Tom Brady looked like Greg Brady last night. If not for Wes Welker and his hustling Yards-After-Catch average (which still didn't work out to too much), Brady would have looked extremely ordinary last night. 18 times knocked down.
I had thought that the Giants D needed to have a perfect gameplan to beat the Pats: pressure Brady, take the deep ball away, take your chances with the underneath route, no silly penalties, and win the turnover battle.
Brady pressured, no deep balls, underneath route given up but without too much damage, one silly pass interference that led to the first TD, and even in turnovers (plus two more for the Pats on downs).
Good enough.
I know it's only 2008, but that's the Catch of the Century right there. The whole play was simply amazing. Look at the replay: Manning should have been sacked about 4 times. The initial grab, the hand to the helmet, the tug on the jersey, and then almost getting tripped up scrambling away. And still he got that ball off and Tyree somehow grabs it, pins it, then controls it without dropping it.
Major props to the Giants. I have nothing bad to say about Eli Manning anymore. If anyone says he's still a crappy QB, then you obviously need to watch a bit more NFL, because you'd realize that he is now miles ahead of the QB he was at the beginning of this season.
Oh, and Belichick? Quit being such a damned sore loser. How embarrassing for him to act like such a child.
first NFL game id ever seen and as a result of it i only had 3.5 hours sleep.
American "football" actually looks half decent. I didnt understand most the rules but the stadium looked amazing and the game seemed quite exciting.
btw, why is the game divided into quarters? Is it just for advertising?
Don't expect every game to be like this, though. In all honesty, I have to say that stands out to me as perhaps one of the best NFL games ever. Definitely in the top 5 that I've personally watched.
I guess the quarters thing is just because of the physical demands of the game. Yes, there are a lot of breaks in action, but with all the hitting that goes on, I would say it's about impossible to expect the teams to go in halves.
this was the best superbowl game and probably one of the best games in the history of the game. That said the sport is generally shite. The quarters, the time outs even the video tape for the referees to go back is all done for commercial breaks. one of the most boring long winded games in the world. uggg. i love watching highlights, and I ABSOLUTELY LOVE PLAYING IT, but i can't stand watching it.
The second act of the "Spygate" scandal began late in Super Bowl week. I'd like to drop my Tuesday Morning Quarterback persona and offer some observations on why these events are happening now and what they mean.
First, the timeline: The initial incident happened in September. After the New England Patriots were caught violating league rules by filming the New York Jets' sideline during a Week 1 game, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell stripped New England of a first-round draft choice, fined the team $250,000, fined coach Bill Belichick $500,000 and issued a harsh statement saying the Patriots' actions constituted a "calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid long-standing rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition."
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Morry Gash
Roger Goodell answered a lot of questions Friday that the NFL had refused to answer for months.
Belichick responded with a brief apology that referred only to sideline taping during games. Then, the first of many strange things happened. Goodell went on national television and implied the Patriots were dragging their feet about his order to hand over other cheating materials; he threatened them with more penalties. And then, the second of many strange things happened. Four days later, the NFL announced it had destroyed all cheating materials and refused to say what had been destroyed.
From that moment in late September until Friday, the NFL never answered the questions of exactly what the Patriots did and why the evidence was destroyed. People, including me, put these questions to NFL spokesman Greg Aiello and to Goodell, but were told the league would not reveal what was in the destroyed evidence. In December, The New York Times pressed the NFL to say what was in the destroyed materials, and again, the league refused. At his annual state of the league address Friday, Goodell made his first public comments about the destroyed evidence.
So, if you are a New England supporter, or simply a sports fan, wondering, "Why is all this coming out right before the Super Bowl?" the answer is, "Because the NFL would not answer the questions until Goodell was in front of the media this week." Some of this information might have emerged weeks or months ago, had the NFL not acted as if there were something to hide on the tapes.
ESPN and other outlets have been working on Spygate stories for weeks or longer, and all competing to be first with any further revelations. I can assure you there was no attempt to time this to the Super Bowl. Far from it.
Flash back to September. After the league made its strange decision to destroy the materials, then refused to say what they contained, several media figures, including me, did this Journalism 101 exercise: Current scandal involves current taping by the Patriots. Are there any former Patriots video officials from New England's Super Bowl runs? That led to a former New England scout and video department official named Matt Walsh, who now lives in Hawaii. Simultaneously, the NFL grapevine was alive with rumors -- caution, rumors -- that the Patriots were guilty not just of taping sidelines during games but rather of much more serious transgressions. The primary rumor, which was reported Saturday by the Boston Herald, was that the Patriots secretly taped the St. Louis Rams' private walk-through before Super Bowl XXXVI, that the Pats knew some of the Rams' plays and formations in advance.
Taping from the sidelines during games, although forbidden, is regarded as a minor violation of the rules. Secret taping of a Super Bowl opponent's practice, if true, would be much more serious.
Throughout the fall, I, as well as other journalists, had many conversations with Walsh. He would not say he taped the Rams' walk-through, but he would not deny it, either. He would not go on the record about what he knows.
Late in Super Bowl week, Walsh agreed with ESPN and the Times to go on the record as saying he knows damaging information about the Patriots that he will reveal if asked by the NFL. Walsh further noted that, although the NFL announced it had investigated New England's videotaping practices, the league had never spoken to him. People are right to be skeptical about Walsh's saying he knows something damning but not revealing it. Walsh says he fears legal retaliation by the Patriots because he signed a non-disclosure agreement when he left the team. He has been advised by an attorney that he will be on firmer ground if he reveals what he knows only at the request of the NFL or Congress.
Simultaneously, the Times learned that Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania -- the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has some jurisdiction over the NFL's precious antitrust exemption -- wants to hold hearings on why the material collected in the NFL's investigation was destroyed.
Think Congress has no business investigating sports? Most NFL teams play in publicly subsidized stadiums, and NFL games are aired over public airwaves controlled by federal licenses. The licenses, among other things, prohibit any pre-arrangement or artifice in what is presented as live competition. If a Super Bowl were affected by cheating, that would be a legitimate matter of concern to Congress. Plus, the recent lesson learned via baseball and steroids was that Major League Baseball did not clean up its own house until Congress put some pressure on.
At his annual Super Bowl news conference Friday, Goodell was peppered with questions about why the New England materials were destroyed. This was painful to watch; the NFL is an image-based enterprise, yet painted itself into a public relations corner by acting in a high-handed, suspicious way. If Goodell had been forthright about the tapes in the first place, perhaps no one would be spoiling the Super Bowl party.
At the news conference, Goodell disclosed several things the NFL previously had refused to discuss. He said that only six tapes and some notes had been turned over to the league by the Patriots, not voluminous materials, as had been assumed; that the tapes all contained only in-game film of opponents' sidelines; and that the oldest tape was from the 2006 regular season, with nothing before that year. Goodell went on to say several times that attempting to steal sideline signals during games is common in football and, although not encouraged, is viewed as an occupational hazard in the sport. Goodell also asserted the Patriots' questionable activities did not alter the outcome of any game.
Goodell's remarks were puzzling in several respects. First, if the Patriots were guilty only of occasional sideline taping, this would seem to merit a letter of reprimand. So why were the Patriots hit with the harshest fine in NFL history? When the scandal first broke, Goodell used extremely strong language about New England's sins. Now, he was implying the whole thing was no big deal.
Next, Goodell did not clarify whether the league had asked only for sideline tapes taken during games or whether this was all the Patriots volunteered. If New England gave the league only video taken from the sidelines during games, plus notes developed from such videos, there would be no evidence of really serious cheating, such as clandestine taping of other teams' walk-throughs.
Finally, Goodell declared that the materials the league destroyed contained no evidence of Super Bowl cheating. But the material went back only to 2006. The Patriots' Super Bowl wins came in 2002, 2004 and 2005. Of course the material contained no evidence of Super Bowl cheating! Did the league ask just for materials dating to 2006, or was that all the Patriots volunteered? Either way, it is more than curious that the league inspected one tape from this season and the rest, materials from a year when the Patriots did not appear in a Super Bowl.
Saturday morning, the Boston Herald ran a story asserting the Patriots secretly taped the Rams' private walk-through before Super Bowl XXXVI. The Herald cited an unnamed source and did not name Walsh as the person behind the camera.
[+] Enlarge
Brian Bahr/Getty Images
Ty Law and the Patriots defense stymied the Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI. Law's first-half interception helped the Pats beat the NFL's highest-scoring team.
Also Saturday, Mike Fish reported on ESPN that St. Louis' walk-through was devoted to red zone plays -- all new plays and new formations the Rams had not shown during the season. Going into that Super Bowl, the Rams' "Greatest Show on Turf" was the league's highest-scoring team. In that game, St. Louis was held to a field goal in the first half. The Rams kept getting bogged down, as if New England knew what plays were coming. If the Patriots secretly taped the Rams' walk-through, then stopped the red zone plays the Rams showed in that walk-through, then won that Super Bowl by three points, then logic says New England materially benefited from cheating in the Super Bowl. If true, this would be the worst sports scandal since the Black Sox.
Let's put that in capital letters: IF TRUE. We don't yet know whether the Super Bowl allegations are true. Then again, we are into only the second day of information going on the record and the league finally answering some questions about the subject.
The Patriots, for their part, are denying the allegations.
"The suggestion that the New England Patriots recorded the St. Louis Rams' walk-through on the day before Super Bowl XXXVI is absolutely false," Patriots spokesman Stacey James said. "Any suggestion to the contrary is untrue."
Here's another unanswered question. If the materials the Patriots turned over and the league destroyed really were just six sideline videos and some notes, that's pretty innocuous. So why didn't the NFL reveal what was destroyed? If the materials really were minor stuff, why the months of "No comment"?
When news of the second act of Spygate hit the sports world Friday, there was considerable backlash. Many radio and TV analysts initially reacted angrily, as if to say, "This is our private universe. In our private universe, everything is perfect. Keep reality out." But if you love athletic competition, if you want sports to be important and generate lots of money and attention, the games must be honest. Any indication of dishonesty should be deeply unsettling.
Footnote: The Giants held a final walk-through for Super Bowl XLII on Saturday, but the Patriots did not.
Quality of Posts > Quantity of Posts
There is a reason I bleed red. United until I die.
ava by yorkey
Last edited by GocartMozart : 02-04-2008 at 05:00 PM.
It really was one of the biggest catches of all time.
I personally feel that the Cowboys - Bills matchup earlier in the season was the best match i'd ever seen. That game had absolutely everything except the Superbowl trophy itself involved.
I personally feel that the Cowboys - Bills matchup earlier in the season was the best match i'd ever seen. That game had absolutely everything except the Superbowl trophy itself involved.
No way. Dallas in that game was the epitome of offensive sloppiness, and Buffalo collapsed.
Had a great career and it was a pleasure sometimes to watch him play.
I do however had a grip about the media's "can't do wrong" attitude with him that just pissed me off on a regular basis. That and the "God" like reverence they bestowed on him as a quarterback.
Anyways, I digress. All the best with your retirement. The game against Oakland after his father passed was probably a top 3 quarterback performance I have ever watched.
Quote:
Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre has decided to retire.
"I know I can still play, but it's like I told my wife, I'm just tired mentally. I'm just tired," Favre told ESPN's Chris Mortensen in a voice mail messasge.
"If I felt like coming back -- and Deanna [Favre, his wife] and I talked about this -- the only way for me to be successful would be to win a Super Bowl. To go to the Super Bowl and lose, would almost be worse than anything else. Anything less than a Super Bowl win would be unsuccessful," Favre said in the message.
"I know it shouldn't feel unsuccessful, but the only way to come back and make that be the right decision would be to come back and win a Super Bowl and honestly the odds of that, they're tough. Those are big shoes for me to fill, and I guess it was a challenge I wasn't up for. "
Mortensen reported that according to Favre's agent, Bus Cook, Favre informed Packers coach Mike McCarthy of his decision Monday night.
The Gunslinger Retires
Brett Favre leaves the NFL with his name atop several career passing categories. In 2007, he set the record for passing TDs (442), passing yards (61,655) and wins by a starting QB (160) and interceptions (288). Including the playoffs, he played in 275 consecutive games.
Most TD passes TDs
Brett Favre 442
Dan Marino 420
Fran Tarkenton 342
Peyton Manning 306
Most passing yards Passing yards
Favre 61,655
Marino 61,361
John Elway 51,475
Warren Moon 49,325
Interceptions INTs
Favre 288
George Blanda 277
John Hadl 268
Vinny Testaverde 267
A sure-fire first-ballot Hall of Famer, Favre, acquired in a trade with the Atlanta Falcons, led the Packers back to the NFL's elite. He retires with 5,377 carrer completions in 8,758 attempts for 61,655 yards, 442 touchdowns and 288 interceptions, passing Dan Marino's touchdown mark last season.
As a player Favre was known for his durability, his willingness to take risks and turn broken plays into big gains, as well as for the way his love for the game was evident in the way he played. He went to a pair of Super Bowls in 1996 and 1997, winning it all on his first try in Super Bowl XXXI, and was named to nine Pro Bowls.
Cook said as of Tuesday morning, there were no plans for Favre to hold a news conference. The Packers planned a news conference for 4 p.m. ET on Tuesday.
"I talked to Brett this morning and I told him 'nobody forced you to make this decision to retire, but the flip side is nobody encouraged you to play,'" Cook told Mortensen. "Two years ago, Ted [Thompson, the Packers' GM] encouraged him to play, but there was nothing this time around from them offering encouragement or him to come back."
Favre, who returned for the 2007 season when many thought he should have left the game, had a career renaissance in his final season and led the Packers to the NFC Championship Game, where they lost to the eventual Super Bowl champion New York Giants in overtime.
Favre passed Marino for the all-time completions record in 2006, and in 2007 set NFL records for wins by a QB, touchdown passes, pass attempts, pass yards and interceptions in 2007. He claimed the NFL record for career quarterback wins with his 149th victory in Week 2, passed Marino for the TD record in Week 4 and overtook Marino's career passing yards record in Week 15.
Mortensen reported that Favre, who wanted the Packers to obtain Randy Moss when he was a free agent last season, had once again pushed for Moss to join the Packers.
Favre had spoken to Moss late last week and was willing to commit to more than just this season if Moss and the Packers could come to an agreement. But the Packers did not pursue Moss, who re-signed with the Patriots on Monday.
In his voice mail message to Mortensen on Tuesday, Favre said the Packers' lack of pursuit of Moss was not the driving reason why he retired.
"This is not about the Packers and who they got or who they didn't get. I get along fine with [Thompson] and I get along great with [McCarthy]. Do I agree with them all the time? No. But the bottom line is, none of that stuff affected my decision," Favre said.
Surrounded by an underrated group of wide receivers who proved hard to tackle after the catch, Favre had a career-high completion percentage of 66.5 in 2007. He threw for 4,155 yards, 28 touchdowns and only 15 interceptions.
It was a remarkable turnaround from 2005, Favre's final season under former head coach Mike Sherman, when he threw a career-worst 29 interceptions as the Packers went 4-12.
Given Favre's career resurgence, it was widely assumed that he was leaning toward returning for the 2008 season.
He even said as much just before the Packers' Jan. 12 divisional playoff game against Seattle, telling his hometown newspaper that he wasn't approaching the game as if it would be his last and was more optimistic than in years past about returning.
"For the first time in three years, I haven't thought this could be my last game," Favre told the Biloxi [Miss.] Sun Herald. "I would like to continue longer."
ESPN NFL reporter Chris Mortensen and The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Quality of Posts > Quantity of Posts
Please fill out your profiles and introduce yourself to the board HERE
United Zone Proudly Presents: Terrace Talk. Have a look, sign up and participate in our new blog. Click
FOUNDER OF THE KEEP BERBATOV AWAY FROM UNITED CAMPAIGN!!!
Avatar by Papercut, Sig 1 by .ak122. Sig 2 & Userbar by Dirtycheat
02-04-2008, 03:08 PM
Linear Mode
