living in Minnesota, I was the Vikings fan. In fact, I am not really attached to any team unless some exceptions mandate that. I love Favre a lot and I I root for the Vikings sometimes. I hope that this loss by the Vikings will be healed soon. I know it hurts. Who knows—it can be Vikings Super Bowl within the next one or two years.
"You’re whining is pathetic, but considering the source, hardly surprising"
I just don’t know how I could have said it better.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
I thought you were a respectable Saints fan but i was wrong, you're a troll
Go do your trolling elsewhere
What I find interesting...
Before I make my comment I’d like to say that I’m not complaining about the officiating, nor am I complaining about how the Saints played. The game is over and that is that.
Now back to my comment. What I find interesing is that if JA would have hit Brees in the same manner as McCray did on the play that Brett was injured (and threw the first interception) the NFL would have fined him and every visiting poster would be calling for his head.
On the play in question, McCray dove for Brett’s legs and hit him below the knees…much like what everyone said happened when JA hit Matt Schaub two seasons ago.
I’m just sayin…
There is no question that the non-call on the low hit was a blown call...
… and this might be the only place where puddnhead has a point; it’s possible that the ref just didn’t see it (the angle he had makes it possible that the OL trying to block McCray cut off his view of Favre), but it’s also possible that the continued boos from the 15 yarder they called for a much more marginal (in my opinion) hit on Favre made the ref decide to let it slide and conclude (wrongly) that McCray had been blocked into making a low hit.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jan 27, 2010 6:53 PM CST up reply actions
If you read my original comment...
You will notice that I wasn’t complaining about the hit, nor was I complaining about the fact that there wasn’t a flag thrown on the play.
What I stated is that “if JA would have hit Brees in the same manner as McCray did on the play that Brett was injured (and threw the first interception) the NFL would have fined him and every visiting poster would be calling for his head.”
Which is utter speculation...
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jan 27, 2010 7:34 PM CST up reply actions
"Utter Speculation"
Really? Oh that’s right, I couldn’t possibly have a clue about what I’m talking about.
it was Hargrove on that play
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
Yes Hargrove did hit Brett in one play,
but in the the play that I’m talking about Remi Ayodele hit Brett high while Bobby McCray dove and hit Brett below the knees from behind.
Thanks for playing.
every ref, every fan, every viewer, every player, every coach saw that low hit
it was a makeup non call because a ref should not call a bad hit on a running play vs. a QB unless the defender goes out of his way to hunt the QB down and that didn’t happen. Mc Cray had an opportunity handed to him right 2 feet in front of him and he “blew him up.” It was just a amatter of a small contact or a huge one. There was no way to actually avoid contact, but he maximized it. No penalty. But the payback, in the form of a non-call, unfortunately for Vikings fans, was huge.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
Well,what I predicted has now come true
Sort of, anyway. I wrote in the OP:
I don’t think Goddell will allow that, hence … I think the NFL front office will (quietly, not publicly) be sending a memo to the Saints today or tomorrow to not make it an explicit goal to hurt the other quarterback — “or else.”And I now see that the head NFL official head NFL official Pereia said tonight:
Vikings quarterback Brett Favre and Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez both took hits during Sunday’s conference championship games that should have resulted in penalties but were not flagged, NFL V.P. of officiating Mike Pereira says.
“They’re missed calls,” Pereira said during his “Official Review” segment on NFL Total Access.
On a Favre interception against the Saints, Remi Ayodele hit Favre high while Bobby McCray hit him low, and Pereira said McCary should have been flagged for getting Favre in the lower leg.
“It is the kind of hit that we want called because, clearly, we’re trying to protect the knees,” Pereira said.
The only thing I got wrong, was that I thought the “line would be drawn in the sand” for the Saints and Colts privately. It turns out they did it very publicly. As I think on it, it makes sense … if they are going to change how strictly they enforce penalties between championship weekend and Superbowl, they want ot be clear about it up front, rather than have fans howl when the calls are suddenly being made again in Miami.
I’m not sure what the impact of the non-calls on fouls against Sanchez might have been, as it was not a close game. But because the now-officially admitted “missed call” on the Favre Brady rule hit would have nullified Favre’s interception … well, it may have changed the final outcome of the game. Hard to say, since so much would have changed after that too, but it at least seems highly likely. That first INT was a killer, and if we get 15 yards on top of keeping the ball … that’s a big swing for the Vikings.
What’s done is done, as far as the game Sunday. But for the integrity of the game, I’m glad to see Pereia throwing this “brushback pitch.” NFL defense are now on notice that they probably won’t get away with this stuff in future playoff games.
I would love for Favre to came back
I hope he would shove it up sharper ass. Had they call the low hit on Favre the Int would be null. That was an important call. Now they admit it. WOW HOW SMART.
Sharper Sucks
Darren Sharper sucked a$$ last year. The only reason he is all pro this year is because he they switch him back to FS where he can pad his interception stats. He sucks balls at coverage.
Believe in the power of one. -Evan Tanner
Take responsablity for your own loss!
We all want to see our team acheive victorious but some times it doesn’t work out this way.
Vikings had way too many turn overs and the O line allowed the Saints to get to Farve to many times in the first place.But to say the saints play dirty because your O line allowed all them big hits to Farve in the first place,I understand Farve was your only way to beat the Saints, You Can’nt trust AP to do it he fumbled to many times but you must protect your qb.
With the Saints Defence only ranked 25 It should have been a tought thing to do.Don’t blame the way the game is played its hard it’s a tough sport but to say that the Saints play dirty really is miss leading considered Allen hit Brees a few times not as much as you would like but this is football. Bottom line is Saints protected Brees ,Minnisota didn’t protect Farve!
Many of the bad calls went to the Saints as stats showed for questionable late hits when Farve still had the ball go figure.
We have, Shane21.
We know which team fumbled several times and we know what the final score was. We know that nothing will change that and this thread isn’t about that. We also know which team got the fines for cheap shots. Maybe you should take your own advice and take some responsibility for that?
"What is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."
We do take responsibility for our own loss
Although I find it amusing that half the Saints fans get mad that we don’t acknowledge our teams mistakes enough (the whole “Peterson and Vikings fans saying that they gave away the game is not giving us respect” thread), and the other half (e.g. you here) is ripping us because you think we are not saying that enough. Y’all need to get together, take a vote, and decide which way you are gonna demand us to go on that topic ;)
But whatever way we go on that — either way, this question is not affected by that. This discussion is just as relevant no matter what the outcome of the game was, whether we won or lost.





























