Skip to content

Pereira says emphasis on illegal contact "didn't seem logical"

Several of you have forwarded to us the link to a Super Bowl week Radio Row interview of now-former NFL V.P. of officiating Mike Pereira, who sat down with Mike Felger and Tony Massarotti of 98.5 The Sports Hub in Boston.

Among other things, Pereira talked about the renewed emphasis that was placed in the middle of the last decade on the rule regarding illegal contact with receivers.  Pereira made it clear that Colts president Bill Polian, a long-time member of the Competition Committee, pushed the issue due to the perception/reality that Patriots defensive backs were manhandling Indianapolis receivers.

Pereira was candid regarding his belief that the change to the application of the rule made little sense.  Specifically, he said that the notion that a flag would be thrown and a first down awarded regardless of whether the contact actually generates an advantage for the defensive team “didn’t seem logical.”

“It was difficult for us,” he said.  “You always tried to officiate the game advantage-disadvantage.  And so it didn’t seem logical . . . to me at the time.  I probably wouldn’t be saying this if I didn’t have just four quarters left to go in my career.  But it didn’t seem logical to me that you would take advantage-disadvantage out of the equation, that just a touch became a foul whether or not it had an affect or not.”

Pereira also explained that the spike in illegal-contact calls has since leveled out, with the spike in calls subsiding over time.

But his broader point is an eye-opener.  Not only did Pereira make it clear that Polian pushed the “point of emphasis” through the Competition Committee, but Pereira also was refreshingly candid regarding his disagreement with the requirement that any contact with a receiver after five yards mandated a five-yard penalty and an automatic first down.

Permalink 107 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
107 Responses to “Pereira says emphasis on illegal contact "didn't seem logical"”
  1. last starfighter says: Feb 10, 2010 9:56 PM

    neither the colts nor patriots have much use for rules

  2. jgreen1570 says: Feb 10, 2010 10:02 PM

    “…You always tried to officiate the game advantage-disadvantage. And so it didn’t seem logical . . .”
    Sounds like something for all the Colts and Vikings whiners to consider

  3. Tim says: Feb 10, 2010 10:05 PM

    I don’t get how it can’t create and advantage. Maybe I’m not following here, but without illegal contact isn’t the receiver potentially going to get open, make a reception, and potentially gain YAC. It’s always an advantage, because you never know where the QB would have chosen to throw the ball without the contact.

  4. Massappeal says: Feb 10, 2010 10:06 PM

    And with Polian sitting up there in the press box, if you just breathed on on of Indy’s receivers, INDY got the call.
    Shame on all you refs that were intimidated by that man!!!!! ALL OF YOU.

  5. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Feb 10, 2010 10:07 PM

    Although Polian’s motives are certainly suspect, I do agree with one thing… Advantage/disadvantage is very subjective. If I were a coach I’d prefer the officials to concentrate on whether or not a foul was committed instead of figuring out whether a foul was committed AND if an advantage was gained. The game moves fast enough and these are 40-60 year-old guys out there. Keep it simple, let the players play and officiate consistently across the board.

  6. Phokus says: Feb 10, 2010 10:08 PM

    Surprise surprise, Polian whined and used his power to the Colts advantage

  7. BornSlippy says: Feb 10, 2010 10:09 PM

    Polian sets the rules for his teams advantage just like shula did for the dolphins.

  8. this class sucks says: Feb 10, 2010 10:09 PM

    I’m confused, I thought that “illegal contact” has been illegal since the Mel Blount days. Or did Polian just push through that the refs should emphasize that call?

  9. Tibor says: Feb 10, 2010 10:10 PM

    Makes me even happier that the crybaby Colts and Choke Manning only won 1 super bowl.

  10. PFTiswhatitis says: Feb 10, 2010 10:12 PM

    I heard that interview, last week. It was very interesting, enlightening, especially the part about how Polian has changed the game to suit his purposes.

  11. sniperhare says: Feb 10, 2010 10:15 PM

    I don’t like the fact that owners are on the Competition Committee, like the CBS thing at the Pats stadium it seems like a conflict of interest.

  12. hayward giablommi says: Feb 10, 2010 10:15 PM

    Cheaters

  13. GhostofFlorioPast says: Feb 10, 2010 10:22 PM

    It’s not surprising Polian did it – everyone knew it – it’s surprising Pereira went public. Belichick looked at the way the league was calling plays, and coached his defense accordingly. Patriots’s defenders were not called for contact because NO ONE was called for similar contact – ever. The “point of emphasis” was a change of the way the game was officiated, not a return to prior practice.
    After the change, Ronnie Lott couldn’t have played in the league any more. He is known as probably the best ever, and he would be penalized up and down the field now. Is football better without guys like Ronnie Lott? The league doesn’t need 35-33 games to be popular – fans would enjoy games just as much with a little less scoring.

  14. Sarge says: Feb 10, 2010 10:23 PM

    Schism.

  15. litemater says: Feb 10, 2010 10:27 PM

    Anyone can be candid when they do not have their job to worry about. I think my last boss was a jerk, he cant do anything to me now.

  16. BaldIggles says: Feb 10, 2010 10:27 PM

    Nice to hear a bit of the back and forth. I’m sure there’s been much debate about this behind closed doors. Officiating is imperfect and often frustrating, but I appreciate the debate involved in the interest of pushing football forward. Moreover, I appreciate being included in the dialogue about how to interpret rules which, these days, is generally such a cloaked process (and increasingly important given our ability to critique calls in the heat of the moment with high def, slow-mo replay). And, I agree – calls are way too ticky tack these days…a painful over-adjustment for the Pats injustice during that AFC championship game.

  17. bearsrule says: Feb 10, 2010 10:30 PM

    This is why I dislike all this “greatest ever” nonsense. In today’s game God forbid you hit a star QB or touch their receivers. Numbers get inflated when guys are merely playing pitch and catch.

  18. hayward giablommi says: Feb 10, 2010 10:34 PM

    Let me say this: Bill Polian’s gerrymandering of NFL rules to suit the Colts is a much more destructive to the league, and far more disgraceful than a team employee filming coaching signals *from an illegal location*, signals which are visible to 70,000 people and which provide no competitive advantage.
    Polian’s actions compromised the integrity of the league far more than anything the Patriots, or any other team did, and as more time passes, impartial observers will agree with this sentiment.
    The Colts are a spineless organization and Mr. NaPolian is a conniving worm. Nice 1-5 Super Bowl record there, Nappy. History will not judge you kindly.

  19. ispysomething7 says: Feb 10, 2010 10:34 PM

    First off, I’m a Colts fan. And I can honstly tell you that the reason why the Colts didn’t win was strictly due to the fact that there were no pass interference calls called last Sunday. This team has thrived on these calls, not only this season, but over the past 4-5 years! This year was probably one of the worst years, henceforth the umdefeated season up until week 15. Polian obviously was planting a seed with the competition committe, because he knew the stars would allign one day. Come to think of it, maybe I’m not a Colts fan anymore.

  20. TJO5 says: Feb 10, 2010 10:35 PM

    News like this just tends to feed all the conspiracy theorists out there.
    Some people feel that the Patriots were handed their first Superbowl win because the refs were instructed to ignore Pats fouls against Rams receivers. But the following video shows that this wasn’t true.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-L9ExI_76E&NR=1
    And that’s why Periera was concerned ‘Quote’
    “””Among other things, Pereira talked about the renewed emphasis that was placed in the middle of the last decade on the rule regarding illegal contact with receivers. Pereira made it clear that Colts president Bill Polian, a long-time member of the Competition Committee, pushed the issue due to the perception/reality that Patriots defensive backs were manhandling Indianapolis receivers.”””
    THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY
    and there’s no way we can find you through IP geolocation search after you click that link

  21. raven4life says: Feb 10, 2010 10:39 PM

    this was by far the worst rule in the nfl. An automatic first down for a little contact, really? The rule should not be an automatic first down because quarterbacks (except McNabb) know the rules and all year quarterbacks were bailed out because they took advantage of a rule that makes no sense what so ever. In college this rule doesn’t exist and after reading this it seems like the crybaby colts would want this call enforced to protect manning. All year my poor ravens were plagued by this rule and in the super bowl did you see this penalty called? No, because the NFL is most likely embarrassed about this penalty because it just shows how the NFL is trying to water down defense and it’s sad that the NFL is trying to take away defense because I’ll ask this forum, did you watch the pro bowl? How did you like it? To borrow Peter King’s line, defense is optional and that’s how the NFL views defense now. Long live defense I say, the rules are slanted to favor the offense and to me it’s sad that people get worked up about 4000 yard seasons for quarterbacks because it’s not that hard with the rules nowadays because of stupid penalties like illegal contact which is forcing cornerbacks to play off the line of scrimmage more and that is embarrasing.

  22. ajd24 says: Feb 10, 2010 10:39 PM

    I don’t know what Pats injustice you’re talking about, considering the Colts had the help of a phantom PI call on Ellis Hobbs in the 2006 AFC championship or else Manning would still have 0 rings.

  23. hayward giablommi says: Feb 10, 2010 10:41 PM

    “calls are way too ticky tack these days…a painful over-adjustment for the Pats injustice during that AFC championship game.”
    ^^^^^
    “Injustice”? A wee bit melodramatic, dontcha think? Especially considering the 24-14, ahem, injustice in the ’03 AFCCG was followed by another 20-3 Patriots dismantling in the ’04 playoffs, despite the Colts actually being favored and NaPolian’s point of emphasis being heavily scrutinized.

  24. erikleif says: Feb 10, 2010 10:43 PM

    right – and farve gets hit late even on run plays and no calls – what a joke – they decide who wins

  25. erikleif says: Feb 10, 2010 10:44 PM

    right – and farve gets hit late even on run plays and no calls – what a joke – they decide who wins

  26. smashmouthd says: Feb 10, 2010 10:53 PM

    This isn’t a news flash.
    The Colts had seven come from behind wins this season, half of which could not have occurred without the timely aid of one or more PIs… most of which were controversial if not flat out incorrect.
    Two mid season games in particular, against the Patriots and Texans, were double digit comebacks that were sparked by timely PIs.

  27. hankstramcbsradio says: Feb 10, 2010 10:58 PM

    Congrats to New Orleans and your pity SB championship season. Look at all those calls that went there way. Look at the Washington game. Look at the NFCCG. Look at the superbowl. No shame in a pity championship. You’ve came a long way baby!

  28. Snowman2008 says: Feb 10, 2010 11:03 PM

    Typical Indy stuff. Protect the finesse (ie: whimpy) teams by throwing flags at the tough (ie: manly) teams.
    What else should we expect from a team that quit on an undefeated season and quit in the 2nd half of the Super Bowl.

  29. LovinBlue says: Feb 10, 2010 11:17 PM

    I’m pretty sure Polian isn’t the entire committee… there must have been others who agreed for the rule to be enforced.
    And hayward – you referring to Polian as a cheater? Now THAT’S rich!

  30. Observer1 says: Feb 10, 2010 11:18 PM

    It is amazing how many so called NFL fans do not understand the rules. EVERY year the officials are given points of emphasis. This is always due to officials not correctly applying a rule or not calling it consistently. Polian is one of many on the competition committee. He can not unilaterally decide what rules will be a point of emphasis, but he can bring up his concerns as everyone else on the committee can.
    Illegal contact has been in place for years. It was not a new rule, it was definitely one that was being applied inconsistently and still is today.
    The NFL has very inconsistently officiated games. Most of the officials can not even spot the ball consistently. One of the best changes was taking official judgement out of the equation on receiver force outs. Of the numerous games I watched this year, I didn’t see them miss one side line catch call.
    The next rule that needs to go is catchability on pass interference calls. They rarely apply this rule correctly. If a ball thrown 20 yards down field hits ten feet outside the three foot wide out of bounds line, it is not catchable but that is rarely a consideration and perhaps for simplifying officiating it should not be in the rules.

  31. PatsRPerfection says: Feb 10, 2010 11:20 PM

    Something has to be done about Polian. This guy has to be taken off the Competition Committee, he is ruining football.
    He and his gigantic ego have been allowed to do whatever they want with the game and it has been crap. Every change that has been made has been anti-Patriot, pro-Colt and it sucks and has to be stopped for the good of the game.
    Also rumor has it Bill Polian urinates while sitting

  32. LovinBlue says: Feb 10, 2010 11:39 PM

    Excellent points, Observer1. My team has at times benefited greatly and been hurt greatly by the incorrect application of the “catchability” rule. Some instances were beyond ridiculous.

  33. TJO5 says: Feb 11, 2010 12:05 AM

    PatsRPerfection says: February 10, 2010 11:20 PM
    Also rumor has it Bill Polian urinates while sitting
    ————————————————–
    Well circumstantial evidence shows that this must be true. Only someone with female genitalia would consider “sitting”their players rather than “standing up” to the “pressure” of “going” for the perfect season.

  34. MasterShake says: Feb 11, 2010 12:17 AM

    It does not make sense. Look at the monkey.

  35. Sourdough says: Feb 11, 2010 12:22 AM

    Why are the only Colts haters Patri*ts fans!?!

  36. Larry30 says: Feb 11, 2010 12:44 AM

    Is bill polian public enemy number one or something? Jesus…we all know BP has taken shots at the refs over the years, so perrerra took a shot at him, big deal…did anyone go to the super bowl and notice perrerra and polian chatting on the sidelines prior to kick off in a friendly manner? I did and I did…my guess is that this tuff about polian being such a jerk is probably overblown, if for no other reason than no one can b as big an a**hole as he’s made out to be on this website…I do c perrerra’s point, my problem with it is that u can’t account for the unknown, who’s to say what would have happened had the foul not occurred? Also, the argument doesn’t hold up when u consider personal fouls…if no one gets hurt but someone throws a punch after the play, well, there was no unfair advantage gained by the puncher’s team yet it’s still a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down.

  37. Juan says: Feb 11, 2010 12:51 AM

    Doesn’t anyone remember the 2006 AFC Championship game when Ellis Hobbs was called for a pass interference without even making contact with Reggie Wayne? That was one of the biggest momentum shifters of the game. I’m sure the refs knew Polian was breathing over their shoulders.

  38. Tyler says: Feb 11, 2010 1:08 AM

    Pereira is a cheater. It’s a big advantage-disadvantage, if a team doesn’t use legal technic and the other uses legal technic. Maybe the QB isn’t trowing to that receiver, because he isn’t where he is supposed to be. Timing, routes, ever heard of them, Pereira?
    Pereira, good riddance. It’s time for a VP, who doesn’t support cheating.
    “Not only did Pereira make it clear that Polian pushed the “point of emphasis” through the Competition Committee”
    Polian pushed it. It was never claimed otherwise, you Colts-hater.

  39. Larry30 says: Feb 11, 2010 1:21 AM

    The Colts had seven come from behind wins this season, half of which could not have occurred without the timely aid of one or more PIs… most of which were controversial if not flat out incorrect.
    So, they would have had 3.5 comeback wins without the timely PI calls…damn, they could have been the first 12.5 win team since the ’72 dolph…oh wait, nevermind

  40. tigerlilac says: Feb 11, 2010 1:31 AM

    Mike Pereira’s comments are some of the more refreshing to come out of the NFL offices but they have some disturbing ramifications.
    Fact: Polian used his position on the Competition Committee (which gives directives to Pereira, the National Football League’s Vice President of Officiating) to gain a competitive advantage for his team with the specific aim of obtaining a competitive advantage over the Patriots that has continued success against his team.
    Fact: Pereira has stated that “the point of emphasis”, which dictates to refs how to call certain plays, “didn’t seem logical.”
    Fact: In only 2 of the Colts’ last 10 games before the Superbowl did the Colts have more accepted penalty yardage than did their opponents. In those 10 games, the Colts’ opponents were 4 times (that’s 400%) more likely to have more penalty yardage than the Colts.
    Playoffs – vs. Jets: 1 penalty for 5 yards
    Playoffs – vs. Ravens: 4 penalties for 25 yards
    Week 17 – vs. Bills: 3 penalties for 15 yards
    Week 16 – vs. Jets: 3 penalties for 15 yards
    Week 15 – vs. Jaguars: 5 penalties 40
    Week 14 – vs. Broncos: 4 penalties 20
    Week 13 – vs. Titans: 5 penalties 40
    Week 12 – vs. Texans: 3 penalties 25
    Week 11 – vs. Ravens: 5 penalties 40
    Week 10 – vs. Patriots: 3 penalties 20
    Here’s the penalties called against Colt opponents for the same period:
    Playoffs – vs. Jets: 6 penalties for 46 yards
    Playoffs – vs. Ravens: 7 penalties for 64 yards
    Week 17 – vs. Bills: 4 penalties for 40 yards
    Week 16 – vs. Jets: 5 penalties for 52 yards
    Week 15 – vs. Jaguars: 4 penalties 22
    Week 14 – vs. Broncos: 7 penalties 65
    Week 13 – vs. Titans: 4 penalties 50
    Week 12 – vs. Texans: 10 penalties 129
    Week 11 – vs. Ravens: 2 penalties 20
    Week 10 – vs. Patriots: 4 penalties 72
    Fact: The aggregate calls against the Colts have round (zero and five) numbered penalty yardage which has a positive correlation with calls that exclude both pass interference as well as calls against them in their own Red Zone. The small number of average penalty yards per penalty indicate very few major penalties and personal foul calls (e.g., very subjective calls like unsportsmanlike conduct) were called against the Colts.
    Fact: The aggregate calls against the Colts’ opponents have a lower number of odd (zero and five) penalty yardage which has a positive correlation with calls that include both pass interference and calls against them in their own Red Zone. The higher number of average penalty yards per penalty indicate more major penalties and personal foul calls (e.g., very subjective calls like unsportsmanlike conduct) were called against the Colts opponents.
    Mike Pereira’s comments indicate that the NFL chose to treat this year’s Super Bowl different than the Colts were treated in those 10 games.
    Fact: In the Super Bowl, the Saints, a very physical team, was penalized only 3 times for 19 yards wheras the Colts were penalized 5 times for 45 yards. The Colts did not get the benefit of any illegal contact calls (a type of call that they have benefitted from for the past several years since the point of emphasis change).
    It appears the NFL has been massaging its competition by how refs are directed to call games. In response to the Patriots domination (look at heperiod of wins in regula season and post season games during the early period of hte last decade), the NFL instituted rules to help the Colts and hurt the Pats. They also cracked down on the Patriots use of filming harder than they did on other teams violating such rules.
    In this year’s Super Bowl, the NFL appeared to strip the Colts of an advantage that has helped them dominate (at least regular season) play over the last several years. Why else would Pereira feel free to say what he said?
    These are really rather amazing revelations.

  41. Kasper Gutman says: Feb 11, 2010 1:54 AM

    I guess the head of the refs didn’t watch the Carolina-Philadelphia Championship game from a few years back. I’m surprised the police didn’t come on the field cause Philly’s WR’s were getting mugged.

  42. StreetBaller says: Feb 11, 2010 2:07 AM

    You people forget that the worst rules committee offender of all time was Don Shula. He was all for mugging receivers all the way down the field, until, oh just a coincidence, he got Dan Marino. That’s when the rules changed only allowing contact within 5 yards, and then only once.
    There are numerous other things he did to give his own team the advantage, under the guise of developing the league
    I know I’m old school, but I’m glad Weeb Ewbank kicked his butt in SB III after he backstabbed Weeb and took his job.
    What a hypocritical douce. Isn’t is ironic that, like Shula, Polian is from the Colts…although the more appropriate name is the Midnight Bolts.

  43. npina says: Feb 11, 2010 2:34 AM

    how in the hell can you decide if contact caused an advantage.
    keep it simple. was there contact or not?

  44. Macadamia says: Feb 11, 2010 4:22 AM

    Man could my Ravens have used a reversal of this ticky-tack b.s. rule this past season…WHEW!

  45. tip56 says: Feb 11, 2010 5:57 AM

    Just announced by the Competition Committee, On Side kicks no longer allowed in Super Bowls.

  46. ahajha says: Feb 11, 2010 6:04 AM

    Polian is bad for the NFL

  47. Bertil says: Feb 11, 2010 6:49 AM

    NaPolian, as much as I loathe him, is using his place in the League to change the competetive advantage in his favor. The real travesty is that the NFL doesn’t see (or pretends NOT to see) the inherant conflict of interest. That is Goodell’s fault. This committee should be comprised of poeple with far less at stake in the fate of one particular team.
    This guy, his team and particularly his QB have been coddled and catered to FAR more than any single team and perhaps more than ALL of the other 31 teams combined. That reason alone was enough to make me spring off the couch, pumping my fist in glee when Porter took Peytons pass to the house.
    Sic Semper Tyrannis!

  48. MistrezzRachael says: Feb 11, 2010 7:06 AM

    That call alone has ruined NFL games.
    Motice there were NONE in Super Bowl…and the officials were not front and center in our view.
    Polian DID push this..and the NFL blindly let it pass.
    Time to ELIMINATE a real bad rule…and eliminate ‘competition committee’

  49. Quagmire says: Feb 11, 2010 7:24 AM

    Not good when the head official says he doesn’t agree with the rules.
    That would be like a cop looking the other way on violations that he doesn’t agree with.
    He is paid to enforce the rules…agreeing with the rules is not relevent to his job.

  50. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 7:35 AM

    the obvious point is nfl was sending a message that polian alledgedly was getting rules applied that helped the colts and fans would be angered GIVING him the excuse to have the refs FIX the super bowl AGAINST the colts showing how nfl refs did not favor the colts
    FIX
    #1- THAT spot at 52 seconds left in 1st half, even announcer said addai was a half yard(i say about a foot) short of the first down, but when they came back off the shortest commercial break all game, the ball was OVER a yard short of the first down as the refs pushed it back almost a full yard. this play had more influence than even the opening kickoff of the 2nd half that may not have even been tried if refs hadnt FIXED the spot.
    #2- Why on earth did Payton discuss with the refs the short onside kickoff “just to the left”? is that how it now works? you prepare the refs for the play you are going to run so they are prepared to make sure they don’t call any penalties against your team? this is absolutely absurd that the ref knows your plays.
    #3- in the san diego game against the jets the chargers one of the least penalized teams in the league were penelized over and over from the word go. after a huge punt return completely away from the play, a push in the back wiped out that play that would have knocked jets right out of the game. peyton manning after that interception was clearly pushed by 2 hands in the back as porter ran past him -NO CALL!
    NFL = WWF!
    The owners bet and bet LARGE! As why all the late money was on New Orleans yet Vegas said MOST bettors lost. THE WISE GUYS DIDN’T JUST LIKE THEY HDIDN’T DO ALL THIS SEASON ON THOSE NATIONALLY TELEVISED UPSETS!

  51. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 7:46 AM

    METHINKS the NFL only comes out NOW to trash polian because they were not pleased with all the grief he caused them by coming out and saying colts were not concerned about winning in week 16. especially after the league had been getting away and was under the radar for these tanked or FIXED games that had been going on for years.

  52. BernardPollardIsAnAss says: Feb 11, 2010 8:01 AM

    Stay classy Bill Po-lyin’. Where is that idiot who was talking about what a class act he is early last week. I repeat… this guy is a great GM but a jackass of an individual. This is cheating, plain and simple.

  53. FreeAgentPro says: Feb 11, 2010 8:08 AM

    Sounds like Pereira got his panties in a wad. What he said is the dumbest thing any ‘official’ could posibly do. He is suggesting the officials ‘think for themselves’ rather than follow the rules. Polian did no more than ask for ‘ emphasis’ on enforcing existing rules. The rules were not rewritten for the Colts. There was no better display of the need for emphasis that the 2001 SuperBowl where the Rams receivers were abused by the Pats. The Pats DBs even admittied that they were told to hit hard and often at every opportunity ’til the officials stopped it. The officials were ignoring the fouls. Some of the fouls occurred were late hits after the play was over. I cannot believe that Pereira would risk pissing off Polian or Goodell with his totally unnecessary editorial comments. It’s not important whether he thinks emphasis on enforcement is logical. That’s not his job to determine.

  54. Buschman says: Feb 11, 2010 8:08 AM

    hayward giablommi says:
    “…a team employee filming coaching signals *from an illegal location*, signals which are visible to 70,000 people and which provide no competitive advantage.”
    So, if it provided no competitive advantage, why would they do it? And why were they penalized for doing it? Just curious.

  55. FireJerryJones says: Feb 11, 2010 8:29 AM

    Love Perreira. Calls it like it is. No way his replacement is as candid.
    Bill Polian changed the way defenses play today to favor his team. Took the aggressiveness out of playing DB.
    Can’t blame Polian for this. there were others on the committee and the owners approved it.

  56. Reasonable says: Feb 11, 2010 8:36 AM

    TJO5
    LOL. I didn’t see any personal fouls. Just a whinney baby.

  57. MSWRavens says: Feb 11, 2010 8:39 AM

    Our mommies & daddies brought us up to believe that cheaters never prosper…and the two most dominant NFL teams over the last decade: Patriots & Colts.
    Hmmmm….. Maybe mommy & daddy were wrong!

  58. The Real Shuxion says: Feb 11, 2010 8:47 AM

    Buschman says:
    First off: How long have I been beating this drum? 3 years now? Where is my credit?
    Second:
    February 11, 2010 8:08 AM
    hayward giablommi says:
    “…a team employee filming coaching signals *from an illegal location*, signals which are visible to 70,000 people and which provide no competitive advantage.”
    So, if it provided no competitive advantage, why would they do it? And why were they penalized for doing it? Just curious.
    ————————————————-
    They were penalized for doing it because doing it after the letter was sent to the teams was basically a middle finger to the NFL.
    They did it so they could be able to find a pattern in D-coordinators signal calls. (You can tape from other locations legally)
    They were caught and punished, I think the punish was a little harsh (draft pick) but I am a Pats fan so take that with a grain of salt.
    However I know they didn’t use the tapes the same game, how do you have the time during halftime? You got like 15-20 mins and you are gonna disect the tape, write everything down, figure out what every signal means and come up with a plan in that time?

  59. Cerberus says: Feb 11, 2010 9:12 AM

    Now if we can only get him to fess-up about Tagliabue calling Walt Coleman and having him throw the Tuck-Game to the Pats, we’ll be on to something.

  60. The Real Shuxion says: Feb 11, 2010 9:15 AM

    MSWRavens says:
    February 11, 2010 8:39 AM
    Our mommies & daddies brought us up to believe that cheaters never prosper…and the two most dominant NFL teams over the last decade: Patriots & Colts.
    Hmmmm….. Maybe mommy & daddy were wrong!
    ————————————————-
    Mommy and Daddy also brought us up to have the morality to tell the cops who killed somebody yet a certain MLB who keeps his mouth shuit does not and gets basically rewarded for it.
    hmmmmm….Maybe they were wrong indeed.

  61. jgreen1570 says: Feb 11, 2010 9:38 AM

    I think it’s pretty clear that any time your team loses, the other team was cheating. Take the vikings for example – they have been getting cheated since the day their franchise started.

  62. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 9:38 AM

    “#1- THAT spot at 52 seconds left in 1st half, even announcer said addai was a half yard(i say about a foot) short of the first down, but when they came back off the shortest commercial break all game, the ball was OVER a yard short of the first down as the refs pushed it back almost a full yard. this play had more influence than even the opening kickoff of the 2nd half that may not have even been tried if refs hadnt FIXED the spot.”
    Because the announcers are always right? I’m sure they can always tell exactly when the runner is down more than the ref. Sheesh.

  63. Nebster21 says: Feb 11, 2010 9:40 AM

    I wonder why Pereira is not being investigated. Doesn’t it seem odd that he is leaving after this year where there were alot of shady calls. Of course there are shady calls every year. This will not change until the refs are held accountable for there blown calls that change games.
    BTW Who thinks lawyers are not up for bribing should really learn about the Mafia and how they have bribed so many Judges, Lawyers, and Officers of the Law.

  64. CaptainFantastik says: Feb 11, 2010 9:52 AM

    Patriots fans are the last ones who should be talking smack on this issue. Their 2007 season was made possible by those same rules. If I had a dollar for every Patriots drive that was kept alive in 2007 because of phantom PI calls I could buy an NFL team. The Ravens game in particular comes to mind when the Patriots’ winning scoring drive was kept alive because of the worst PI calls I’ve ever seen.
    So shut yer traps Pats fans. Your team benefitted as much, if not more so, than the Colts have from those rules.

  65. CaptainFantastik says: Feb 11, 2010 9:56 AM

    Let me say this: Bill Polian’s gerrymandering of NFL rules to suit the Colts is a much more destructive to the league, and far more disgraceful than a team employee filming coaching signals *from an illegal location*, signals which are visible to 70,000 people and which provide no competitive advantage.
    —————————————-
    LOL at Pats fans still trying to minimize their team’s cheating. Since all you guys love to talk about what a “genius” Belichick is, tell me this…………if there was no competitive advantage then why did Belichick bother with it for over 6 years? Hmmmmm? Yep, that’s what I thought. If Belichick saw no advantage he wouldn’t have bothered. He obviously did see an advantage.

  66. frox says: Feb 11, 2010 9:57 AM

    Wow! This rule, more than any other, drives me crazy and to hear Pereira come right out and say the same thing is hard to believe. He is 100 percent right though that it makes no sense that on a 3rd and 17 a receiver being bumped 6 yards down field on the opposite side of where the QB is looking causes an automatic first down. If I had one rule I could change, this would probably be the one (although the rules on hitting QBs and “defenseless” receivers would be a close 2nd).

  67. GoBrowns19 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:01 AM

    Why is anyone intimidated by Polian? He’s a freakin GM. Just shows the NFL is nothing more than a good ole boys club…not in the rooney rule way, but more in the ugly, bald, fat guys rule all…like in old Europe.

  68. hilman22 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:02 AM

    Every Peyton Manning comeback (2007 afc championship, and this past season) has been aided by a phantom illegal contact or pass interference call). and if you don’t believe on the first one you can look up ellis hobbs face guarding. The super bowl was the best officiated big game i’ve seen in years and look at the final outcome. coincidence…..

  69. CaptainFantastik says: Feb 11, 2010 10:03 AM

    However I know they didn’t use the tapes the same game, how do you have the time during halftime? You got like 15-20 mins and you are gonna disect the tape, write everything down, figure out what every signal means and come up with a plan in that time?
    ————————————————-
    You don’t know that they weren’t used in the same game. Games are won or lost in the 4th quarter. Halftime plus the 3rd quarter is plenty of time for a known savant like Ernie Adams to break down a tape of the 1st half. Face reality, your team was busted for rampant systematic cheating for 6 years. That’s why the penalty was as harsh as it was. If there was no advantage, Belichick wouldn’t have bothered with it for 6 years.

  70. dashoe says: Feb 11, 2010 10:08 AM

    Florio, do yourself and your readers a service and go back and watch that Colts Pats game. You’ll see that the Pats were blatantly, holding, grabbing and even tackling the Colts WR’s while the ball was in the air and before.
    The Pats abused the rules(I know, thats a shocker!) and the refs, for whatever reason allowed it to happen. It was a blatant violation of the rules and needed to be addressed, especially since that kind of contact wasn’t allowed all year.
    Being a “man-who-seeks-the-truth”, you and others should have been asking why the refs allowed such play in that game when it wasn’t allowed in any other game ALL season. Why did the refs turn a blind eye to such contact? Given the fact that the Pats were caught cheating and the more glaring fact that the NFL Commissioner detroyed all the evidence, it would seem there are a WHOLE lot of unanswered questions out there about a lot of games the Pats won in very suspicious ways. It’s like an onion, the more layers you peel, the more it stinks!

  71. Reptar says: Feb 11, 2010 10:09 AM

    Yes, because Bill Polian is the only member of the Competition Committee. Jeebus, Florio, do you even try on stories like these? Polian’s an ass, but he was hardly alone in passing this emphasis.

  72. PirateFreedom says: Feb 11, 2010 10:12 AM

    This is a foolish complaint:
    #2- Why on earth did Payton discuss with the refs the short onside kickoff “just to the left”? is that how it now works? you prepare the refs for the play you are going to run so they are prepared to make sure they don’t call any penalties against your team? this is absolutely absurd that the ref knows your plays.
    The refs knowing they would be called on to determine possession would only help them avoid mistakes.
    It does not aid the Saints in any way beyond reducing the possibility of an officiating error.

  73. Cowboy22 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:13 AM

    Anyone who has any complaints about that rule did not watch the play-off game between the Pats and Colts that stirred this whole deal up. The Pats were definitely creating an advantage for themselves and it was more than just a touch. They man-handled the Colts receivers the whole game long. That game was taken from the Colts by pass-interference and illegal contact that was let go the whole game.

  74. Reasonable says: Feb 11, 2010 10:15 AM

    To Bob S. I feel retarded that I even bothered to look at the 52 second complaint, but I did. Your just simply wrong on that one. The ball was not spotted then moved. It was just spotted about a half a football length short. It’s very arguable where it should have been spotted anyway. (Many players from both teams are between Addi and the official.) This happens all the time. I’ll give you the benefit and say it was about a half a ball short. That’s it. You should really try a different sport. Obviously your emotions can’t handle football. But to your complaint, the ball was not spotted then moved. It was just spotted a tad short. In the first half, to boot.

  75. Massappeal says: Feb 11, 2010 10:18 AM

    Colts fans, blaming the bitching in this post on Patriots fans, is like bama still blaming Bush.

  76. shermpotter86 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:26 AM

    Pereira has always been a useless company man. If he spoke out about this, he broke a trust and proves my point. Polian isn’t the only member of the committee, so it isn’t all on him, the majority must have agreed with him. Good riddance, P! Your guys muffed the calls in the first game and the last game using the same rules!

  77. Marima says: Feb 11, 2010 10:38 AM

    This is just one aggravating reason why a bully and manipulator like Polian should not be on the competition committee.
    The other reason is that how can a guy be a member of the COMPETITION committee when he had his team THROW THE GAME in Week 16?????
    Is that the kind of competition we fans want in the NFL?

  78. Bill Cowher's Chin says: Feb 11, 2010 10:42 AM

    Can we move on from filming of coaches signals. CHRIST, let it go!!!!!!
    Was it illegal to tape signals? NO
    Was it illegal to tape signals from the sideline? YES
    Would BB do it just to do it? NO
    Was that the only reason they won? NO
    Is it worse than changing the rules? NO
    Is it worse than violating the salary cap? NO
    Is it worse than pumping in crowd noise? NO
    Obviously Belichick gained something from it, but the advantage gained wasnt more or less valuable than watching the game tapes that Tracy Porter watched, that enabled him to pick6 Manning’s pass.
    Yes the Pats were punished, yes they violated the rules, but no one really knows just how much of an advantage it was. It is simply an opinion on each side of the argument. If you hate the Pats, you pretend that taping signals (a legal act) from the sideline (against the rules) was the end all be all of cheating. That it was the same as bribing officials, etc. It obviously violates the spirit of “fair competition” but let it go. And those that support the Pats, think it was no big deal. Again, no one really knows. Many coaches have come out and said it provided no advantage so they simply didnt waste time doing it (Jimmie Johnson). As a NASCAR fan, I have an appreciation for some one trying to push the rule book, to gain an advantage. If you think your team isnt trying to gain an advantage over the competition, you are a complete fool. I hate Polian, and I hate the “focus on illegal contact”, but I can appreciate the fact that he did everything he could, to give his team an advantage…….
    Its over and done with, they were caught, they were punished, and in America, after you serve your “time”, its done with. Agreeing with the “sentence” doesnt matter…..
    The people that continue to hang on, and harp on taping signals are almost pathetic, and then, they will harp on Florio for “beating a dead horse” when Florio writes over and over about something negative about your team……

  79. 6250claimer says: Feb 11, 2010 10:44 AM

    Screw’em, bring back the good ole days. I want Night Train Lane and Jack “The Assassin” Tatum at corner, and Ronnie Lott and Larry Wilson at safety. And Deacon Jones on the line, for good measure. Just decrapitate all of ‘em, the refs won’t have enough flags.

  80. Commish says: Feb 11, 2010 10:45 AM

    Hayward is right on:
    Especially with the spygate thing. Its funny how the Pat staff was “cheating” since signals can be seen from all over.
    It’s like saying that you’re dating a girl but if you check out another girl walking down the street its cheating. maybe it isn’t what your supposed to do, but your not compromising the play now are you?
    Polian definitely used his power unethically. However, because everyone now plays by the same rules its justified. But it does speak to his character.

  81. Filbertkiwi71 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:49 AM

    Reading some of the Patriot fans responses here is comical.
    No matter what Polian may have done, that does not let the Pats off the hook for Spygate. You don’t just compare the two and say that what Polian may have done is worse than what happened with Spygate.
    Really, if you are going to go down that road, then you can just about justify any behavior by anyone by saying:” Yeah, I know what this person did, but it is no where near as bad as what that person did”.

  82. TheBigOldDog says: Feb 11, 2010 11:10 AM

    All other issues aside, the makeup of the Competition Committee should change frequently. In other words, they should have term limits

  83. edgy1957 says: Feb 11, 2010 11:14 AM

    A lot of Manning’s apologizers talk about how he would go to the ’70s Steelers and do as well as Bradshaw but they don’t seem to realize that the rules were different and if he was disturbed by the touching of his receivers NOW, he’d have been a nervous wreck at how they could have been manhandled then and throw in the fact that the offensive line had to get their hands in and couldn’t extend them like they do today. Also, since they would end up giving more sacks back then don’t you think that the OL would have taken care of Manning in their own way if he were to throw his linemen under the bus like he did the mauling by the Steelers? Manning also would have found his way to the bench if he tried to audible out of a run when Noll called for it.

  84. Sourdough says: Feb 11, 2010 11:14 AM

    Why are the only Colts haters Patri*ts fans!?!

  85. Devils Advocate says: Feb 11, 2010 11:16 AM

    Cowboy22 says:
    February 11, 2010 10:13 AM
    Anyone who has any complaints about that rule did not watch the play-off game between the Pats and Colts that stirred this whole deal up.
    __________________________
    hey cowboy22, yeah and it used to be called the NFL. now it’s the PFL – pussy football league. your kind of game i guess?

  86. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 11:17 AM

    “Pereira has always been a useless company man. If he spoke out about this, he broke a trust and proves my point.”
    A “company man” is one who sticks to the company line. How is speaking out about this being a “company man”?

  87. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 12:03 PM

    Reasonable says:
    To Bob S. I feel retarded that I even bothered to look at the 52 second complaint, but I did. Your just simply wrong on that one. The ball was not spotted then moved. It was just spotted about a half a football length short. It’s very arguable where it should have been spotted anyway. (Many players from both teams are between Addi and the official.)

    I never said it was spotted then moved. They cut to commercial before it was spotted. What you do see is the ball is within inches of the yellow first down unofficial line which is about a football length past the 11 yard line and in Addai’s hands. When they cut back from the commercial the ball was back ABOUT A FULL YARD touching the 10 yardline. You even are obviously saying refs’ views were blocked but the pan shot from this side was NOT and replay officials upstairs did NOTHING as opposed what they are supposed to do in the final 2 minutes of a half or game.
    ====
    nps6724 says:
    Because the announcers are always right?

    in that specific case he was right about how short of a first down Addai was

  88. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 12:08 PM

    PirateFreedom says:
    This is a foolish complaint:
    #2- Why on earth did Payton discuss with the refs the short onside kickoff “just to the left”? is that how it now works? you prepare the refs for the play you are going to run so they are prepared to make sure they don’t call any penalties against your team? this is absolutely absurd that the ref knows your plays.
    The refs knowing they would be called on to determine possession would only help them avoid mistakes.

    That’s a foolish answer:
    Oh so they didn’t realize that they had to determine possession on onside kickoffs?

  89. TJO5 says: Feb 11, 2010 12:15 PM

    # Reasonable says: February 11, 2010 8:36 AM
    TJO5
    LOL. I didn’t see any personal fouls. Just a whinney baby.
    —————————————————-
    Very true. Whoever made that video was a first class whiner. Maybe if the Rams defense played as intensely they would have done better.
    Seems like some teams actually believe the media hype about how great they are and think they don’t have to show up for the big game.

  90. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 12:38 PM

    “in that specific case he was right about how short of a first down Addai was”
    According to…?
    Even if it was slightly short, Hart was completely stuffed on the next play and lost more than he gained. Your only argument is that Caldwell would’ve called a QB sneak but that’s purely speculative.

  91. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 1:26 PM

    “Oh so they didn’t realize that they had to determine possession on onside kickoffs?”
    If they aren’t expecting an onside kick, they may be out of position like the Colts’ blockers were. Letting the refs know an onside kick is coming allows them to make sure they’re in position.
    It makes perfect sense, really. If the ref expects a typical kickoff, he may bail and start running down the sideline like the front of the Colts’ line did. Knowing it’ll be an onside kick allows him to get in perfect position for the call. Situational awareness.

  92. Treadstone says: Feb 11, 2010 2:03 PM

    Dashoe, Perhaps Goodell destroyed the evidence because it showed that many other teams in the league were doing the same thing. IF so, that really didn’t need to be made public, thus hurting the golden goose. It’s a lot better for the league to have a Yankees style team that was busted than having 10 Yankee style teams that were busted.

  93. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 2:11 PM

    nps6724 says:
    “in that specific case he was right about how short of a first down Addai was”
    According to…?

    I guess according to the announcer’s eyes! And mine too btw.

    “Even if it was slightly short, Hart was completely stuffed on the next play and lost more than he gained. Your only argument is that Caldwell would’ve called a QB sneak but that’s purely speculative.”

    firstly hart was NOT completely stuffed. he gained about 10 inches which would have been enough if properly spotted in the first place, however you’re right and i’ve seen manning successfully on many occasions quarterback sneak it when its only about a half yard or less to go. but this spot made it OVER a yard and a quarter to go – a helluva difference.
    how could a ball that CLEARLY was closer to the 11 yard line and to that yellow unofficial first down line than to the 10 yardline, end up spotted touching the 10 yardline and upstairs not even bothering to review such a key play in such an important game.

  94. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 2:36 PM

    nps6724 says:
    “Oh so they didn’t realize that they had to determine possession on onside kickoffs?”

    If they aren’t expecting an onside kick, they may be out of position like the Colts’ blockers were. Letting the refs know an onside kick is coming allows them to make sure they’re in position.

    he only told it to one ref. who obviously would then tell to another and to another until all there refs heard, maybe when one ref was telling another one some colt could possibly overhear it or maybe one of those other refs had a friend on the colts and told him, “they are going to try an onside kick on you”.
    sorry i just dont think vince lombardi , chuck noll and others would divulge their secrets and their trick plays to the refs except for some other reason!
    as for the refs why did they not throw a flag when manning he was blocked and pushed with 2 hands right on his back and numbers during the interception?
    or how was the spot so off?
    or on the 2 point catch which had not been completed when it was knocked out. the rules clearly state it is ONLY a completion if a receiver going to the ground maintains control. he never got to the point where it would have been called a completion – because the ball was on the ground.

  95. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 2:44 PM

    nps6724 says:
    Situational awareness.

    you mean he thought if they were out of position they would say colts got the ball not the saints?
    even that- it took them all kinds of time and with mixed signals being given by the players of each and conviently no closeup was shown to the fans on who really had it.
    and besides the ball was kicked right into the hands team hands or baskett and the pass catcher blew it. i wonder if then a penalty flag would have been thrown on colts for a late hit or offsides? thats the reason payton was telling them “to the left”!

  96. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 3:19 PM

    “I guess according to the announcer’s eyes! And mine too btw.”
    …So? Watch a game with any group and you’ll hear people say they saw many different things. Just because you swear by it doesn’t mean it’s true.
    “firstly hart was NOT completely stuffed. he gained about 10 inches which would have been enough if properly spotted in the first place, however you’re right and i’ve seen manning successfully on many occasions quarterback sneak it when its only about a half yard or less to go. but this spot made it OVER a yard and a quarter to go – a helluva difference.”
    Good to know you can properly spot a football from a TV camera when the runner goes up the middle. And not only that, but determine how many inches a RB gained. Last I checked, the camera angles weren’t lined up with the LOS or 1st-down marker. Not only that, but it’s where the ball is the moment the knee hits. Just because a RB extends his arms after he’s down doesn’t mean that’s the spot.
    “how could a ball that CLEARLY was closer to the 11 yard line and to that yellow unofficial first down line than to the 10 yardline, end up spotted touching the 10 yardline and upstairs not even bothering to review such a key play in such an important game.”
    That should answer your question for you.
    “he only told it to one ref. who obviously would then tell to another and to another until all there refs heard, maybe when one ref was telling another one some colt could possibly overhear it or maybe one of those other refs had a friend on the colts and told him, “they are going to try an onside kick on you”.
    sorry i just dont think vince lombardi , chuck noll and others would divulge their secrets and their trick plays to the refs except for some other reason!”
    And none of them ever tried an onside kick before the 4th quarter in the Super Bowl. What’s your point? What one coach does makes no difference to what another does.
    “as for the refs why did they not throw a flag when manning he was blocked and pushed with 2 hands right on his back and numbers during the interception?”
    Because Will Smith pushes him in the right shoulder first. It’s only an illegal block in the back “when an offensive player blocks a defender from behind.” Peyton wasn’t blocked from behind until he ran past the play. But he was first blocked from the side, which is not illegal.
    “or how was the spot so off?”
    According to you and one announcer.
    “or on the 2 point catch which had not been completed when it was knocked out. the rules clearly state it is ONLY a completion if a receiver going to the ground maintains control. he never got to the point where it would have been called a completion – because the ball was on the ground.”
    He had control and crossed the goalline. That is all that is needed for a TD or 2PC to be good. Once he established possession and crossed the line, the play is over. Otherwise anytime someone scored a TD they’d lose possession whenever they released the ball.

  97. cutler_eats_it says: Feb 11, 2010 3:21 PM

    Bob S.
    So Bob… What’s your opinion of the spot on “the 4 & 2″. Did NE get the right spot? Becareful now…your entire credibility is riding on your answer.

  98. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 3:48 PM

    “you mean he thought if they were out of position they would say colts got the ball not the saints?”
    They could’ve not been in proper position that led to an incorrect call, whether it be possession or a penalty.
    “even that- it took them all kinds of time and with mixed signals being given by the players of each and conviently no closeup was shown to the fans on who really had it.”
    How is this different than EVERY OTHER onside kick? And Chris Reis came out of the pile with the ball. He happened to be the guy who went down with it.
    “and besides the ball was kicked right into the hands team hands or baskett and the pass catcher blew it. i wonder if then a penalty flag would have been thrown on colts for a late hit or offsides? thats the reason payton was telling them “to the left”!”
    The hands team was on the field for what they thought was a normal kickoff?
    Baskett was hit by a Saint (Johnathan Casillas IIRC) and he was going to the ground when the ball got to him.
    How could the Colts be offsides when the ball is being kicked to them and after the ball was kicked? And what late hit would they call?
    May I interest you in a tinfoil hat? Nevermind, I see you already have one. Carry on.

  99. tigerlilac says: Feb 11, 2010 3:50 PM

    dashoe says:
    February 11, 2010 10:08 AM
    Florio, do yourself and your readers a service and go back and watch that Colts Pats game. You’ll see that the Pats were blatantly, holding, grabbing and even tackling the Colts WR’s while the ball was in the air and before . . . It was a blatant violation of the rules and needed to be addressed, especially since that kind of contact wasn’t allowed all year.
    xxxxxxxx
    Sorry, but the penalty distribution in the game you reference was 3 penalties agaisnt the Colts for 20 yards and 4 against the Patriots for 72 yards. The facts don’t fit your argument.
    For all of the Belichick haters: Polian used his position on the Competition Committee (which gave directives to Pereira, the National Football League’s Vice President of Officiating) to gain a competitive advantage for his team with the specific aim of obtaining a competitive advantage over the Patriots that had continued success against his team.
    Why did the owners go along? Because they didn’t want one team dominating the competition. That’s not good for business. Belichick was too good so they rigged the rules. They came right out and admitted that fact.
    Now, in 2010, for similar reasons, the NFL chose to strip the Colts of the competive advantage they enjoyed for several years but took away in Super Bowl 44.

  100. Bob S. says: Feb 11, 2010 5:22 PM

    1-Baskett was hit by a Saint (Johnathan Casillas IIRC) and he was going to the ground when the ball got to him.
    2-How could the Colts be offsides when the ball is being kicked to them and after the ball was kicked? And what late hit would they call?

    1-baskett is a pass receiver and his job being up there is to catch the ball – why they call it the hands team. but that has nothing to do with lombardi telling the refs he would onside kick to the left!
    2- i sarcastically said theyd find a way to throw a flag for any possible penalty against the colts to make sure lombardis play that they were asked to watch for them succeeded.

  101. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 5:35 PM

    “1-baskett is a pass receiver and his job being up there is to catch the ball – why they call it the hands team. but that has nothing to do with lombardi telling the refs he would onside kick to the left!”
    …That wasn’t the hands team. The hands team only takes the field when it’s an expected onside kick. Baskett is a STer who is also a WR so he plays on STs.
    “2- i sarcastically said theyd find a way to throw a flag for any possible penalty against the colts to make sure lombardis play that they were asked to watch for them succeeded.”

  102. nps6724 says: Feb 11, 2010 5:36 PM

    “1-baskett is a pass receiver and his job being up there is to catch the ball – why they call it the hands team. but that has nothing to do with lombardi telling the refs he would onside kick to the left!”
    …That wasn’t the hands team. The hands team only takes the field when it’s an expected onside kick. Baskett is a STer who is also a WR so he plays on STs.
    “2- i sarcastically said theyd find a way to throw a flag for any possible penalty against the colts to make sure lombardis play that they were asked to watch for them succeeded.”
    Good thing the Saints didn’t need this supposed flag then. Or did they not actually recover the ball and it just magically appeared in Chris Reis’ hand?
    Some of you Colts fans are getting to be as bad as Vikings fans. You lost. Deal with it.

  103. The Real Shuxion says: Feb 11, 2010 5:46 PM

    # CaptainFantastik says: February 11, 2010 9:56 AM
    Let me say this: Bill Polian’s gerrymandering of NFL rules to suit the Colts is a much more destructive to the league, and far more disgraceful than a team employee filming coaching signals *from an illegal location*, signals which are visible to 70,000 people and which provide no competitive advantage.
    —————————————-
    LOL at Pats fans still trying to minimize their team’s cheating. Since all you guys love to talk about what a “genius” Belichick is, tell me this…………if there was no competitive advantage then why did Belichick bother with it for over 6 years? Hmmmmm? Yep, that’s what I thought. If Belichick saw no advantage he wouldn’t have bothered. He obviously did see an advantage.
    —————————————————-
    This is coming from a fan of a team whos legacy is built on roids. The cesspool spews once again.

  104. The Real Shuxion says: Feb 11, 2010 5:50 PM

    CaptainFantastik says: February 11, 2010 10:03 AM
    You don’t know that they weren’t used in the same game. Games are won or lost in the 4th quarter.
    ——————————————————
    If you really think that it can all be deciphered in that amount of time, then I guess you also think 9-11 is an inside job.
    Shouldn’t you be teaching youth football players the Steeler way by injecting them with horse testosterone?

  105. Larry30 says: Feb 11, 2010 9:58 PM

    The Colts had seven come from behind wins this season, half of which could not have occurred without the timely aid of one or more PIs… most of which were controversial if not flat out incorrect.
    So, they would have had 3.5 comeback wins without the timely PI calls…damn, they could have been the first 12.5 win team since the ’72 dolph…oh wait, nevermind

  106. TJO5 says: Feb 11, 2010 10:44 PM

    # Sourdough says: February 11, 2010 11:14 AM
    Why are the only Colts haters Patri*ts fans!?!
    ————————————————-
    Might have been BC the Colts and Peyton Manning were challenging Tom Brady and the Patriots as the greatest team of the decade- but you don’t really have to worry about that any more.
    Congrats Saints.

  107. Dr. Steve says: Feb 13, 2010 8:54 PM

    Bill Polian got the rule changed after the Peyton Manning bitterly complained that the Patriots were holding up his receivers. That was just one of the rules the Competition Committee changed to favor Manning. That’s why, the NFL Rule Book for the following season had Manning’s picture on it, I believe.
    And sports writiers call Manning the greatest QB ever. Not! He’s made his name playing on turf in a domed stadium with the rules changed to protect him and his receivers. Peyton is the greatest flag football QB ever, but just average on grass in an open stadium under the old rules, in my opinion.

Leave a Reply

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