Patriots Panthers Great Ending

[Surge89]

I hear you on this, and when you apply the old "eye test" all of it rings true, BUT...

 

Gronk is a very big, very athletic player with a huge catch radius. His hands are the size of frying pans and he's made dozens of remarkable catches in his relatively short career. To suggest that, had he been completely uninhibited (and not held), he definitively had NO SHOT at making that catch is poor judgment - at best - on the refs' part. Brady himself said that the throw should have been better, but a 6'5" tight end with excellent agility can generally make a good effort on a ball that's coming in about five yards short of where he is. 

 

Throw in the fact that, prior to wrapping him up, Kuechely was making contact past five yards and kind of rode Gronk to the back of the end zone before bear-hugging him.

 

If this play is legal, then I would suggest that every defensive coordinator instruct his cover guys to just bear-hug their assignment when the ball is not coming their way. 

 

 

I think this is more just a bunch of bad luck...  Because I understand where you are coming from, but "I THINK" that holding can't be called since the ball is in the air, and that the refs saw incidental tripping that started the mauling (lol).  Take those 2 things into consideration you gotta call PI but there was an int before the receiver so PI is impossible...  It just a really tough spot and hard to blame the refs because they are attempting to call the "correct penalty".  I think if I were officiating I could easily tell that it was a penalty.  But which penalty is it?  Then is that penalty still applicable by the letter of the rule.  And I think in that last part it wasn't so no call. 

 

Tough luck  

[Surge89]

Truth. Most games come down to a handful of plays. The Ridley fumble was a huge mistake. The failure to convert on 3rd-and-1 (when the Patriots took the lead with a FG) was another spot where they left points on the field. 

 

The key is to win decisively so you don't put yourself in those positions where a ref can decide the game with a call. Or, in this case, a non-call.  ;)

 

It is frustrating to watch a back fumble in the red zone!  But honestly that play just threw off everything great the O was doing.... 

[GoPats]

What? Pats played a great game. Perhaps their best of the season in hostile conditions against a hot team at their place. Sure, there were mistakes like every game. Fact is Pats had a chance at the end to win which is all you can ask. They should have had one more play but it was taken away. Such is life. On to Denver which is a much bigger conference game.

 

They did play a good game but, like I mentioned above, two things...

 

1. Ridley fumble. That was huge. Erase at least three points there.

 

2. Failure to convert on the last third down before they took the lead. I hated that play call (play action out of a big set) and they had been running with good success. And where's the QB sneak that Brady is so good at? We haven't seen a lot of it this year.

[amfootball]

They did play a good game but, like I mentioned above, two things...

 

1. Ridley fumble. That was huge. Erase at least three points there.

 

2. Failure to convert on the last third down before they took the lead. I hated that play call (play action out of a big set) and they had been running with good success. And where's the QB sneak that Brady is so good at? We haven't seen a lot of it this year.

I think with Ridley you have to take the good with the bad. He is what he is. A great RB who will fumble on occasion. I hated the fumble but what can you do. That is not poor execution.

 

I am torn about the third and one. I wanted a run but think it may have been tough down there to get it. I agree that the play action was not the right call either. What about the direct snap to Vareen where Brady fakes like the ball goes over his head? They used to do that all the time with Faulk inside the ten with great success.

[GoPats]

I think with Ridley you have to take the good with the bad. He is what he is. A great RB who will fumble on occasion. I hated the fumble but what can you do. That is not poor execution.

 

I am torn about the third and one. I wanted a run but think it may have been tough down there to get it. I agree that the play action was not the right call either. What about the direct snap to Vareen where Brady fakes like the ball goes over his head? They used to do that all the time with Faulk inside the ten with great success.

 

That's funny, Gresh and Zo were speculating on what they would have called if the PI call had held. Gresh suggested they would have run that direct snap play from the shotgun to Vereen... I guess it's coming sooner or later, LOL! 

[amfootball]

That's funny, Gresh and Zo were speculating on what they would have called if the PI call had held. Gresh suggested they would have run that direct snap play from the shotgun to Vereen... I guess it's coming sooner or later, LOL! 

Ha,ha. That is great. Why not? Vareen is even faster then Faulk.

[dynasty13]

Again take into context what is going on in the game.  

 

1.   Why is a flag thrown?  Easy the ref is doing his job and watching the receiver and defender if there is an action of pass interference.  He is not watching the ball.

 

2.   Why is the flag picked up?  Again easy, it is, unfortunately for the Pats, very bad luck because due to the nature of the coverage the defender took the inside route.  This then completely prohibits Gronk making a play THROUGH A PERSON to come back to a poorly thrown ball.  No one in the league is getting that call just plain and simple.  If Brady throws a solid throw its an easy PI but because of the RULE (interception before the play) the refs pick it up because it simply was impossible to be caught.  Now if the defender is on the outside of Gronk and he has a free pass to the ball then of course its PI no question.  

 

3.  Why do the refs not explain?  Again another easy explanation, the refs are not required to explain the finer rules of the game.  And in doing so would take up a lot of time that simply wasn't needed.  

 

Would I have been bothered? of course! but don't forget you just finished a game and there is another team.  Don't make this all about you go shake some hands take the loss and find out about everything later.  SPORTSMANSHIP  

 

Take these factors and there shouldn't be any bitterness about the game other than the Pats could have easily won this if they executed early.  But they didn't and that is football...

 

Just a response to the highlighted line...I understand their explanation of why they picked up the flag...the part I disagree with is their explanation of what they saw. The contact did NOT occur at the same time as the interception, and that is clear to anyone who watches the replay. The VP of Officiating even said he 'understands' why they made the call in real time, and continually stressed that it was a tight judgement call (all the while not being able to bring himself to say they made the right call). 

 

Like I've said, there's a difference between a missed call and a wrong call...and if no flag was thrown initially I'm sure most people wouldnt have a problem with it. 

[braveheartcolt]

Truth. Most games come down to a handful of plays. The Ridley fumble was a huge mistake. The failure to convert on 3rd-and-1 (when the Patriots took the lead with a FG) was another spot where they left points on the field.

The key is to win decisively so you don't put yourself in those positions where a ref can decide the game with a call. Or, in this case, a non-call. ;)

Didn't the Panthers have opportunities to score more points, but fail as well? Two teams on the field if I recall. I'm not sure why losing a game against an improving but yet elite squad is considered a big plus. Or have the might Pats fallen so much that you are now please with close defeats?

Ridley's fumble was as much due to good D by Carolina rather than the NE's failure to execute. Defences are allowed to make plays as well.

I can see you beating Denver next week, but I'm pretty surprised you guys are virtually rejoicing a loss to a yet unproven team.

[Superman]

All elite Qbs have a double standard. If that same hit is applied to Geno Smith or Ben Roethlisberge in the niners/saints game no foul is called.

 

And the only double standard for Brady in this case maybe from the media who thought he was justified in wanting an explanation. He is still probably going to get fined from the league.

 

Umm, if that same hit is applied to a taller QB, it would have been across their chest, not their neck and head. If they did get hit in the neck and head area, it would have been called. Has nothing to do with the status of the QB.

 

And the media's double standard is exactly what I'm talking about. They and the fans ripped Dez Bryant for going crazy on the sideline, even though he was trying (albeit not in the proper way) to light a fire under his teammates. Now Brady goes after a ref, using profanity -- none of which do I think is the worst thing in the world, by the way, but it wasn't exactly a great display of sporting conduct -- and all everyone says is how justified he was. 

[amfootball]

Umm, if that same hit is applied to a taller QB, it would have been across their chest, not their neck and head. If they did get hit in the neck and head area, it would have been called. Has nothing to do with the status of the QB.

 

And the media's double standard is exactly what I'm talking about. They and the fans ripped Dez Bryant for going crazy on the sideline, even though he was trying (albeit not in the proper way) to light a fire under his teammates. Now Brady goes after a ref, using profanity -- none of which do I think is the worst thing in the world, by the way, but it wasn't exactly a great display of sporting conduct -- and all everyone says is how justified he was. 

In terms of Dez and Brady the double standard has to do more with Brady's resume both on the field and OFF. Dez has been a problem child since he came into the league with off-field incidents and known as an immature player on the field so he has little leeway with the media for obvious reasons. Brady has always been emotional guy like Marino and even with his outbursts in week 2 they were not directed at anyone just more out of frustration, him yelling into the air whereas Dez was going up and down the sideline yelling at his OC and teammates for an entire half. And Brady was heavily criticized for the entire week following the Jets game and he said in his post game comments that he needs to keep control better whereas Bryant said he was justified in his tirade.

 

And I have seen much worse hits on non-elite QBs that were not flagged compared to the Brees hit.

[braveheartcolt]

In terms of Dez and Brady the double standard has to do more with Brady's resume both on the field and OFF. Dez has been a problem child since he came into the league with off-field incidents and know as an immature player on the field so he has little leeway with the media for obvious reasons. Brady has always been emotional guy like Marino and even with his outbursts in week 2 they were not directed at anyone just more out of frustration, him yelling into the air whereas Dez was going up and down the sideline yelling at his OC and teammates for an entire half.

And I have seen much worse hits on non-elite QBs that were not flagged compared to Brees.

Oh give me a break. He acted like a jerk. No big deal if I'm honest, but all these effots to justify his actions are just silly. He's been cranky all year. I think he's getting a hard time from Gisele.

[amfootball]

Oh give me a break. He acted like a jerk. No big deal if I'm honest, but all these effots to justify his actions are just silly. He's been cranky all year. I think he's getting a hard time from Gisele.

Who said his behavior was acceptable? The issue has been the media perception which they have given him a bit of a pass given the circumstances.

 

I have always liked emotional players that care to be honest. I don't care what a guy does as long as he does not get a penalty on the field for it. It is an emotional game and Brady to my knowledge has never been flagged so his emotions positive or negative have been in step with the spirit of the game.

[GoPats]

Didn't the Panthers have opportunities to score more points, but fail as well? Two teams on the field if I recall. I'm not sure why losing a game against an improving but yet elite squad is considered a big plus. Or have the might Pats fallen so much that you are now please with close defeats?

Ridley's fumble was as much due to good D by Carolina rather than the NE's failure to execute. Defences are allowed to make plays as well.

I can see you beating Denver next week, but I'm pretty surprised you guys are virtually rejoicing a loss to a yet unproven team.

 

Well sure, the Panthers could have played better also. That's pretty broad-based logic. But they didn't turn the ball over in the red zone and only had to settle for a FG once instead of twice. That was the difference in the game. Objectively, the Patriots "left more points" on the field than Carolina. 

 

I completely disagree with you on Ridley's fumble. That was a play where an NFL back has to hold onto the ball better, not an exceptional defensive effort. It's not like the defensive player ripped it out of his hands. It was a fairly weak swipe at the ball and Ridley obviously didn't have it secured, as is often the case with him. Ball security has been an issue and turnovers are killers. At least three, possibly seven points off the board right there.

 

I understand that, in some ways, the Panthers have proven nothing, but they've won six straight games and their defense was in the top 10 (or maybe even top five) of every significant defensive statistical category going into the game. Time will tell whether or not they are for real. But during the ebb and flow of any season, teams get hot and play very well, and that's the case with Carolina right now.

 

I'm never "happy" with a loss, but given how this season has gone, it was good to see the Patriots go into a hostile environment on a Monday night that had a playoff-game-type feel to it and go back-and-forth with a team like that. There's also a sense that they "beat themselves" in some small way, which is always better than getting your butt kicked through your hat. "Rejoicing" is a little hyperbole on your part. There are losses where, as a fan, you aren't quite as down the next day. I feel better about this loss than, for example, you guys probably felt after getting blown out by the St. Louis (expletive) Rams! 

[Shane Bond]

GoPats - If Tuck Rule was followed based on the rule book, you shouldn't have any issues with the call Monday. It was based on the rule book too.

 

I really we are making a big deal about this one call which was called based on the rule book. Like i said before, whether the rule is right or wrong is for discussion.

 

Also, Tom brady wasnt asking for an explanation. He clearly said "F***king nonsense" which was captured, thats not you ask for ax explanation .

[BOTT]

In terms of Dez and Brady the double standard has to do more with Brady's resume both on the field and OFF. Dez has been a problem child since he came into the league with off-field incidents and known as an immature player on the field so he has little leeway with the media for obvious reasons. Brady has always been emotional guy like Marino and even with his outbursts in week 2 they were not directed at anyone just more out of frustration, him yelling into the air whereas Dez was going up and down the sideline yelling at his OC and teammates for an entire half. And Brady was heavily criticized for the entire week following the Jets game and he said in his post game comments that he needs to keep control better whereas Bryant said he was justified in his tirade.

 

And I have seen much worse hits on non-elite QBs that were not flagged compared to the Brees hit.

Non elite quarterbacks get calls too, it's just nobody cares enough to remember. Geno Smith got a little bump going out of bounds that sealed a victory over the Bills. If the elite QB's were protected as much as fans think Manning would have gotten a flag on that low hit against the Chiefs.

[Shane Bond]

Oh give me a break. He acted like a jerk. No big deal if I'm honest, but all these effots to justify his actions are just silly. He's been cranky all year. I think he's getting a hard time from Gisele.

 

I agree, one thing i dont understand with some of these NE fans here is Brady and NE can never go wrong.

[GoPats]

GoPats - If Tuck Rule was followed based on the rule book, you shouldn't have any issues with the call Monday. It was based on the rule book too.

 

I really we are making a big deal about this one call which was called based on the rule book. Like i said before, whether the rule is right or wrong is for discussion.

 

Also, Tom brady wasnt asking for an explanation. He clearly said "F***king nonsense" which was captured, thats not you ask for ax explanation .

 

Not exactly. There is little room for interpretation with the way the Tuck Rule was written in 2001. A pass interference call is classified as a "judgment call." 

 

That's why one play would be review-able, and the other would not. Coaches cannot challenge PI calls. But when the Tuck Rule existed, it was challenge-able. 

 

Regarding Brady, I would rather have seen him calmly shake hands with Newton and walk off the field. I'm not condoning his actions, nor am I defending them. We don't know what the ref said in response before Brady said, "That's F-nonsense." I think ending a game like that deserves a little more explanation from the ref. Some of them over-explain things (hello, Ed Hoculi) but in this case, saying, "There was no foul on the play. Game over," is a little chicken-poop. They didn't want to make the call, or the non-call... that was obvious. Then they ran off the field like cowards! 

 

Check out this transcript from the ref (Blakeman) and count the number of times he says, "in essence." 

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2013/11/referee_clete_blakeman_explains_controversial_call.html\

 

They know they blew it. 

[amfootball]

Non elite quarterbacks get calls too, it's just nobody cares enough to remember. Geno Smith got a little bump going out of bounds that sealed a victory over the Bills. If the elite QB's were protected as much as fans think Manning would have gotten a flag on that low hit against the Chiefs.

Sure. It happens. But for sure the elite guys are protected more.

[GoPats]

I agree, one thing i dont understand with some of these NE fans here is Brady and NE can never go wrong.

 

Untrue. We're actually a bunch of cynical jerks, and we get down on him when he deserves it.  ;)

 

I also hate his crazy-creepy-fruity lifestyle, but I don't care, lol... 

[Drastik]

patriots got a real screw job... the karma from the tuck game is still alive...

[amfootball]

I agree, one thing i dont understand with some of these NE fans here is Brady and NE can never go wrong.

You haven't been reading then. No one is defending Brady's behavior. But one of the things I have also admired about him is the fact that he will admit when he is wrong whether it be something like Monday night or an on field play. He said he could have made a better throw to Gronk. We all make mistakes but being able to admit them and be accountable is the mark of true character. Probably explains why Brady's teammates love him so much.

[Superman]

In terms of Dez and Brady the double standard has to do more with Brady's resume both on the field and OFF. Dez has been a problem child since he came into the league with off-field incidents and known as an immature player on the field so he has little leeway with the media for obvious reasons. Brady has always been emotional guy like Marino and even with his outbursts in week 2 they were not directed at anyone just more out of frustration, him yelling into the air whereas Dez was going up and down the sideline yelling at his OC and teammates for an entire half. And Brady was heavily criticized for the entire week following the Jets game and he said in his post game comments that he needs to keep control better whereas Bryant said he was justified in his tirade.

 

And I have seen much worse hits on non-elite QBs that were not flagged compared to the Brees hit.

 

Dez gets a bad rap, but he hasn't been a problem child. His issues are many and varied, but they have not impacted his play on the field. He's just the league's poster child for a petulant wide receiver, and it's unfortunate because I think everything he does gets blown out of proportion.

 

And it's not surprising that you're blowing them up, while at the same time downplaying Brady's antics. Again, I'm not trying to bury Brady, I'm just saying that if Dez Bryant did what he did (or any number of other players that aren't media darlings like Brady), there would be very few members of the media coming to his defense, the way they're protectively flocking to Brady.

 

Lastly, this really has nothing to do with the hit on Brees. The call was correct, and while the refs miss calls, they make a concerted effort to protect EVERY QB from hits to the neck and head area. Luck got hit in the head against the Texans (or Broncos?), and the refs didn't call it. But they called a ticky tack roughing call against the Texans that even some Colts fans didn't like. It was a foul according to the rules, and it was called because the refs want to protect QBs. Even someone with reputation and stature like Luck, who gets the benefit of ticky tack calls, doesn't get every call. So while I'm sure you have seen worse hits on QBs that didn't get called, I don't think that has anything to do with the way the league wants forcible contact to the neck and head flagged. There's no getting around the Brees' call, and it has nothing to do with the fact that he's Brees. Case Keenum would have gotten that call. It was plainly obvious.

[Superman]

You haven't been reading then. No one is defending Brady's behavior. But one of the things I have also admired about him is the fact that he will admit when he is wrong whether it be something like Monday night or an on field play. He said he could have made a better throw to Gronk. We all make mistakes but being able to admit them and be accountable is the mark of true character. Probably explains why Brady's teammates love him so much.

 

Maybe not defending, but certainly justifying and marginalizing, complete with the patented "Manning does the same thing!" defense from Yehoodi.

[braveheartcolt]

Well sure, the Panthers could have played better also. That's pretty broad-based logic. But they didn't turn the ball over in the red zone and only had to settle for a FG once instead of twice. That was the difference in the game. Objectively, the Patriots "left more points" on the field than Carolina.

I completely disagree with you on Ridley's fumble. That was a play where an NFL back has to hold onto the ball better, not an exceptional defensive effort. It's not like the defensive player ripped it out of his hands. It was a fairly weak swipe at the ball and Ridley obviously didn't have it secured, as is often the case with him. Ball security has been an issue and turnovers are killers. At least three, possibly seven points off the board right there.

I understand that, in some ways, the Panthers have proven nothing, but they've won six straight games and their defense was in the top 10 (or maybe even top five) of every significant defensive statistical category going into the game. Time will tell whether or not they are for real. But during the ebb and flow of any season, teams get hot and play very well, and that's the case with Carolina right now.

I'm never "happy" with a loss, but given how this season has gone, it was good to see the Patriots go into a hostile environment on a Monday night that had a playoff-game-type feel to it and go back-and-forth with a team like that. There's also a sense that they "beat themselves" in some small way, which is always better than getting your butt kicked through your hat. "Rejoicing" is a little hyperbole on your part. There are losses where, as a fan, you aren't quite as down the next day. I feel better about this loss than, for example, you guys probably felt after getting blown out by the St. Louis (expletive) Rams!

Never said it a 'great' defensive play, but he knocked the ball. Like he's supposed to do. Credit to him at least.

The rest? Hyperbole? Me? Poetic license perhaps.....

If we meet you guys in the play-offs, Mrs Wallace and I are going to have a 'taser' bet like that Bears / Packers couple!

[Superman]

I'm sure Brady would tell you that he would not do that again and chalk it up to a "heat of the moment" situation. He is an emotional player on the field, as we all know. 

 

Probably so. That's why I appreciated his presser comments. After going after the ref, I expected him to double down, and he completely backed off and took responsibility. After having calmed down and reflected, he did the right thing. Credit to him.

 

But Dez Bryant doesn't get that treatment. If he had blown up like that, then calmed down and did the right thing, people would be calling for him to be suspended. It's neither here nor there, but there's a huge double standard.

[amfootball]

Dez gets a bad rap, but he hasn't been a problem child. His issues are many and varied, but they have not impacted his play on the field. He's just the league's poster child for a petulant wide receiver, and it's unfortunate because I think everything he does gets blown out of proportion.

 

And it's not surprising that you're blowing them up, while at the same time downplaying Brady's antics. Again, I'm not trying to bury Brady, I'm just saying that if Dez Bryant did what he did (or any number of other players that aren't media darlings like Brady), there would be very few members of the media coming to his defense, the way they're protectively flocking to Brady.

 

Lastly, this really has nothing to do with the hit on Brees. The call was correct, and while the refs miss calls, they make a concerted effort to protect EVERY QB from hits to the neck and head area. Luck got hit in the head against the Texans (or Broncos?), and the refs didn't call it. But they called a ticky tack roughing call against the Texans that even some Colts fans didn't like. It was a foul according to the rules, and it was called because the refs want to protect QBs. Even someone with reputation and stature like Luck, who gets the benefit of ticky tack calls, doesn't get every call. So while I'm sure you have seen worse hits on QBs that didn't get called, I don't think that has anything to do with the way the league wants forcible contact to the neck and head flagged. There's no getting around the Brees' call, and it has nothing to do with the fact that he's Brees. Case Keenum would have gotten that call. It was plainly obvious.

Very few see Brady's behavior in the same light as Bryant's for the reasons I stated. Everyone understood Brady's reaction given the circumstances which was heat of the moment but Bryant made the game with the Lions about him and Johnson and then wondered why the cameras were glued to him during his tirade. If you can find me an example where Brady said before a game he was as good or better then another QB and then went out to try to prove it and then yelled for an entire half when he couldn't, I will agree with you. Otherwise it is an apples to oranges comparison.

[BOTT]

Sure. It happens. But for sure the elite guys are protected more.

Vick tried pulling that card a couple years ago and it was thoroughly disproven. Jason Cambpell was getting a higher percentage of roughing calls than Tom Brady.

[amfootball]

Maybe not defending, but certainly justifying and marginalizing, complete with the patented "Manning does the same thing!" defense from Yehoodi.

And many here are blowing it out of proportion like Brady shot someone's dog. As usual the truth lies in the middle.

[amfootball]

Vick tried pulling that card a couple years ago and it was thoroughly disproven. Jason Cambpell was getting a higher percentage of roughing calls than Tom Brady.

It is not about roughing calls as the elite guys take few hits because they get rid of the ball faster. It is about the consistency of the call regardless of player.

[BOTT]

It is not about roughing calls as the elite guys take few hits because they get rid of the ball faster. It is about the consistency of the call regardless of player.

See what you wanna see I guess

[Shane Bond]

Not exactly. There is little room for interpretation with the way the Tuck Rule was written in 2001. A pass interference call is classified as a "judgment call." 

 

That's why one play would be review-able, and the other would not. Coaches cannot challenge PI calls. But when the Tuck Rule existed, it was challenge-able. 

 

Regarding Brady, I would rather have seen him calmly shake hands with Newton and walk off the field. I'm not condoning his actions, nor am I defending them. We don't know what the ref said in response before Brady said, "That's F-nonsense." I think ending a game like that deserves a little more explanation from the ref. Some of them over-explain things (hello, Ed Hoculi) but in this case, saying, "There was no foul on the play. Game over," is a little chicken-poop. They didn't want to make the call, or the non-call... that was obvious. Then they ran off the field like cowards! 

 

Check out this transcript from the ref (Blakeman) and count the number of times he says, "in essence." 

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2013/11/referee_clete_blakeman_explains_controversial_call.html\

 

They know they blew it. 

 

If the ball is tipped or intercepted, the PI or holding doesnt apply. Thats the rule right now. Based on that rule, its the right call. Now whether the rule itself is right or wrong is for discussion. Similar to what they did with Tuck rule and eliminated it.

[Shane Bond]

Untrue. We're actually a bunch of cynical jerks, and we get down on him when he deserves it.  ;)

 

I also hate his crazy-creepy-fruity lifestyle, but I don't care, lol... 

 

I love him for his fighting spirits, his never die attitude etc. He could just restrict himself with some of the activities like yelling at Brian, kicking Ed Reed etc. I mean he wasnt like this before.

[shecolt]

first off Brady said that because they did not want to say what they think in the presser  . . . after all every pats opponent is "the best at doing everything" most of the time they say it out of respect, sometimes it true, sometimes they just pick the good players so what they say is true, and sometimes it is plan political nonsense for the presser and public . . . Brady is not going to say "I say the play and it was an ^^^ call and can not see why they have their jobs" . . . he is going to pass it off and play jimmy the dunce . . .

 

as for Manning being upset, he was mad because the refs made Denver take a timeout and give back SD TO, as the clock was key at the point in the game preserving SD's TO help them as they could stop the clock on more time . . . Brady is not stupid and I don't believe his presser . .. . I got no problem with a QB yelling at a ref for a flag pick up no more than I have a problem with a QB getting at a ref for giving the TO back to SD . .. you are the one applying a double standard not me . . . I view them consistently . .  . 

 

As I read your post, it seemed to me like you were implying that Brady was lying.  And, if so, I'm going to have to defend him.

 

I think it's entirely possible that Brady did not see the play.  It went very fast and there were all these big, tall men that could very well have been blocking his vision. 

 

My thought was that Brady was upset at the time because an explanation was not given and not because he thought picking up the flag was wrong.

 

And, I think that is what the other poster was trying to point out . . . that Manning saw what happened and was upset whereas Brady didn't see what actually happened and was upset.

 

And, that doesn't mean that I blame Brady for being upset . . . I would have been also.

 

I do think that he probably wishes that he had acted a "little" calmer as this has become a story not just for the sporting world, but I saw coverage of it on a news channel last night that is usually dedicated primarily to politics.

[Superman]

Very few see Brady's behavior in the same light as Bryant's for the reasons I stated. Everyone understood Brady's reaction given the circumstances which was heat of the moment but Bryant made the game with the Lions about him and Johnson and then wondered why the cameras were glued to him during his tirade. If you can find me an example where Brady said before a game he was as good or better then another QB and then went out to try to prove it and then yelled for an entire half when he couldn't, I will agree with you. Otherwise it is an apples to oranges comparison.

 

My comment was purely hypothetical. I'm not saying Bryant didn't deserve some criticism, I'm saying it was blown out of proportion. And I think if he did what Brady did, it would have been blown out of proportion. But Brady gets sympathized with.

 

Clear double standard.

[amfootball]

My comment was purely hypothetical. I'm not saying Bryant didn't deserve some criticism, I'm saying it was blown out of proportion. And I think if he did what Brady did, it would have been blown out of proportion. But Brady gets sympathized with.

 

Clear double standard.

Sure that is my point. Brady's standard is one of a three time SB champ and two time SB MVP AND league MVP and he plays the leadership position on the team - QB - and has never been in trouble off the field. Bryant's resume is just the opposite and his position is associated with diva-like behavior which he only underscored by his comments regarding Johnson before the Lions game. You can call it double standard if you want but that characterization assumes both sides are equal and that is not true in this case.

[Superman]

Sure that is my point. Brady's standard is one of a three time SB champ and two time SB MVP AND league MVP and he plays the leadership position on the team - QB - and has never been in trouble off the field. Bryant's resume is just the opposite and his position is associated with diva-like behavior which he only underscored by his comments regarding Johnson before the Lions game. You can call it double standard if you want but that characterization assumes both sides are equal and that is not true in this case.

 

You're making me think you don't know what a double standard is. Sometimes there are justifications for double standards (I don't think accolades like SB champ and MVP and whatnot are justifications, but I'll allow that Brady's reputation helps him in this case, whereas Bryant's hurts him). That doesn't mean the double standard doesn't exist.

 

I'm talking, not about Bryant against the Lions, but a situation like Monday night when frustration was justifiable. Had Dez Bryant gone after the ref the way Brady did, it would be complete pandemonium. Brady, on the other hand, gets sympathized with and defended. That, my friend, is the definition of a double standard.

[amfootball]

You're making me think you don't know what a double standard is. Sometimes there are justifications for double standards (I don't think accolades like SB champ and MVP and whatnot are justifications, but I'll allow that Brady's reputation helps him in this case, whereas Bryant's hurts him). That doesn't mean the double standard doesn't exist.

 

I'm talking, not about Bryant against the Lions, but a situation like Monday night when frustration was justifiable. Had Dez Bryant gone after the ref the way Brady did, it would be complete pandemonium. Brady, on the other hand, gets sympathized with and defended. That, my friend, is the definition of a double standard.

I guess we can disagree. I don't think Bryant gets creamed if he did what Brady did given the circumstances. Even Brady has received criticism as well not everyone thinks he was justified.

 

And a double standard is usually applied in like circumstances. Brady and Dez could not be further apart in terms of their achievements, reps, position played, etc. The only thing in common is that they play in the NFL. A better comparison would be another QB of Brady's level receiving different treatment which I don't know of one as Manning gets passes too. Or another receiver getting different treatment then Dez which I do not know of as Moss and TO got creamed for the same type of behavior as Dez.

[GoPats]

Never said it a 'great' defensive play, but he knocked the ball. Like he's supposed to do. Credit to him at least.

The rest? Hyperbole? Me? Poetic license perhaps.....

If we meet you guys in the play-offs, Mrs Wallace and I are going to have a 'taser' bet like that Bears / Packers couple!

 

1. Film that.

2. Post to youtube.

 

Cheers, kind sir. 

[Superman]

I guess we can disagree. I don't think Bryant gets creamed if he did what Brady did given the circumstances. Even Brady has received criticism as well not everyone thinks he was justified.

 

And a double standard is usually applied in like circumstances. Brady and Dez could not be further apart in terms of their achievements, reps, position played, etc. The only thing in common is that they play in the NFL. A better comparison would be another QB of Brady's level receiving different treatment which I don't know of one as Manning gets passes too. Or another receiver getting different treatment then Dez which I do not know of as Moss and TO got creamed for the same type of behavior as Dez.

 

Like I said, sometimes double standards are justified. In this case, it's purely hypothetical. I don't think Pats fans would be defending Peyton Manning the way they're defending Tom Brady, but again, that's hypothetical because Manning has never chased a ref into the tunnel while dropping profanities.

[GoPats]

If the ball is tipped or intercepted, the PI or holding doesnt apply. Thats the rule right now. Based on that rule, its the right call. Now whether the rule itself is right or wrong is for discussion. Similar to what they did with Tuck rule and eliminated it.

 

Right, but... what they missed is that the contact started well before the ball was picked. That's what I'm saying.