JSngry Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Guess it shouldn't be a surprise given the fact that the N.O. coach was schooled by that total scumbag Buddy Ryan. As touchy-feeley sports, that was discomforting for me to watch too. But as military strategy, it was hard for me to argue with, especially considering how the longer the game went on & the more hits Farve took, the more he reverted back to his "crazier" self. That last throw, the int, might well have not happened if he hadn't taken all those hits before and not gotten beaten "literally" out of his cool & collected zone. So, whaddya want, a Geneva Convention for the NFL? Quote
GA Russell Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 I don't' know much about the Vikings. It seems to me, in a general way, that a team good enough to play in the conference championship game should be good enough to keep its quarterback safe. Usually it's the bad teams whose quarterbacks get beat up, isn't it? Quote
Van Basten II Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 (edited) They did a decent job throughout the season they were in the middle of the pack for sacks allowed, give credit to the Saints who have an agressive defense. By the way, Favre was not sacked once throughout the game, it's just that they took shots at him every time they had the chance. Whether it was after Favre got rid of the ball or not. Also for those who think that the Vikings played better than the home time, you may be right but when you turnover as often as they did, you're bound to lose the game. And on this point it could have been worse on a few occasions the Saints failed to recover a fumble because their players instead of diving on the ball tried to pick it up. Edited January 26, 2010 by Van Basten II Quote
Son-of-a-Weizen Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 (edited) Guess it shouldn't be a surprise given the fact that the N.O. coach was schooled by that total scumbag Buddy Ryan. As touchy-feeley sports, that was discomforting for me to watch too. But as military strategy, it was hard for me to argue with, especially considering how the longer the game went on & the more hits Farve took, the more he reverted back to his "crazier" self. That last throw, the int, might well have not happened if he hadn't taken all those hits before and not gotten beaten "literally" out of his cool & collected zone. So, whaddya want, a Geneva Convention for the NFL? I don't' know much about the Vikings. It seems to me, in a general way, that a team good enough to play in the conference championship game should be good enough to keep its quarterback safe. Usually it's the bad teams whose quarterbacks get beat up, isn't it? GA, yes, that usually is the case....and we're talking about a series of late hits, so of course the offensive line isn't protecting him at that point --- the play is over...which is why they were getting unsportsmanlike conduct penalties! Jim, I'm all for taking down QBs....but the plan here was to cause injury. These weren't your standard sacks, were they? Malevolent stuff really. Edited January 26, 2010 by Son-of-a-Weizen Quote
JSngry Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Mot "injury" in the carry him off on a stretcher sense, just beat him down, mentally and physically to get inside his head, make him distrustful of ever moment of peace that he has outfield. And it worked - he got hit and knocked crushed and tossed and banged and tripped and fallen on for so long that his head came out of its safety zone. The aim was not to "injure", it was to beat down. This was in no way pretty football. It was old-school hardass take you down no matter how long iot takes football. And the team that played it won it. And I don't think that a QB who was not as likely to take all those beatings and still answer the call with some mojo in reserve would have gotten that treatment. But Farve would NOT be "injured". so the Saints knew they had to stop Farve over the long haul, chip away at his mind through his body, and they did it the only way they could - by whoopin' him so hard for so long that the one time he really NEEDED to be disciplined, he couldn't find it in him for habing been whopped up on so bad. It wwasn't football, it was a boxing match. It wasn't a game, it was a war. And as such, I'd say that the Saints did what they had to do ro win, and they did it until they did win. Quote
Big Wheel Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 (edited) Guess it shouldn't be a surprise given the fact that the N.O. coach was schooled by that total scumbag Buddy Ryan. As touchy-feeley sports, that was discomforting for me to watch too. But as military strategy, it was hard for me to argue with, especially considering how the longer the game went on & the more hits Farve took, the more he reverted back to his "crazier" self. That last throw, the int, might well have not happened if he hadn't taken all those hits before and not gotten beaten "literally" out of his cool & collected zone. So, whaddya want, a Geneva Convention for the NFL? I don't' know much about the Vikings. It seems to me, in a general way, that a team good enough to play in the conference championship game should be good enough to keep its quarterback safe. Usually it's the bad teams whose quarterbacks get beat up, isn't it? GA, yes, that usually is the case....and we're talking about a series of late hits, so of course the offensive line isn't protecting him at that point --- the play is over...which is why they were getting unsportsmanlike conduct penalties! This doesn't make any sense...it's not like the whistle was blown and then a defensive lineman ran over his man after he'd stopped blocking and decked Favre. Most of the hits I saw were either from a lineman who had already beaten his blocker or a blitzing LB or safety who was coming in either at the time the ball was released, or a moment after it. The low McCray hit looked illegal under current rules, but the point is that any team that good really needs to be blocking way better than that so it's not even a close call. Edited January 26, 2010 by Big Wheel Quote
JSngry Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 (edited) Oh, they took every chance to hit him, maybe not full force, but if they could get to him after a handoff or something and have it be even vaguely legal, they'd get to him. That last fumble, Farve was down there kinda trying to tackle the recoverer and BAM somebody knocked him har to get him out of the area. The guy was a moving target the entire game. Edited January 26, 2010 by JSngry Quote
Big Wheel Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Some of the hits are shown in the final 30 seconds of this clip: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-the-coaches/09000d5d815f7aea/The-Coaches-Why-the-Vikings-lost -That hit from MacCray on the handoff: yeah, that's borderline. But again, the tight end missed his block, allowing MacCray to get close to Favre. -The hit from Sharper: that looks absolutely legal to me. He comes in a split second after the ball is released and it looks virtually impossible to avoid hitting the QB when you're going that fast. That's why you blitz! -The hit from Fujita (55) and Hargrove (69): Again, this looks legal. Hargrove has his left hand almost on Favre's right side at the moment the ball is thrown. The left tackle was totally beaten on the play and nobody appears to have even attempted to chip-block Fujita on the blitz. Quote
Man with the Golden Arm Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 The Chicano would have toughed it out! 2:15!! Quote
Chalupa Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Mot "injury" in the carry him off on a stretcher sense, just beat him down, mentally and physically to get inside his head, make him distrustful of ever moment of peace that he has outfield. And it worked - he got hit and knocked crushed and tossed and banged and tripped and fallen on for so long that his head came out of its safety zone. The aim was not to "injure", it was to beat down. This was in no way pretty football. It was old-school hardass take you down no matter how long iot takes football. And the team that played it won it. And I don't think that a QB who was not as likely to take all those beatings and still answer the call with some mojo in reserve would have gotten that treatment. But Farve would NOT be "injured". so the Saints knew they had to stop Farve over the long haul, chip away at his mind through his body, and they did it the only way they could - by whoopin' him so hard for so long that the one time he really NEEDED to be disciplined, he couldn't find it in him for habing been whopped up on so bad. It wwasn't football, it was a boxing match. It wasn't a game, it was a war. And as such, I'd say that the Saints did what they had to do ro win, and they did it until they did win. I think too much is being made out of his "beat down" effecting his mental judgement. Yeah he was banged up but after 19 years as a pro he should be able to mentally adjust for that. Additionally, the beat down excuse seems to provide an "out" for Favre which I don't think he deserves. His mental lapse had little to do w/ his physical state at the time and everything to do w/ his ego. That last drive was a perfect summation his career. Though he was "injured" he toughed it out and made some amazing throws(that pass for the first down on 3 and 8 around the 50 yard line when he threaded the needle was incredible) and then made a dumb ass one the on that last play when there wasn't a defender w/in 10 yards of him when he let the ball go. He had a receiver right in front of him about 5 yards away but instead of going for the safe throw he committed the cardinal sin of throwing to his left while running right because he thought he saw a open receiver 15 yards down field. He gambled and this time he lost. But that's who he has always been. That's his MO. He gambles too much and when he's on it works and when he's not... well we all saw what happened. Quote
JSngry Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Fair enough, be he pointedly commented in a pregame interview w/Pam Oliver that this was his best season ever precisely because he had finally tamed those wilder instincts. I guess only he knows (and maybe not even him) why, after playing a well-disciplined game that saw him getting hit relentlessly, he went and blew a sure thing on the type of blatantly goofy play he had avoided all game long. Tell you what, though, if you don't want to overstate the effects of that beating, I'd not underestimate them either. I've never heard any quaterback say anything other than the type of assault Farve withstood does get into your head before the game is over, and if that's what happened Sunday, it's wholly to Farve's credit that he took what he took for as long as he took it before it finally did. Quote
BruceW Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 Mot "injury" in the carry him off on a stretcher sense, just beat him down, mentally and physically to get inside his head, make him distrustful of ever moment of peace that he has outfield. And it worked - he got hit and knocked crushed and tossed and banged and tripped and fallen on for so long that his head came out of its safety zone. The aim was not to "injure", it was to beat down. This was in no way pretty football. It was old-school hardass take you down no matter how long iot takes football. And the team that played it won it. And I don't think that a QB who was not as likely to take all those beatings and still answer the call with some mojo in reserve would have gotten that treatment. But Farve would NOT be "injured". so the Saints knew they had to stop Farve over the long haul, chip away at his mind through his body, and they did it the only way they could - by whoopin' him so hard for so long that the one time he really NEEDED to be disciplined, he couldn't find it in him for habing been whopped up on so bad. It wwasn't football, it was a boxing match. It wasn't a game, it was a war. And as such, I'd say that the Saints did what they had to do ro win, and they did it until they did win. a big DITTO from me on this one. The Saints did exactly what they had to do to win. Quote
papsrus Posted January 26, 2010 Report Posted January 26, 2010 ... His mental lapse had little to do w/ his physical state at the time and everything to do w/ his ego. That last drive was a perfect summation his career. Though he was "injured" he toughed it out and made some amazing throws(that pass for the first down on 3 and 8 around the 50 yard line when he threaded the needle was incredible) and then made a dumb ass one the on that last play when there wasn't a defender w/in 10 yards of him when he let the ball go. He had a receiver right in front of him about 5 yards away but instead of going for the safe throw he committed the cardinal sin of throwing to his left while running right because he thought he saw a open receiver 15 yards down field. He gambled and this time he lost. But that's who he has always been. That's his MO. He gambles too much and when he's on it works and when he's not... well we all saw what happened. Dilfer was saying the other day that the physical beating Favre took had everything to do with his mental mistake at the end. That was, he said, the whole point of hitting him constantly -- to wear him down both physically and mentally, to the point where he would make a mistake. Given his "gun-slinging" MO, it was a calculated tactic intended to have just the exact effect that it did. But I put the blame for that loss as much on the coaching staff as that single play by Favre at the end. Their screw-up coming out of the timeout with too many men in the huddle took them out of field goal range, and put their obviously battered QB in a bad position. All that said, I don't disagree that it was a horrible decision -- just saying that in the opinion of Dilfer, who has played the position, the beating had everything to do with that horrible decision. Quote
PHILLYQ Posted January 27, 2010 Report Posted January 27, 2010 It's also worth noting that maybe Favre felt he couldn't run on the fateful across-the-body interception play- maybe his ankle was killin' him, so he went for a pass when he could have run and... Quote
trane_fanatic Posted February 7, 2010 Report Posted February 7, 2010 Congrats to Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith, the newest and most deserving 1st ballot HOFers along with John Randle, Russ Grimm, Floyd Little and Dick LeBeau. Quote
GA Russell Posted March 17, 2010 Report Posted March 17, 2010 Gil Brandt has listed the top players of the past fifty years to have not been drafted. #1 is Kurt Warner. http://www.nfl.com/draft/story?id=09000d5d816fb4f0&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted March 17, 2010 Author Report Posted March 17, 2010 Interesting list. Tony Romo and Wes Welker were both undrafted, as was Jeff Saturday of the Colts. Quote
GA Russell Posted March 18, 2010 Report Posted March 18, 2010 Warren Moon probably would have been drafted for something, but he signed with Edmonton before the NFL draft because he didn't think that he would be given a shot at quarterback. I see that my man Jeff Garcia made the list. Quote
Aggie87 Posted April 5, 2010 Report Posted April 5, 2010 Eagles just traded Donovan McNabb to the Redskins for a 2nd round pick! That's not much compensation for trading your starting QB to a division rival. They either think he's not capable of being a decent starter anymore, or the Skins really think Jason Campbell sucks. Quote
BruceW Posted April 5, 2010 Report Posted April 5, 2010 Eagles just traded Donovan McNabb to the Redskins for a 2nd round pick! That's not much compensation for trading your starting QB to a division rival. They either think he's not capable of being a decent starter anymore, or the Skins really think Jason Campbell sucks. It is always a bad mistake to trade to a division rival; they almost always come back to beat you, if no one else, and at a time when you need a win the most. Quote
echoboss Posted April 5, 2010 Report Posted April 5, 2010 Eagles just traded Donovan McNabb to the Redskins for a 2nd round pick! That's not much compensation for trading your starting QB to a division rival. They either think he's not capable of being a decent starter anymore, or the Skins really think Jason Campbell sucks. It is always a bad mistake to trade to a division rival; they almost always come back to beat you, if no one else, and at a time when you need a win the most. The Detroit Lions have proven that over and over again. They could write a book on "how not to draft". Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted April 6, 2010 Author Report Posted April 6, 2010 Eagles just traded Donovan McNabb to the Redskins for a 2nd round pick! That's not much compensation for trading your starting QB to a division rival. They either think he's not capable of being a decent starter anymore, or the Skins really think Jason Campbell sucks. Teams don't cough up draft picks so easy any more. The Pats could only get a 2nd rounder for a promising young qb, Matt Cassell. McNabb's contract has a year remaining. There are no guarantees that he will stay. I think the Eagles got a good deal. There's a fourth and fifth rounder included as well. Consensus has it that it's a deep draft pool this year. Quote
papsrus Posted April 6, 2010 Report Posted April 6, 2010 There's a fourth and fifth rounder included as well. I thought it was a third or fourth. Quote
Chalupa Posted April 13, 2010 Report Posted April 13, 2010 There's a fourth and fifth rounder included as well. I thought it was a third or fourth. You're right it's a 3rd or 4th. How about the Jets getting Santonio Holmes for a measly 5th round pick?? Quick! someone call the FBI and have the Jets' GM arrested for robbery. Quote
BruceW Posted April 13, 2010 Report Posted April 13, 2010 There's a fourth and fifth rounder included as well. I thought it was a third or fourth. You're right it's a 3rd or 4th. How about the Jets getting Santonio Holmes for a measly 5th round pick?? Quick! someone call the FBI and have the Jets' GM arrested for robbery. Yes, but Santonio Holmes just got suspended for four games by the League for substance abuse. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.