Skip to content

Week 13 Morning Aftermath

While trying to fall asleep last night after another Sunday devoted almost exclusively to covering another day of NFL action, I had a great idea for the first few paragraphs of this week’s Morning Aftermath.

It was one of those nice moments of satisfaction that come with having one less thing to worry about.

And so, naturally, I now cannot recall what in the hell the great idea was.

So we’ll just launch into this thing without the introductory few paragraphs.  (Other than the ones I just wrote.)  Here are the things that stand out most to yours truly based on the 14 games played on Sunday.

1.  Momentum remains critical for Saints, Colts.

We’ve been banging the drum for a week now regarding the recent experiences — especially in the AFC — of teams that earn postseason byes.

In the last four years, those franchises have failed on five of eight occasions in the divisional round.

The Colts know this reality better than anyone.  They’ve played in three division-round games in the past four years.  In each game, the team that had earned the bye LOST.

Our theory for this odd dynamic in the AFC arises from the competitiveness of the conference.  Over the past four years, the conference that was created upon the merger of the AFL and NFL has had a logjam of excellent teams at the top.  (Last year, for example, the Patriots were on the outside looking in, despite an 11-5 record.)  So the gap between the teams that earn a bye and the teams that don’t is small.  And the boost to the confidence that comes from winning a wild-card game apparently allows the first-round victors to catch flatfooted the teams that had a weekend off.

That dynamic becomes even more pronounced where the team that earned a bye treats the final weeks of the regular season like the third week of the preseason, pulling starters after the first half.

Maybe the folks who are inside the sport are too close to it to recognize this dynamic.  Last week, Colts president Bill Polian said that the facts don’t support the concept of rested teams losing momentum in the playoffs, despite the fact that five of eight AFC teams that secured a bye said farewell to the postseason after only one game.

Former Colts coach Tony Dungy agrees.  After Sunday night’s Vikings-Cardinals game, Dungy expressed disagreement with the Saints’ intention (per Peter King) to try to run the table, and Dungy explained that going 16-0 “is not on the Colts’ mind,” and that their goal is to clinch home-field advantage as soon as possible so that they can give younger players reps and rest the key veterans.

For the Saints, having the hot, rancid breath of Hagar the Horrible and his cohorts on their necks has provided a strong incentive to keep winning.  The Saints surely don’t want to go to the Metrodome in January — and they surely would love to force Minnesota to come to the Bayou.  Last night’s loss by the Vikings means that the Saints need merely to win three of four to secure the top seed in the NFC, even if the suddenly average-looking Vikings somehow run the table.

And even if the Saints finish the regular season with no losses, they still will have to take a week off before playing a postseason game.  Last year in the NFC, both teams that did were bounced in the divisional round.

So keep this concept in mind.  It doesn’t mean that all — or even any — of this year’s top conference seeds will be done after one game.  But there once was a presumption that the AFC and NFC semifinals largely represented tune-up games for the two teams on a collision course to meet in the conference title games.  Lately, those games have been up for grabs, and several of the supposedly great teams that stopped trying to be great down the stretch have had real trouble finding their way through the postseason maze.

(For takes on why the Jaguars should move, the “down by contact” ruling in the Saints-Redskins game, the meaning of the Vikings’ performance on Sunday night, the hype regarding the Mike Vick touchdowns, and more, just click the link below.)


2.  Jaguars should just move now.

On Sunday, the Jacksonville Jaguars hosted the Houston Texans in a key AFC South battle.  With the Jags at 6-5 and the Texans at 5-6, the outcome would have a huge impact on a wild-card field that at times has assumed a “none of the above” vibe.

And a whopping 42,079 showed up to watch the game at Jacksonville Municipal Stadium.

On Sunday, the Jags host the 6-6 Dolphins in another key fight for postseason positioning.  Then, four nights later, the currently 12-0 Colts come to town for a Thursday night game.

Though the league did the Jags no favors by giving them three home games in only eleven days apart, the last chapter in this trio of December games should be a sellout.

If it’s not, they should leave.  Regardless of the reason(s), Jacksonville can’t or won’t support an NFL team, even when it’s winning.

But if they move, the stadium will at least get some use.  In this year’s Gator Bowl, for example, 80,000 are expected to watch West Virginia play Florida State.

3.  “Down by contact” rule needs tweaking.

Prior to 2006, the replay rules did not apply to plays resulting in a fumble after the officials determined that the runner was “down by contact.” 

In 2005, the Competition Committee tried to push through a tweak to the rules that would allow possession to be award to the defense, even if possession is secured by the defense via a scrum that emerged after the whistle had blown.  The owners, however, rejected the proposal.

This is a big play,” Falcons president Rich McKay, a co-chair of the Competition Committee, said at the time.  “This is a turnover.  We haven’t heard the last of it. . . . These are game-changing plays.  Change of possession is one of the most important things we deal with.”

He was right.  The next year, the rule change surfaced again — and this time the owners accepted it.

For the most part, the rule has worked well, even though it encourages players to ignore the mandate to stop playing when the whistle is blown, if there’s any doubt as to the judgment made by the official who’s blowing his whistle loudly and pointing to the ground repeatedly and emphatically.

Still, there’s something about the rule that bothers us.

Based on yesterday’s critical call during overtime of the Saints-Redskins game, we finally figured out the source of our discomfort.  There’s something counterintuitive about action continuing on the field well after an official, who is standing right by the spot where the player was down by contact, is blowing his whistle loudly and pointing to the ground repeatedly and emphatically.

For those of you who missed it (and for any Redskins fans who have already managed to drive the moment out of their minds), Washington fullback Larry Mike Sellers caught a short pass from quarterback Jason Campbell on the first drive of overtime.  Chris McAlister hit Sellers low, and Head Linesman Kent Payne began using his whistle like the horn of a New York cab, and Payne assumed the body language of a New York traffic cop.

Despite Payne’s sounds and gestures, linebacker Troy Evans dove at the ball and collided with Sellers.  They both had a shot at the ball, the ball squirted away, and then McAlister scooped it up with a nonchalance that suggested he really didn’t expect his team to be awarded possession of it.

After a lengthy replay review (we thought there was a time limit), the right decision was made (even though we questioned it on Sunday via Twitter). 

In our view, the question of whether Sellers actually had completed the process of catching the ball was sufficiently unclear to constitute “indisputable visual evidence” to overturn the decision that the Redskins should retain possession.  But the play presented a somewhat unusual situation. 

The ruling on the field was that Sellers had made the catch and that he was down before he fumbled.  Thus, indisputable visual evidence was necessary to overturn the ruling of the catch and/or the ruling of “down by contact.”

In this case, there was insufficient visual evidence to overturn the decision that Sellers had caught the ball, but the video ultimately was clear regarding the fact that the ball was coming out before Sellers’ arm hit the ball.

Ultimately, then, the officials got it right.  But that doesn’t alter our concern regarding the rule as currently written.  At a visceral level, something simply strikes us as odd when the official is giving strong indications that the players should cease and desist, but when in reality the ball is still live.

It becomes even more troublesome when a ball squirts away from the initial post-whistle recovery attempt.   Based on our crude Mississippi-style chronometric measurements, more than two seconds elapsed between the time the whistle blew and the moment McAlister picked up the ball.

And that’s simply too much time.   

So the league needs to look at this rule again.  Either the officials need to not be so demonstrative when doing the “down by contact” thing, or there needs to be a limit on the amount of time after the whistle is blown for the defense to demonstrate clear possession of the loose ball.

Thus, while the rules as currently applied were applied correctly, the visceral sense that the Redskins got jobbed comes from the fact that the Saints secured possession far too long after the whistle when McAlister lifted the ball with all the urgency that Paul Crewe used when picking up the game ball in both versions of The Longest Yard.

4.  Steelers need Polamalu, but it might be too late to matter.

The Steelers have lost six games this year.  In each defeat, safety Troy Polamalu didn’t play.  (In one of the games — a November 15 loss to the Bengals — Polamalu reinjured his knee on the opening drive.)

Coincidence?  Hell no.

Despite all the praise that gets heaped on the 3-4 and the zone blitz and James Harrison and Dick LeBeau, Polamalu has become the cornerstone of the defense.  Without him, they’re average.  With him, they can compete with anyone.

Actually, they might even be worse than average without him.  In a span of 14 days, they’ve lost to the dregs of the AFC West — the Chiefs and the Raiders.  Both losses were fueled by the kind of big plays that Polamalu prevents, like he did when he refused to concede a touchdown to Sidney Rice of the Vikings and tracked him down at the brink of the goal line on a drive that ultimately forced Minnesota to settle for a field goal.

On Sunday, the Polamalu-free Steelers gave up a 17-yard touchdown pass, a 75-yard touchdown pass, and an 88-yard touchdown drive.  All in the fourth quarter.

Four year ago, the Steelers assumed they were done after falling to 7-5.  They ended up running the table, stealing a spot in the playoffs as the sixth seed in the AFC, and then hitting the road to ultimately win the Super Bowl.

This year, that stellar 6-2 start has melted into a 6-6 reality.  Even if they run the table on the regular season, it might not be enough to get a shot to go on the road again in the hopes of winning another championship.

5.  Jim Mora makes his case for more time.

With G.M. Tim Ruskell gone from Seattle, first-year coach Jim Mora is likely feeling a little nervous.

General Managers typically like to hire their own head coaches.  Regardless of how good or bad the current coach is, the G.M. doesn’t fully put his imprint on the

team until the G.M. hires his own coach.

Just ask Dick Jauron, who coached the Bears when G.M. Jerry Angelo was hired.  An unexpected 13-3 season in Angelo’s first year forced the G.M. to bide some more time.  After a 4-12 season and a 7-9 showing, Jauron was gone.

So Mora needs to hope that the team hires a G.M. that would have hired Mora in the first place, or Mora needs to do such a great job that the G.M. has no choice but to keep him.

On both accounts, Mora helped himself Sunday by upsetting a 49ers team that desperately needed the game in order to keep pace with the Cardinals in the NFC West race.

With Mike Holmgren sending out strong signals that he’d be willing to keep Mora around, the win also boosted the Big Show’s candidacy to return to the team. 

Now, the Seahawks unexpectedly have climbed to 5-7, and they’ve got a chance to finish the year at .500, which would give Mora — and in turn Holmgren — an even better shot at working for the franchise in 2010.

6.  Vikings loss an aberration, or a trend?

Ardent followers of the Minnesota Vikings have been waiting for it to happen.  The bubble kept expanding each week; eventually, it had to implode.

And impolode it did on Sunday night in Arizona, the place were the the Vikings had gone last December (with Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback) and toppled the eventual NFC champions by 21 points.

This time around, the Cardinals led by 20 before Minnesota scored a garbage-time touchdown that made the outcome look closer than it was.

So does this mean that the Cardinals have devised a blueprint (or, for the Emmitt Smith aficionados in the crowd, a bootprint) for beating the Vikings?

Probably not, unless the bootprint is “kick the asses of the Minnesota linemen on both sides of the ball.”

The Vikings’ offensive line had its worst showing of the year, with quarterback Brett Favre routinely hurried — and in turn doing the stuff that he usually does when hurried.  He forced plenty of throws, and he had two interceptions.  That number easily could have been a Cutleresque quartet, but for two drops by Adrian Wilson, confirming once again the career path that led fast, agile players to land on the defensive side of the ball.

On the other side of the ball, the neo-Purple People Eaters had zero sacks of a quarterback with all the mobility of a comatose turtle.

So it now appears that the Vikings will have to go on the road to play — and lose to — the Saints in the playoffs.

But before obsessing over that long-overdue payback for the 8-7 Vikings’ 44-10 surprise over the 12-3 Saints in the franchise’s first-ever playoff game some 22 years ago, Minnesota needs to qualify for the postseason.  Based on how the team played last night, it’s no longer looking like a lock.

7.  Chargers face tough decision on Turner.

For the third straight season of the Norv Turner era in San Diego, the Chargers limped out of the gates.

For the third straight season of the Norv Turner era in San Diego, the Chargers have gotten very hot.

Possibly for the third straight season of the Norv Turner era in San Diego, the Chargers will ultimately send the Colts home in January.

Currently, the fourth year of the Norv Turner era in San Diego is scheduled to be the final year of the Norv Turner era in San Diego. 

The Chargers face a tough decision regarding the possibility of extending Turner’s contract.  Giving him a new contract prematurely could lock the Lightning Bolts into a long-term arrangement that, in hindsight, might have been a bad idea.  Waiting too long could put the Chargers in a position where they’re trying to determine Turner’s value after Bill Cowher and Mike Shanahan lift the market to eight-figure heights.

The best test regarding whether the Chargers have arrived arguably comes in six days, when they travel to Dallas, the city where Turner laid the foundation for his coaching career.  Nearly three years ago, Turner was regarded as the favorite to become the new coach of the Cowboys.  The Dallas decision to go with former Chargers defensive coordinator Wade Phillips provided an occasion for more animosity between G.M. A.J. Smith and former Chargers coach Marty Schottenheimer, which resulted in the out-of-the-powder-blue February firing of Schottenheimer, as the exclamation point on a 14-2 season.

And so this game gives Turner a chance to show that his Bolts have bypassed the ‘Boys — and it might be wise for the Chargers to tie Turner up for several more years into the future before the price spikes after the next hiring cycle commences, if Turner can send the Cowboys to 8-5.

8.  Beginning of the end for the ‘Boys.

Regardless of whether the Cowboys find a way to outscore the Chargers on Sunday, the Week 13 loss to the Giants in the Meadowlands confirms that the 8-3 record was deceptively strong, and that December again will result in reality catching up with the Cowboys.

The moment is coming in 12 days, when the Cowboys enter the Superdome to take their lumps.

The Saints, after all, have scored 48 against the Eagles and 48 against the Giants.  Sean Payton, who worked in Dallas before becoming head coach of the Saints, likely has 48 or more in his back pocket for Jerry Jones and company.

Indeed, the Saints have won five straight games against the Cowboys, a streak that dates back two years before the streak of non-playoff wins started.  The last time the two teams met, in 2006, New Orleans won easily, 41-17.

So with that Saturday night game being the centerpiece of the annual December Dallas slip-n-slide, look for the wheels to come off, and for the Cowboys again to either miss the playoffs, or to do nothing when they get there.

Again.

9.  Miami roller coaster continues.

The Dolphins have generated an odd vibe this season.  They play poorly, prompting folks to think they’re not very good.  Then, they play well.

And then, after pulling off a particularly impressive win, they lose.

Then, after again being written off, they win.

Twelve games in, they’re at 6-6, riding the high of a 22-21 win over the Patriots, during which Miami came back from deficits of 14-0 and 21-10.

The season now arguably comes down to Sunday, against the Jaguars.  Currently, Jacksonville holds the No. 6 seed, with a 7-5 record.  A win by the Fins would pull them into the mix for the final spot in the field — a loss would force them to hope for an implosion by the Patriots, who lead the division at 7-5, or the Broncos, who have a firm grip on the top wild-card spot at 8-4. 

It’ll be a tall order for the Dolphins.  Which of course likely means they’ll win.

And then they’ll lose.

10.  Too much is being made of Vick’s two-touchdown day.

We’ll admit that, as Michael Vick was nearing his reinstatement to the NFL, we argued that he was as good or better than many of the current NFL starting quarterbacks.

But that was before we got an eyeful of Post-Prison Mike.

His legendary burst is gone.  Though he still possesses a potent passing arm, the thing that made him truly special was a combination of speed, agility, and elusiveness that allowed him to escape the pocket like Ben Roethlisberger, get to the corner like Vince Young, and then turn it north and outrun everyone like Chris Johnson.

Vick was a different guy from the moment he donned a metallic green helmet, and he has yet to approach the level he occupied during his time in Atlanta.

Our opinion didn’t change on Sunday.

Sure, he was re
sponsible for two touchdowns and one long pass play.  But let’s take a closer look.

First came a five-yard touchdown run from Wildcat formation.  It looked like most of the runs Vick has made all year.  He gets the ball, he looks for some day light, and he gains a few yards.  It just so happened that the play began a few yards from the end zone.

Next came a 43-yard pass to Reggie Brown, a play the Eagles unleashed with a 27-0 lead in the fourth quarter.  At first blush, it appeared that Vick recklessly threw into double coverage.  Actually, he underthrew Brown, who was streaking down the field with the cornerback trailing by a full step or more and the safety help arriving late. 

If Vick had put a little more juice on the throw, it would have been a 50-yard touchdown pass. 

(We realize that Peter King has a different interpretation of the play, and we respect his views.  But I’ve watched it a dozen times.  It was designed to be a touchdown, not a Randy Moss-style intentional fly-stop pattern.) 

The defensive approach made sense, since Vick had thrown the ball only nine times all season, completing only three.

But for a great effort by Brown to stop and come back and make the catch despite being manhandled by a defender, Vick would have still be three-of-nine on the year after the play, because the Eagles would have accepted the interference penalty.

Then came the touchdown pass.  It was a misdirection play that Eagles coach Andy Reid had spent all season setting up. 

Vick takes the shotgun snap, he and nine other guys move left, and tight end Brent Celek bleeds out to the right.  Vick stops and tosses the ball across the field.  Celek catches it and breaks the plane of the end zone as he’s being tackled.

It was a gimmick play, a misdirection.  There was no athletic ability involved other than the ability to stop, turn, and lob the ball back to the receiver.

But the mob is as gullible as it is fickle, and the handful of plays prompted those who had booed him earlier in the game to chant, “We want Mike!”

Bottom line?  With the Eagles long since deciding that Vick won’t be back in 2010 but needing to conjure a market for the second year of his contract, the surgically-selected play calls from Reid and the reaction thereto might have done enough to persuade an unsuspecting owner to conclude that Vick is back.

Even if he actually isn’t.

Permalink 106 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Features, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
106 Responses to “Week 13 Morning Aftermath”
  1. PETTE says: Dec 7, 2009 7:52 AM

    COLTS 16-0 COMING RIGHT UP

  2. brian_21 says: Dec 7, 2009 7:52 AM

    Save me from my 10-page final paper I’m in the middle of — it’s due in a few hours and I don’t want to keep writing. I want to sleep.

  3. Gweez says: Dec 7, 2009 8:04 AM

    Still devasted that the Skin lost that game they so deserved to win. How does your kicker miss a PAT range fg.

  4. Bwa Ha Ha says: Dec 7, 2009 8:05 AM

    My morning after question is:
    Where is Vox and ClapNasty? Isn’t there some Cowboy whining called for? Can one of you Cowboy fans please speak up? Just because the ‘boys take December off, doesn’t mean you should too.

  5. 4ever19 says: Dec 7, 2009 8:08 AM

    As a Colts fan for 45 years (this month; somehow, I started rooting for them the day they got hammered by the Browns in the ’64 championship game), I have to once again express my frustration at the organizational blind spot about the end of the season. It has been shown beyond doubt that if they put the car on wheels for a few weeks it is impossible to get the engine revved up again. The one year they made it to the SB was the year they had to play for their lives in the playoffs. Oh well.

  6. ftomeo says: Dec 7, 2009 8:28 AM

    When will Florio learn that a post that goes on and on and on and on… can have a “Read More” link? Or that a list should have more than one item? Or that if you are slowly going to assemble a list over several hours, you might as well post them as separate items?
    This blog continues to live in 1999.

  7. samh says: Dec 7, 2009 8:44 AM

    You keep spouting off that Jacksonville “can’t” support an NFL team as though they haven’t done it yet. Hello, before this season there were only occasional blackouts. You can’t myopically examine ONE season during the worst economic climate of the team’s history and make a pronouncement about the entire city. Well, you can’t if you’re a journalist. You can if you’re a hack.

  8. SF Saints Fan says: Dec 7, 2009 8:45 AM

    I was at the Saints game. Both teams played hard. The Saints had bad calls and no calls go against them as did the Redskins. One of the Redskins fans behind me kept yelling “Holding!!!! Holding!!!!” every time the Saints went back to pass………, I stopped doing that when I was 12 years old! The missing of the short FG by Washington opened a VERY tiny crack in the window and the Saints blew in like a freight train.
    I told the fans around me when the Saints took over with no timeouts left deep in their own territory needing a TD to tie the game, that it was now the time for Brees to start building the “Legend of Drew Brees.”
    It was time for him to to take his team down and score. I had complete confidence that he would do it.
    He did……..in 38 seconds……
    Saints tied the game……..Saints won the game.
    The Saints added another early chapter in the book “The Legend of Drew Brees”. I hope it becomes a thousand page novel.
    Next chapter……..????

  9. Pack83 says: Dec 7, 2009 8:47 AM

    Favre: 12 games: 3,149 Yards, 26 TDs, 5 INT; 6 rushes, -3 Yards, 0 TD. Rating: 108.5
    Rodgers: 11 games: 3,136 Yards, 22 TDs, 5 INT; 45 rushes, 247 Yards, 3 TDs. Rating: 104.9
    With Favre having a top 2 running back, a MUCH better offensive line, and comparable TE/WR talent, I’m sorry, which QB is having the better year?? It’s a lot closer than anyone has been talking about.

  10. Bob Loblaw says: Dec 7, 2009 8:47 AM

    One bad game = suddenly average looking.
    I’m assuming if the Redskins kicker doesn’t choke away a chip shot FG, you would also make the claim the Saints were suddenly average looking. Same if the Texans hadn’t choked away the game vs. the Colts the week before.

  11. 1of40000 says: Dec 7, 2009 8:50 AM

    I’m from Jacksonville and a die hard Jags fan (we do exist). I love the team and I love the city. My heart hurts when I watch the games. The empty seats put such a damper on even sweet victories like yesterday that I am grateful when the Jags are away. I should be at these games but I’ve moved away from Jacksonville. There simply wasn’t a viable jobs market there when I graduated from college. There is no excuse and while I don’t want the Jaguars to leave I know that with every passing game the possibility looks more and more likely. They might escape LA with some luck as there are a number of legally more likely suitors but if the city doesn’t begin to overachieve even an owner as loyal as Wayne Weaver will have to make the sound business decision. I don’t know how or if there is a fix to this situation but the worst part is the Jags leaving would have a devastating effect on Jacksonville’s national image, thus causing the city to endure even further economic hardship. My heart aches for the city and the franchise.

  12. Buc-em says: Dec 7, 2009 9:30 AM

    I moved to Jacksonville from Tampa 4 years ago. First thing I noticed was the lack of support and excitment for the Jags. In Tampa people actually care about the bucs (even at 1-11 they have way higher attendance than the 7-5 jags). The only thing these people up here care about is their gators/seminoles/dawgs. Funny thing is, I don’t think any of these rednecks even went to these schools…… If the jags leave they won’t care. Only the 40K that went Sunday will shed a tear. The other million can put their jorts on, grab a natty, and go tailgate at a school they have no ties to. Yee-haw!

  13. Silva59 says: Dec 7, 2009 9:35 AM

    For those of you who missed it (and for any Redskins fans who have already managed to drive the moment out of their minds), Washington fullback *Larry* Sellers caught a short pass from quarterback Jason Campbell on the first drive of overtime. Chris McAlister hit Sellers low, and Head Linesman Kent Payne began using his whistle like the horn of a New York cab, and Payne assumed the body language of a New York traffic cop.
    —————————
    That would be MIKE Sellers…

  14. Tony Alexander says: Dec 7, 2009 9:39 AM

    Who is “Larry” Sellers, Florio? Good god man…

  15. BigMikeSkinsFan says: Dec 7, 2009 9:44 AM

    Dont lie and say the Colts aren’t thinking about going 16-0. Peyton is a competitor and he does not like that Brady has the TD record and the perfect regular season record.
    He will want that for himself.

  16. SliKRiK says: Dec 7, 2009 9:44 AM

    I hope the Colts and Saints lose a game. I don’t feel like hearing that crack-head Mercury Morris start rapping on ESPN again!

  17. Favre On HGH says: Dec 7, 2009 9:44 AM

    Jacksonville having 3 games so close together and in December seems bad but tickets do go on sale in June – August.
    Don’t think the schedule has much to do with it since most teams sell most of the tickets months ago. Usually just the nose bleed seats are left for borderline sell outs.
    Need to break this into separate article segments.
    Morning Aftermath 1 – Momentum remains critical for Saints, Colts.
    Morning Aftermath 2 – Jaguars should just move now.
    Used to have split articles for all of the games, no reason to bunch it for a few different points. Still read all of it but don’t always have the attention span to stay interested for the entire time.
    By the time I hit the third point all I could think about was the whooping Favre and the Vikings just received.

  18. Sterling says: Dec 7, 2009 9:44 AM

    Pack83:
    Minnesota: 10-2
    Green Bay: 7-4 (after tonight: either 8-4 or 7-5)
    Minnesota vs. Green Bay: 2-0
    Wins and losses are the only stat that matters. Green Bay will not get to the playoffs on the basis of Rodgers’ yards/TDs/INTs; they will only get to the playoffs if they win. Right now, the difference b/w the two QBs isn’t as close as you suggest.

  19. Ralph Gre Nader says: Dec 7, 2009 9:45 AM

    You might say E.J. Henderson went “Down by contact” (shameless, I know.)

  20. bake says: Dec 7, 2009 9:46 AM

    i am a redskins fan, ready to jump off a bridge!!!!!!!
    How on earth the saints got awarded that ball is beyond me, Ed Hochuli was nowhere in sight!!!!
    We got robbed, leaving only 2 questions:
    1. Is it me, or are the redskins better without Portis???
    2. With the way Fred Davis ha come on, do we trade him or Cooley for draft picks???

  21. Fed up says: Dec 7, 2009 9:47 AM

    The Cowboys loss make me feel better about the Steelers losing. Thank you Giants!!

  22. Tony Alexander says: Dec 7, 2009 9:51 AM

    SF Saints Fan:
    The story was over whe the Redskins lined up for a 23 yd FG. The Redskins were by far the better team on Sunday. The Saints, a better team on the year, did not find a way to win… the Skins found a way to lose, yet again… As for the calls… the Saints gave ZERO points to missed or blown calls. The Skins were hit with 10 points by comparison… the INT stolen back for 7 and Sellers fumble for 3.

  23. BigMikeSkinsFan says: Dec 7, 2009 10:05 AM

    bake..you dont trade either. you use a 2 TE set a lot next year. Use one of them like SD uses Gates.
    We are better without Portis. Portis seems to just be a head case..and his “concussion” has nothing to do with it.

  24. chw468 says: Dec 7, 2009 10:07 AM

    Similar play occurred in the Eagles/Falcons game. Roddy White caught a ball in the flat, started to turn up field, got hit by Asante Samuel, fumbled, whistle starts blowing and the ball was clearly recovered by the Eagles. The play was initially ruled incomplete but the replay clearly showed White had possession. Reid rightly (for once) went to challenge the play. The referee said that the play couldn’t be challenged because the Eagles did not clearly recover the fumble. They never showed a replay of the recovery during the telecast but during the play the Eagles clearly recovered it. It was a blown call that would have been crucial if we weren’t playing against Chris Redman. One of many bad calls in the game and hopefully this will render Ed Hochuli a spectator during the playoffs. He and his crew were terrible yesterday.

  25. JCD says: Dec 7, 2009 10:11 AM

    I call BS on the Colts not caring about 16-0. Everyone says Dungy rested players last time they were on an undefeated streak but that is so not true, he didn’t rest anyone until they lost a game. Peyton rules that team and I have no doubt he wants that complete undefeated season.

  26. elduderino13 says: Dec 7, 2009 10:12 AM

    I think Larry Sellers is the kid who stole The Dude’s car in The Big Lebowski.
    “Do you know what happens, Larry?”

  27. hayward giablommi says: Dec 7, 2009 10:15 AM

    I hope the Colts and Saints lose a game. I don’t feel like hearing that crack-head Mercury Morris start rapping on ESPN again!
    ^^^^^
    Huh? If you don’t want to hear from Mercury Morris or any of those other bitter old malcontents from the 72 Dolphins again, then you should be hoping that either of those teams run the table.

  28. nps6724 says: Dec 7, 2009 10:15 AM

    “The story was over whe the Redskins lined up for a 23 yd FG. The Redskins were by far the better team on Sunday. The Saints, a better team on the year, did not find a way to win… the Skins found a way to lose, yet again… As for the calls… the Saints gave ZERO points to missed or blown calls. The Skins were hit with 10 points by comparison… the INT stolen back for 7 and Sellers fumble for 3.”
    The better team on any particular day ALWAYS wins. How can you be better that day and lose? It’s illogical.
    As for the calls, Kareem Moore was no longer touching Shockey when he finally possessed the ball. He was initially touching Shockey when he first touched the ball, but he didn’t gain control until on the back of his teammate. It’s quite similar (though not on the surface) to the Kevin Faulk 4th-down reception against Indy. He first touched the ball past the 1st-down mark, but didn’t possess it until he was behind it and couldn’t have forward progress until possession. If Moore catches the ball cleanly as soon as it hits his hands, Redskins ball.
    Sellers lost the ball before his elbow touched down. The side angle showed the ball out of his hand. The only beef is the goofy rule where the defense can recover a live-but-not-live ball. But the ruling itself was correct.

  29. hineswardcriesafterfumbling says: Dec 7, 2009 10:18 AM

    Tony Alexander says:
    December 7, 2009 9:39 AM
    Who is “Larry” Sellers, Florio? Good god man…
    “Do you see what happens, Larry? Do you see what happens, Larry? Do you see what happens, Larry, when you f*ck a stranger in the *ss”
    Larry Sellers stole The Dude’s car in The Big Leboswki. Also, his father was Arther Digby Sellers, who wrote the majority of the episodes for ‘Branded’.

  30. Jax at least were not oakland says: Dec 7, 2009 10:19 AM

    Jax is nowhere close to the number of blackouts Oakland has. Hey florio come on down to jax and I’ll show you how hard it is to make the kind of money it takes for my 3 season tix, not all of us went to law school. I bust my ass daily to afford my seats and half of my friends are jobless. Did I mention that my condo’s value has dropped 2/3rds from 3 years ago!

  31. copes cabana says: Dec 7, 2009 10:30 AM

    While the corner play in the fourth quarter of games is atrocious, I still think this is a problem of our offense. All the passing leads to short offensive drives. Even when they score, they take way to little time off the clock. this keeps the defense on the field way to often. We should have been able to take all the time off the clock on our second to last drive on the way to the endzone. That would have left little time for the Raiders to drive back down the field. Bruce Arians is a cancer on that team and needs to go!!!!! How does Tomlin not see this? Yes, his offense is one of the most productive the Steelers have had. But Football is not about stats it is about winning. For the Steelers, running and chewing the clock is winning. Lebeau’s defensive schemes are crazy. lots of running around. you need well rested players for that. To have well rested players, you need your offense to be on the field for long sustained drives.
    Good win by the raiders, bad loss by the Steelers. We now need to win out and get lots of help as we hold almost no tie-breakers.
    As far as troy is concerned we better get a corner who can handle those duties (I said duties… poop) as well, because Try will have a short career the way he plays.

  32. SF Saints Fan says: Dec 7, 2009 10:35 AM

    Tony Alexander says:
    “SF Saints Fan:
    The story was over whe the Redskins lined up for a 23 yd FG. The Redskins were by far the better team on Sunday. The Saints, a better team on the year, did not find a way to win… the Skins found a way to lose, yet again… As for the calls… the Saints gave ZERO points to missed or blown calls. The Skins were hit with 10 points by comparison… the INT stolen back for 7 and Sellers fumble for 3.”
    I don’t think either one of those calls were bad calls. The calls went against the Redskins, but they were not bad calls. On the interception, not down by contact, interception return, strip and score. That was clearly a correct call. That play happened right in front of me. The intercepting player was in contact with a Saint player, but contact with the Saint player was broken by the time the intercepting player had gained control of the ball. The strip by Meachem and score was just a good play by a player who would not be denied.
    On the overtime fumble. There are two angles. The one from the side clearly showed the ball was loose before the players arm hit the ground. His hand was down, but a player is not down by contact with just a hand being down.
    The Redskins played a great inspired game. The Saints are still playing on defense with their top three corners out because of injury. Both teams played hard, the “breaks” (not bad calls) went against the Redskins. The missed FG was crucial, but the Redskins defense did nothing to slow down the Saints drive at the end of regulation. They drove the length of the field in 38 seconds to tie the game.

  33. hardtolikedabears says: Dec 7, 2009 10:54 AM

    # samh says: December 7, 2009 8:44 AM
    You keep spouting off that Jacksonville “can’t” support an NFL team as though they haven’t done it yet. Hello, before this season there were only occasional blackouts. You can’t myopically examine ONE season during the worst economic climate of the team’s history and make a pronouncement about the entire city. Well, you can’t if you’re a journalist. You can if you’re a hack.
    I could be be wrong, but I believe that the Jags franchise has lost money every year they have existed.

  34. HughJassPhD says: Dec 7, 2009 10:59 AM

    Did the Saints peak too early? Or are they not as good in the cold & on grass (a real football environment).
    It looks like the Saints really need to win home field advantage to make sure they can stay in their climate controlled environment.

  35. meezle says: Dec 7, 2009 11:09 AM

    A player ruled down I always thought was considered a non reviewable play, by a coaches challenge, shouldn’t the same thing apply for a booth review? If not, then the booth should review everything and they completely get rid of coaches challenges.
    It was the right call though, Sean Payton was smart for blowing that time out.

  36. nps6724 says: Dec 7, 2009 11:12 AM

    “Did the Saints peak too early? Or are they not as good in the cold & on grass (a real football environment).”
    Or is it playing on the road after a Monday night game? Historically in the NFL, teams lose when going on the road after a Monday night game. The Redskins got 2 additional days of practice. One due to the previous week’s game — the Saints played on Monday, which means they have Tuesday off, which the Redskins don’t — and one due to travel — the Saints had to lose another day for travel while the Redskins didn’t.
    2 more days of practice + more time to heal and rest + no travel makes a big difference.

  37. DrThunder728 says: Dec 7, 2009 11:31 AM

    Landry is the Redskins’ problem, he blows coverage for a TD at least once a game (2 Sunday). Half his so called “big hits” end in wiffs or him just bouncing off defenders. He doesn’t force turnovers, he doesn’t tackle, he has average cover ability but bites on every single pump-fake. He needs to take a look a London Fletcher and learn how to make a damn form tackle. The Redskins’ need to bench him, plain and simple.

  38. Deb says: Dec 7, 2009 11:33 AM

    @Buc-em …
    Just curious, where are you from originally? And do you know anything about the history of football in the South?
    For generations in the South, there was no professional football. The grandparents and great-grandparents of the people you’re mocking grew up on the Gators, Seminoles, and Dawgs. Rooting for those college teams, despite the fact that many of them worked in the fields and couldn’t possibly dream of going to college, gave them an escape from their hardscrabble lives … the same way pro ball gives us an escape from the stresses of ours.
    College football always has been more popular in the deep South–and North Florida is still part of the deep South–than pro and probably always will be. If the people scoping out the area for NFL expansion didn’t discover that during their research, they did a half-assed job.
    The NFL braintrust should be horsewhipped for putting a team in a city then talking about ripping it away from those fans. But don’t blame the college fans who never asked for it in the first place. So what if they never went to those schools? None of us ever played for our teams, either. Get off your arrogant high horse.

  39. jeff says: Dec 7, 2009 11:36 AM

    But before obsessing over that long-overdue payback for the 8-7 Vikings’ 44-10 surprise over the 12-3 Saints in the franchise’s first-ever playoff game some 22 years ago, Minnesota needs to qualify for the postseason. Based on how the team played last night, it’s no longer looking like a lock.
    ===============================
    Florio, are you a freaking idiot? Rhetorical question.
    You actually are stating, based on 1 game, that a 10-2 team is not a lock to make the payoffs?
    A team that has a virtual 3 game lead on the closest division foe, even if said team wins tonite?
    I don’t have to wait until 3pm to hand out my asshat of the day award. It’s all yours buudy!
    Congrats!
    http://cincyblurg.googlepages.com/asshat1.gif

  40. CutlerISaPussy says: Dec 7, 2009 11:44 AM

    Florio must be delusional. He is calling out the Vikes at 10-2 (second best record in the NFC by 2 games) as no longer a lock for the playoffs??
    As Scott the Engineer would say: ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
    10-2….and no longer a team that is a lock for the playoffs. With games against Carolina, Bears, Bengals, and Giants. With the bengals and g-men at home. 3-1 is my prediction.
    Florio, have you gone sh!t crazy?

  41. Supersuckers says: Dec 7, 2009 11:56 AM

    Mike Florio,
    I could not agree more. Well said.

  42. Notoroius B.U.G. says: Dec 7, 2009 11:57 AM

    So it now appears that the Vikings will have to go on the road to play — and lose to — the Saints in the playoffs.
    But before obsessing over that long-overdue payback for the 8-7 Vikings’ 44-10 surprise over the 12-3 Saints in the franchise’s first-ever playoff game some 22 years ago, Minnesota needs to qualify for the postseason. Based on how the team played last night, it’s no longer looking like a lock.
    This is the ignorant comment I’ve read Florio…you have sunk to an all-time low. Teams have bad games. The Vikings were indeed dominated. No longer a lock to make the playoffs? Because they went on the road and lost a game (to a team who played in the SB last year), the Vikings are going to go 0-4 the rest of the way and miss the playoffs? Talk about jumping to conclusions.
    Pittsburgh lost at home to Oakland. Does that mean Pittsburgh is a terrible team and is going to miss the playoffs? Of course it doesn’t.
    The Vikings were exposed last night, but they are still a very good team. Can they beat the Saints in New Orleans? Maybe. The Saints almost lost to Washington yesterday…the Redskins lost to the Lions earlier in the year.
    Florio, that’s why they play the games! Don’t write them off completely just yet.

  43. Danc says: Dec 7, 2009 12:03 PM

    Soooooo, where are all Vikings fans that were talking junk all week long? People that were telling Kurt Warner to sit this one out since he was going to be destroyed by Jared Allen and the rest of the Vikings defense? Huh, where are you guys? PurplePuzzyEaters? Where you at?
    I was at the game, and holy hell did we dominate you on both sides of the ball. My friends and I were constantly commenting on how Jared Allen hadn’t even been a factor, or how Kurt Warner wasn’t even feeling much heat in the pocket. Kurt Warner picked your defense apart all night, Fitz and Boldin showed once again, unequivocally who the best receiving tandem in the NFL is.
    Your boy, ALL DAY had 13 rushes for 19 yards. Hahahahaha, that’s funny right there. 62 rushing yards as a team…wow! Come on Viking fans, stand up and talk your junk now that you were thoroughly dominated. You were embarrassed on national TV!

  44. Manbearpig says: Dec 7, 2009 12:06 PM

    I think Larry Sellers is the kid who stole The Dude’s car in The Big Lebowski.
    “Do you know what happens, Larry?”
    Pretty funny duderino. Laughed heartily when I saw that comment. I think you are right.
    Wow Florio you really spew the anti-Viking vitriole after one bad game huh? I find it hard to believe they won’t qualify for the postseason. Chill out.

  45. footballrulz says: Dec 7, 2009 12:06 PM

    Based on how the team played last night, it’s no longer looking like a lock.
    ______________________________
    Florio, oh Florio, poor poor Florio
    I may have to eat these words but I highly doubt the Vikes don;t make the playoffs. Yesterday was an excellent example of the “any given Sunday” theory but come on man. They would basically have to lose out and the Pack win out for anything to change in the NFC North playoff race.
    Don’t misunderstand me, would love to see that happen, but I don’t think so. I’ll be happy just to see a Pack win tonight.
    Based on yesterday’s games (and pending tonight’s) the playoffs are going to be very interesting this year. Any team that makes it will definitely be in the hunt. I would personally concedce the AFC to the Colts at this point were it not for their stupid propensity to rest their starters. I will agree with you on that point and history proves it to be correct.

  46. jeff says: Dec 7, 2009 12:11 PM

    Super:
    I know how you hate being called names, but you agreeing with that statement makes you an epic moron.

  47. Fan of Football says: Dec 7, 2009 12:11 PM

    “So it now appears that the Vikings will have to go on the road to play — and lose to — the Saints in the playoffs.”
    Thanks for jynxing the Saints Mike!

  48. uncommonjohn says: Dec 7, 2009 12:20 PM

    Is there a way to turn off these jerks who, when the season reaches midterm (after 8 games) they spend their whole week telling you how each undefeated team is going to lose. They started with the four week 9, the three week 10, the two week 11 and week 12., wee 13. Somehow NO and Indy keep standing even those these jerks tell us all week long how they are going fall this week for sure. The Titans 5 game streak would mean the Colts had lose for sure to this streaking team.
    Well today the Titans are a streaking team. Streaked in losess, streaked in wins, and now again probably streaking in losses. By tomorrow we will know exactly how Denver is going to beat the Colts next Sunday. I can hardly wait to see how its going to happen. And of course Tony Romo is going to end NO perfect season, right?
    Hogwash. Next Monday they will be 13-0. Watch and see.

  49. uncommonjohn says: Dec 7, 2009 12:21 PM

    Is there a way to turn off these jerks who, when the season reaches midterm (after 8 games) they spend their whole week telling you how each undefeated team is going to lose. They started with the four week 9, the three week 10, the two week 11 and week 12., wee 13. Somehow NO and Indy keep standing even those these jerks tell us all week long how they are going fall this week for sure. The Titans 5 game streak would mean the Colts had lose for sure to this streaking team.
    Well today the Titans are a streaking team. Streaked in losess, streaked in wins, and now again probably streaking in losses. By tomorrow we will know exactly how Denver is going to beat the Colts next Sunday. I can hardly wait to see how its going to happen. And of course Tony Romo is going to end NO perfect season, right?
    Hogwash. Next Monday they will be 13-0. Watch and see.

  50. nps6724 says: Dec 7, 2009 12:24 PM

    I guess all those Viking fans who were whining about those supposed bad calls against Washington should worry more about Old Man River and Speedy and less about the #1 seed in the NFC.

  51. Herndiggler says: Dec 7, 2009 12:29 PM

    You see what happens Larry? Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps??

  52. Supersuckers says: Dec 7, 2009 12:29 PM

    I dont mind being called names by people I do not know. It shows how childish they are. People I do know I concerned about when they throw childish names around.

  53. Bo Darville says: Dec 7, 2009 12:30 PM

    The Vikings are going to lose to the Saints in the playoffs? Come on. You’re assuming that bonehead Childress can win a playoff game? Let’s get realistic here.

  54. Vikes-N-Favre says: Dec 7, 2009 12:37 PM

    So lets get this straight dumb ass Mikey Florio.
    1. You say the Vikings scored a late TD in “garbage duty” yet when GB scored a couple of late TD’s in “garbage duty” against us, there was no mention of it at all.
    2. Now after a loss which was only our second loss in 3 months we are no longer a lock to make the playoffs? Need I remind you that even if GB wins tonight, we will have a 3 game lead over them in the division because of our 2 wins against them with only 4 games left to play? The last time I checked, Division Champions make the playoffs numb nuts.
    I will give credit where it is due, the Cards played a great game and beat us plain and simple. Does that mean we are done? Hell no, it means we had a bad game. Did I hear you saying anything bad about the Saints when they were handed a win yesterday? Nope. Please, I would rather get beat by the defending NFC Champions versus getting my ass handed to me by the Redskins.
    The Vikings will go home next week and get back on track mark my words. This was just a speed bump in the road, and every great team has a bad game every now and then. So before you start your little the Vikings are shit routine, just remember that they are still the 2nd seed in the NFC, and still sitting very good at 10-2.

  55. Fan_Of_ Four says: Dec 7, 2009 12:41 PM

    Change it back A$$ Wipe !!!

  56. jeff says: Dec 7, 2009 12:46 PM

    Super: Don’t make moronic statements that you dont actually believe then.
    People I know that make statements just for a reaction concern me. Especially when that person gets said reaction and then calls me childish.

  57. goetta-head says: Dec 7, 2009 1:02 PM

    Here come the Bengals!

  58. creepycrayon says: Dec 7, 2009 1:04 PM

    who dat?!?

  59. leatherneck says: Dec 7, 2009 1:04 PM

    The Vikings will defeat the Chargers in the Super Bowl.

  60. Chiggerticky says: Dec 7, 2009 1:05 PM

    There are always two things happening in sports reporting: 1) the alleged reporting of the “facts”; and 2) the narrative created by sportswriters and editors in order to attract readership (and thereby dollars).
    The narrative is always the more interesting (and usually the more ridiculous). For weeks now, PFT and its prognosticators has been telling us how the Saints and the Colts are going to lose “this Sunday’s” game. And yet, as almost always, reality is just so friggin’ uncooperative with sportswriters’ narratives. Week after week, the two undefeateds and their opponents just don’t get the memo. So this week, we have a new tack from the sportswriters: going 16-0 will be bad for the Saints and the Colts.
    The further back you step, the more ridiculous the sportswriters look. It’s good theatre. Keep it up.

  61. The Mission Miami says: Dec 7, 2009 1:12 PM

    If you want a diehard Vikes fan to reply then you will have one here!
    We got beat and the Cardinals did a tremendous job last night and there are absolutely no excuses on why we lost. We got beat and Arizona made us look bad.
    I kept waking up last night and this morning hoping it was just a bad dream. It was the worst possible scenario!
    1) Injuries – Henderson (obviously) but Griffin, Johnson, Loadholt and McKinnie.
    2) Favre – forced balls and hurt those MVP chances
    3) The running game – OUCH! Unless we fix this we are screwed.
    Arizona did an outstanding job of coaching and scheming and they provided a formula to beat us. The key will be now our coaching staff and how they respond to this and adjustments they can make on their end.
    We have weaknesses as all teams do. The key will be our coaching and if we can make adjustments and improve upon our weaknesses. If not we will be a one and done in the playoffs or get destroyed by the Saints and their passing game in the playoffs!
    Mark my word: The key to the rest of the year is coaching!

  62. Supersuckers says: Dec 7, 2009 1:30 PM

    Mike Florio is right way more then he is wrong!! I love Mike florio!

  63. Pack83 says: Dec 7, 2009 1:35 PM

    If the Pack win tonight, it’s a virtual 2.5 game lead for the Vikes, not 3.
    Vikes are 10-2, if the Pack win they’d be 8-4…if the Vikes lose their next 3 (not saying that’s gonna happen) they’d be 10-5. If the Pack win their next 3, they’d be 11-4. It’s NOT a 3 game lead, it’s 2.5. Everyone misspeaks on that and it’s annoying.

  64. Brewster says: Dec 7, 2009 1:38 PM

    Re: LarryMike Sellers fumble call
    Both review calls in this game, the Moore interception/Meachum stripping and subsequent TD and the Sellers fumble were correct calls by the officials.
    And I say that as a long time Redskins fan.
    ___________
    And Florio, about that comment that Jacksonville will sell out the Gator Bowl between West Virginia and Florida State.
    It’s a once a year event that receives heavy promotion, not one of 6 home games a year.
    And even with the heavy promotion, if West Virginia was playing a non Florida team with a 6-6 record like Minnesota or Iowa State there’s no guarantee of a sellout.
    Comparing selling out the Gator Bowl to 6 Jaguars home games is not a fair comparison.

  65. Tony Alexander says: Dec 7, 2009 1:45 PM

    All you Skins haters will insist the calls were not bad… we will agree to disagree. I (and the guys calling the game) saw something totally different, as did the official on the field regarding the “Larry Sellers” play (Florio wisely pointed that out)…
    The game would have been iced if not for Shawn Squeegee’s miss – it was not won or lost on that play alone or the two blown calls. As Redskin fans we are used to calls. The point is two bad calls cost the team points…
    The reason the game was lost is because LaRon Landry could not cover a pecker if he were a condom… He insists on playing the pass like the run, like he is still a strong safety. 14 points rest squarely on his shoulders -
    Landry is the reason the Skins los and the defense schemes run have the Corners playing way too deep off the line of scrimmage. Hell, I could complete a pass on the Skins DB’s and even catch a few…

  66. Thorpie says: Dec 7, 2009 1:50 PM

    I love how the Vikes fans keep bringing up how the Saints almost lost, in an attempt to make themselves feel better about getting their asses handed to them yesterday. Hey Vikes fans, New Orleans is still undefeated. Period. It may not have been pretty, but a “W” is still a “W”. As for the comments about how many yards we gave up, I am 100% OK with that, considering we all 3 starting CB’s out for the game.
    Again, it was not a great game by New Orleans yesterday, but the heart and determination they showed is far more valuable than blowing out a weak opponent.

  67. Mary007 says: Dec 7, 2009 2:03 PM

    Hey Peyton~
    We’re really looking forward to playing you in January! Your house, our house…it won’t matter. We’ve got your number and you know it.
    Fondly,
    The Chargers

  68. BigSlick says: Dec 7, 2009 2:11 PM

    “Again, it was not a great game by New Orleans yesterday, but the heart and determination they showed is far more valuable than blowing out a weak opponent.”
    Or just the fact that Washington completely blew it…missed field goal, interception and fumble all in the last couple minutes of regulation or ot. Your Saints are so curageous and determined!!!

  69. Notoroius B.U.G. says: Dec 7, 2009 2:12 PM

    @Thorpie:
    “A ‘W’ is still a ‘W’
    Tell that to all the idiots who kept saying”The Vikings shouldn’t have beat the Ravens. They got lucky.”
    I agree – a win is a win…take them any way you can….my point about saying New Orleans almost lost to the Redskins was that no team plays great every week, especially on the road.
    Florio is ready to write the Vikings out of the playoffs altogether because they lost a game…All the power to your Saints…I hope they go 16-0…
    @pack83 “Everyone misspeaks on that and it’s annoying.” – Just like all you Packer fans…annoying.

  70. Thuney says: Dec 7, 2009 2:14 PM

    I love it! Such great analysis…..
    Everyone can agree the Saints got handed the victory….they should have lost to a far inferior team, and they still had the “great” ballhawking Darren Sharper in the line-up. Florio’s write up is that they “have to keep momentum going.”
    The Vikings got hammered by a solid oppononent, also on the road. It was embarassing, but now Florio feels the need to state that them making the playoff doesn’t look so certain anymore????? Um, ok….10-2 with a 3 game lead (due to tiebreakers) with 4 games left and the playoffs look uncertain?? I think that might be a bit of a stretch don’t you think?
    I also like how they “are all of sudden looking average” after one loss. I think I just saw the Saints let WASHINGTON score 30 on them. I think I’ve watched Indy have to come back in most of the games despite the quality of the oppononent. I know wins are wins and blah, blah, blah….luck is luck as well. You just couldn’t wait for the Vikings to stumble could you!

  71. SF Saints Fan says: Dec 7, 2009 2:21 PM

    Tony Alexander:
    I don’t know what the Redskins are thinking, but LaRon Landry is a classic Strong Safety. He has the speed to play free safety, but not the cover skills. He should have been flagged for pass interference at least once and he could have easily had a taunting call against him when he standing over a player he had just “tackled” (actually hit like a freight train) and it was not called.
    And one final point on the “bad calls”. If the officials were somehow out to screw over the Redskins why were there 7 penalties for 102 yards against the Saints and only 2 penalties for 15 yards against the Redskins? Looks like they were calling things against the Saints and not the Redskins. The reviewed calls were absolutely correct according to current NFL Rules.

  72. ras6111 says: Dec 7, 2009 2:24 PM

    Hey Jags fans,
    It’s too bad excuses can’t buy tickets.

  73. jwinn006 says: Dec 7, 2009 2:29 PM

    DrThunder728 says:
    December 7, 2009 11:31 AM
    Landry is the Redskins’ problem, he blows coverage for a TD at least once a game (2 Sunday). Half his so called “big hits” end in wiffs or him just bouncing off defenders. He doesn’t force turnovers, he doesn’t tackle, he has average cover ability but bites on every single pump-fake. He needs to take a look a London Fletcher and learn how to make a damn form tackle. The Redskins’ need to bench him, plain and simple.
    Sounds an awful like Roy Williams (the safety, when he played for Dallas). Sucks doesnt it? Karma.

  74. whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says: Dec 7, 2009 2:32 PM

    Vikes-N-Favre,
    Do you ever post anything that doesn’t smell of like the biggest purple colored glasses wearing homer in the NFL? You defend your team like a cry baby with every post about the Vikings and talk more nonsense then PervyHarvin himself. I’m going to give you the benefit that you are about 12. That’s the only thing that can explain your ridiculous posts and screen name.

  75. creepycrayon says: Dec 7, 2009 2:33 PM

    who dat?!?

  76. Boudin says: Dec 7, 2009 2:34 PM

    “Again, it was not a great game by New Orleans yesterday, but the heart and determination they showed is far more valuable than blowing out a weak opponent.”
    Or just the fact that Washington completely blew it…missed field goal, interception and fumble all in the last couple minutes of regulation or ot. Your Saints are so curageous and determined!!!
    ————————————————
    remember that part? at the end of regulation? when the Saints went 80 yards in 5 plays and 33 seconds to tie it up?
    that was awesome.
    you act like Jonathan Vilma and Chris McAlister had nothing to do with those turnovers. come on, man. you act like the Saints did a Belichick and pulled their starters. the Saints were fighting for it until the end. even if Squeezy-ham makes the FG, the Saints would have been gunning for the win.

  77. Anarcho Purplism says: Dec 7, 2009 2:36 PM

    @ Danc
    Vikes took a beating last night. Many good teams do that. My sentiments are similar to Mission Miami…..the Cards beat us good & they beat us a plenty.
    All of the Purple’s weapons were completely neutralized. OLine looked terrible. Dline looked sub-average. QB looked okay & threw at LEAST 4 balls he should not have thrown. Run game was totally non-existent.
    It’s an embarrassing loss. Sometimes you win games you should lose (Baltimore/San Francisco) and sometimes you lose games you should have won (Steelers). Sometimes you get your ass handed to you (Cardinals).
    Part of what defines character in sports is the lessons you learn from individual games. Sometimes “getting the W” negates the lesson because everyone is focused “on the bottom-line. Period.” Sometimes getting your ass handed to you reminds you of the basics.
    Hopefully the Vikes will use this as lesson moving forward. I am sure the Cards had it out for them after getting humped last year which was kind of a flip-flop scenario of last year.
    Maybe there is a blueprint in the making. Maybe 1 team got off the ball better & had a better gameplan. We’ll find out for sure in the coming weeks…….
    What I know for sure, Florio is trying to ignite the Minny fans to bite on the “Vikes miss the playoffs front.” Not hungry, no thanks.
    Saint fans can gloat all they want.
    *******************************************
    # Danc says: December 7, 2009 12:03 PM
    Soooooo, where are all Vikings fans that were talking junk all week long? People that were telling Kurt Warner to sit this one out since he was going to be destroyed by Jared Allen and the rest of the Vikings defense? Huh, where are you guys? PurplePuzzyEaters? Where you at?
    I was at the game, and holy hell did we dominate you on both sides of the ball. My friends and I were constantly commenting on how Jared Allen hadn’t even been a factor, or how Kurt Warner wasn’t even feeling much heat in the pocket. Kurt Warner picked your defense apart all night, Fitz and Boldin showed once again, unequivocally who the best receiving tandem in the NFL is.
    Your boy, ALL DAY had 13 rushes for 19 yards. Hahahahaha, that’s funny right there. 62 rushing yards as a team…wow! Come on Viking fans, stand up and talk your junk now that you were thoroughly dominated. You were embarrassed on national TV!
    ******************************************

  78. cheeseheadken says: Dec 7, 2009 2:44 PM

    C’mon. As a lifelong Packer fan who still gets sick to his stomach whenever he sees Favre in that purple suit, there is no way the Vikings don’t make the playoffs. I agree they looked mediocre last night, but it’s not like they lost to the Bucs or something. Crap. How in the world did the Packers lose to the Bucs again?

  79. cusoman says: Dec 7, 2009 2:52 PM

    You Vikes fans should be HAPPY people are so easy to dismiss them. It gives them fuel for the raging fire…
    Remember the Cards last year? (you know, the team that the Vikings destroyed at the end of the season?) Yeah, NO ONE thought they had the drive and talent to go all the way, and, well, you know how that all turned out…
    None of you know ANYTHING about how any of this is going to turn out. This the is the freaking NFL, where teams just shy of .500 have a chance to go all the way in a weak conference. Stop talking like you know a damn thing.

  80. Tony Alexander says: Dec 7, 2009 2:54 PM

    SF Saints Fan:
    I did not say the refs had it in for Washington… my point, as with many teams in the league, is that we, as fans, are used to a few blown calls or no calls every game. That is a direct reflection of poor officiating which is plaguing the league right now.
    As for Landry. Take him if you want him. For every bone-crushing hit there are 5 bone headed plays. He could have been called for late hits out of bounds at least twice yesterday. He plays with anger, the wrong emotion in my opinion. Landry thinks he is better than he is. Even at SS Landry will continue to make idiotic mistakes. He, along with several others on the team certainly represent the “I” and not the “we” some of the younger players have talked about.
    On the post game show yesterday Fred Davis was asked about the noticeable attitude change since Portis went out. His response was that injuries throughout the team allowed players to get on the field who want to win, collectively, and are working hard at that goal…

  81. texasPHINSfan says: Dec 7, 2009 3:10 PM

    Mike, spot-on analysis of the Dolphins season! You’re not even a Fins fan and I can tell you know exactly how frustrating it is for us. Hang with the colts until a dropped TD pass at the end of the game. Smother the Saints until halftime. Lose to a hapless Bills team quarterbacked by a journeyman QB from Harvard.
    Oy. Frustrating for sure. Which team will show up every week? I am afraid to ask…

  82. wydok says: Dec 7, 2009 3:18 PM

    I don’t care if “Vick is back”, I just care the Eagles won.

  83. MNFANINAZ says: Dec 7, 2009 3:21 PM

    For what its worth, I’d like to give the Arizona Cardinal credit for winning a tough road game last night.
    I also enjoyed Card fans out in the Plaza cheering on the Saints… for no apparent reason.
    WORST.FANBASE.ON.EARTH.

  84. Majik Man says: Dec 7, 2009 3:28 PM

    # Pack83 says: December 7, 2009 1:35 PM
    If the Pack win tonight, it’s a virtual 2.5 game lead for the Vikes, not 3.
    Vikes are 10-2, if the Pack win they’d be 8-4…if the Vikes lose their next 3 (not saying that’s gonna happen) they’d be 10-5. If the Pack win their next 3, they’d be 11-4. It’s NOT a 3 game lead, it’s 2.5. Everyone misspeaks on that and it’s annoying.
    __________________
    The “virtual” 3 game lead he was talking about wasn’t a reference to the half game, because if you could read, you would have seen that he said even if the Pack win tonight. If the Packers win tonight, it’s still virtually a 3 game lead because of the head to head tie breaker. So while they would be 2 back in the standings, they are really 3 back. What’s annoying is your inability to comprehend this simple concept.

  85. Reinholdmessner says: Dec 7, 2009 3:34 PM

    I’m pretty sure the real “Prison Mike” wears a purple bandana and now works for a mid-level paper supply company in Northern PA

  86. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 7, 2009 3:48 PM

    Majik Man says:
    December 7, 2009 3:28 PM
    # Pack83 says: December 7, 2009 1:35 PM
    If the Pack win tonight, it’s a virtual 2.5 game lead for the Vikes, not 3.
    Vikes are 10-2, if the Pack win they’d be 8-4…if the Vikes lose their next 3 (not saying that’s gonna happen) they’d be 10-5. If the Pack win their next 3, they’d be 11-4. It’s NOT a 3 game lead, it’s 2.5. Everyone misspeaks on that and it’s annoying.
    __________________
    The “virtual” 3 game lead he was talking about wasn’t a reference to the half game, because if you could read, you would have seen that he said even if the Pack win tonight. If the Packers win tonight, it’s still virtually a 3 game lead because of the head to head tie breaker. So while they would be 2 back in the standings, they are really 3 back. What’s annoying is your inability to comprehend this simple concept.
    —————————
    No, if the Pack win tonight they’re virtually 2.5 back. Pack83 had it right. If (after a win tonight) the Packers make up 3 games on the Vikings, they would be one game AHEAD of the Vikings. So after tonight (assuming a Packers win) the Vikings don’t have a virtual 3 game lead. If the Packers make up 3 games, the Vikings would get the lower playoff seed.
    It’s not “virtually 3 games”. It’s virtually 2.5 games. It’s more than 2 but less than 3.
    Now you can reread the last sentence of your own post and repeat it in front of a mirror.

  87. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 7, 2009 3:51 PM

    Having said all that, I don’t see the Vikings collapsing and losing their division lead to the Packers. Much as I’d like to see it.

  88. EricTheClown says: Dec 7, 2009 3:56 PM

    Reinholdmessner says:
    December 7, 2009 3:34 PM
    I’m pretty sure the real “Prison Mike” wears a purple bandana and now works for a mid-level paper supply company in Northern PA
    ——————————————–
    funny as he11!

  89. ALLDAY says: Dec 7, 2009 4:09 PM

    VIKINGS NOT MAKE THE PLAYOFFS, SURE THEY WILL BEAT THE TAINTS AND WIN IT ALL.

  90. Majik Man says: Dec 7, 2009 4:40 PM

    No Adam, the only time you refer to half games is when teams have played a different amount of games. Even if the Pack makes up their 2 game deficit, they would be a game back because of the tie break. They need to make up 3 games to clinch, hence the 3 game deficit. Now you can stand in front of that mirror, and realize that, yes, you really are that big of a douche.

  91. OmegaXxXNFL says: Dec 7, 2009 5:18 PM

    Vikes are a joke.

  92. bian8 says: Dec 7, 2009 5:24 PM

    Hey Mary007 ,
    Hope you dont lose to the Patriots first!
    Love,
    Bian8

  93. steeler-in-exile says: Dec 7, 2009 5:31 PM

    Mike Florio is the worst NFL writer, ever. His articles are hackneyed and devoid of any informed analysis. His rankings are little more than uninspired digs. Even as a gossip columnist, most of his scoop is recycled and his tired, lazy imagination is evidently displayed in his writing style (‘I thought of a good intro…oops, I forgot because in reality I was drinking alone last night!’)
    I make sure I read ESPN, SI and even CBS before I find my way here, and then only when I have a slow day at work.
    Someone once said, “If you can make a living as a writer, that’s a special thing.” The only thing special about Florio was the bus he rode to school.

  94. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 7, 2009 5:36 PM

    Majik Man says:
    December 7, 2009 4:40 PM
    No Adam, the only time you refer to half games is when teams have played a different amount of games. Even if the Pack makes up their 2 game deficit, they would be a game back because of the tie break. They need to make up 3 games to clinch, hence the 3 game deficit. Now you can stand in front of that mirror, and realize that, yes, you really are that big of a douche.
    —————————-
    You fail. The Vikings’ lead (assuming the Packers win tonight), due to the head-to-head tiebreaker is 2+ games. That’s what Pack83 was saying and that’s why you’re a mental midget.
    He wasn’t saying 2.5 games in reference to the uneven number of games played. He was saying 2.5 games in reference to the tiebreaker.

  95. dreyer says: Dec 7, 2009 7:15 PM

    I get so sick of hearing everyone dog on the Colts. Florio’s constantly going on and on about how they are gonna lose this game and the next game. Always counting em out even though year after year they are one of the best teams in the league. When are you gonna quit smokin crack Florio and wake up and smell that the Colts have been here and are staying on top!

  96. Notoroius B.U.G. says: Dec 7, 2009 8:32 PM

    You fail. The Vikings’ lead (assuming the Packers win tonight), due to the head-to-head tiebreaker is 2+ games. That’s what Pack83 was saying and that’s why you’re a mental midget.
    He wasn’t saying 2.5 games in reference to the uneven number of games played. He was saying 2.5 games in reference to the tiebreaker.
    ————————————————-
    Here’s where Pack83 is wrong. He said if the Vikings lose their next 3 and the Pack win their next 3…but that doesn’t take into account each of the team’s last game. Assuming Pack win tonight, they’re 8-4; Vikings 10-2.
    If Pack win out: 12-4. If Minnesota goes 2-2; 12-4. It’s a tie. Vikings win on tie-breaker. So…for the Pack to win the division, they must win out and Vikings must go 1-3. That’s a difference of 3 games. You’re rationale or way of thinking might be different, but that’s why Vikings fans are saying it’s a 3 game lead…Packers need to win tonight and win 3 more games than the Vikings the rest of the way…

  97. azcardswhizard says: Dec 7, 2009 9:54 PM

    A few comments about criticism of fan support for the AZ Cardinals:
    - To MNFANINAZ, why did you leave MN?
    The Phoenix area is the only metropolitan destination for folks who want to leave the winter cold and escape humidity. For that reason, our 4+ million people include fans of every NFL, NBA and MLB team. If they can afford it, they should attend their teams’ games when they play in the Valley of the Sun.
    The Phoenix metro population has more than doubled since 1990. Many of those who criticize Cards fans are very happy they don’t have to live in their past home towns anymore.
    - People in the west and southwest have a different mindset about their pro teams. Folks enjoy the sunshine, warm temps in the winter, outdoor activities all year long.
    Many people east of us have lives that are identified by their teams – we have too many other benefits than living/dying with a team’s success.

  98. Pack83 says: Dec 7, 2009 10:28 PM

    Nothing about what I said is wrong…it’s not a 3 game lead, it’s an uneven scenario because of the tiebreaker.
    Notorious…what is wrong? Like I said, if the Pack win their next 3, they’re 11-4…if the Vikes lose their next 3 they’re 10-5. It’s that simple. It’s a virtual 2.5 game lead after the Packers finish the Ravens, and Majik Man is a moron.

  99. Notoroius B.U.G. says: Dec 8, 2009 7:36 AM

    @Pack83…what is wrong is that you’re only talking about the next 3 weeks when there’s 4 weeks left in the season…we’ll agree to disagree.
    The Packers are 2 full games back. That’s really the only thing that matters.

  100. Pack83 says: Dec 8, 2009 8:51 AM

    I was just using the next 3 games as an example to prove my point…that the Pack aren’t 3 games back, they’re 2.5 :)

  101. jeff says: Dec 8, 2009 9:20 AM

    Pack 83:
    You must be shitterson in disguise.
    You are using a stupid scenario. There are 4 games left, but let’s only count the next 3, beecause that fits your argument.
    This is why it is fruitless to argue with a Packer fan, they will just keep changing the scenario to fit their argument and you throw your hands up in disgust.
    On a side note, Pack 83, at least you haven’t offered to mail your shit to anyone like Adam has.

  102. Pack83 says: Dec 8, 2009 2:00 PM

    hahaha…love it…
    Tiebreaker = .5 games
    YES, there are 4 games left…so if the Packers go 4-and-0 and the Vikings go 1-3…GUESS WHO WINS THE DIVISION…THE PACKERS!!!! Because they will have 12 wins, and the Vikings will have 11, and 12 is a larger number than 11.
    Therefore…the Vikings don’t have a virtual 3 game lead…because if it was a virtual 3 game lead…………..THEY’D BE TIED UNDER that scenario.
    It’s an UNEVEN concept.
    The only reason I used the next 3 games as an example was to prove that it’s not a ‘virtual’ 3 game lead…because if it was virtual 3 game lead, and the Packers won their next 3 and the Vikings lost their next 3…THEY’D HAVE TO BE TIED…but the Pack would have 11 wins and the Vikings would have 10…and under the rules of the NFL and general math, with 11 being a higher number, the Packers would have a 1 game lead…
    BUT it would only be a virtual .5 game lead going into Week 17 because Minne swept them…just like if they finish with the same record, the Vikings would win the division because of the tiebreaker.

  103. jeff says: Dec 8, 2009 3:02 PM

    That you still dont get the concept amazes.
    I’ ll leave you to wallow in your stupidity.
    It’s an inane argument, the vikes will not go 1-3 and the Pack certainly will not win out.
    I’d bet the house on that.

  104. Pack83 says: Dec 8, 2009 3:34 PM

    When did I say that would happen? What concept are you talking about? I’m just saying it’s not a virtual 3 game lead, it’s 2.5, and it’s annoying that most everyone (like Florio above) is wrong when referencing the tiebreaker. The Packers could lose out and the Vikings could win out…
    And if they did, the Pack would be 8-8 and the Vikes 14-2…and they’d have a virtual 6.5 game lead, not 7 :)
    This is gonna be a fun place on Sunday if the Bengals beat Burt, and the Pack win in Chitown…

  105. jeff says: Dec 8, 2009 4:35 PM

    Why is that? The Vikes will still have a virtual 2 game lead ;)

  106. PurpleRaid12 says: Dec 9, 2009 12:55 AM

    Super says:
    “I love Mike florio!”
    - Thats cause you’re a moron.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!