NFC Championship: Not All the Calls Went the Saints’ Way (1 Viewer)

[Arch Stanton]

I'm a bit confused by what you're saying here. The Saints wouldn't have gotten a pick regardless. What was missed is an offensive pass interference call. If I'm correct, the play happened on 1st down on the drive when eventually Berrian fumbled in the red zone. So it could have been 1st & 20 instead of 2nd & 10 on that drive. I'm not sure that would have made a big difference. Can you enlighten me?

I doubt it, you seem to have some serious blinders on.

I get it, so you can't actually respond to my post. Who has the blinders on?

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

The impact of the calls was not the same. If you can't see that, you're the one with blinders on.

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

A lot of people are saying the Vikings got screwed because of 3 questionable calls in overtime. I guarantee that if the NFL had on OT period that allowed both teams to touch the ball and the Vikings had a chance to match that score but were unable to, then there wouldn't be any #####ing. It just "felt" unfair because the refs were at least partially responsible for putting the Saints in FG range, whether you agree with the calls or not. So, blame the NFL's OT rules for the screwing if you want, but it was a farce.

How? Which 3 calls? The PI that was upheld by the NFL? What were the other 2? The non-call on Favre certainly didn't happen in OT. How about we blame Favre for throwing away their SB dreams.

 

[Tau837]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

 

[Arch Stanton]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

I'm totally objective and even empirical about it. Both QBs had a roughing call not called. Favre's happened to be on a pick, Brees' wasn't. Sure the outcome was of more impact in the Favre throw but the refs couldn't know that at the time that they kept the flags in their pocket. But to cry foul just because Favre's was on a pick is just asinine and silly. The game was flawed by the refs, but if Favre could throw to his own WRs instead of Saints it wouldn'e be an issue.

 

[DerekZoolander]

$100 says Viking Dave didn't watch the video.

you can send that $100 my way...like I said, reach much...the Leber "hit" to the head, get the F*** out, he skimmed the top of his helmet...the Brees roughing, nope, he didnt pick his ### up off the ground and slam him down like the Saints did Favre...

you guys won, I dont see what you have to defend...if we would have won I wouldnt give two ####s what anyone said...

Im pissed cause MY TEAM isnt in the SB...

Fixed

 

[guderian]

It kills me that Viking's fans are still whining so much about officiating when they had a 15/88 yardage advantage in penalties during regulation with a 4-to-1 advantage in first downs due to penalties.

My Longhorns and Saints put up 28 wins this season, but if you listen to the opposing team's fans both teams should be winless because in each case the refs handed them the game. Funny stuff.

 

[guderian]

The impact of the calls was not the same. If you can't see that, you're the one with blinders on.

So when the argument that "all the calls went against the Vikings" goes awry we jump to "ok, well then the impact of the calls wasn't the same!!!!"

 

[guderian]

The first clip in that video shows a Viking hitting Brees in the knees too...

 

[Tau837]

The first clip in that video shows a Viking hitting Brees in the knees too...

No it doesn't. The defensive player grabs Brees by his thigh and takes him down. There is no hit to the knees.

 

[saintsfan]

How many times have us Saints fans heard, "Good teams overcome bad calls."

Personally, I think there were bad calls on both sides. One team overcame them, the other didn't. Also, I might take complaints more seriously if the Vikings didn't do everything POSSIBLE to lose the game anyway. How many fumbles and interceptions are too many??

I didn't like the PI call against the Vikings in OT; I thought that was a bad call. But unless you are a complete blind Saints hater, I don't see how you can POSSIBLY think that they should have re-spotted the ball on the PT dive. How would you have any idea where to spot it? Not only that, it's not clear that PT lost control of the ball, IMO. What should they have done? Push the ball back at random until it wasn't a first down to make

Vikings fans happy? You can't tell what yard line the ball belongs on.

Also, the Meachem catch, what should they have done? There's no evidence that the ball moved. The ball can touch the ground if he has control. It's not even all that clear that the ball touched the ground.

Once again, the entire point of the replay is that there has to be sufficient evidence to overrule the call on the field. In neither instance is there anything close to sufficient evidence. You can't guess.

 

[Jeremy]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

You're not being objective either. As a Chargers fan, what is your stake in this?

 

[Statorama]

The guy that's happiest about all of this kind of chatter is Brad Childress.

 

[Tau837]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

You're not being objective either. As a Chargers fan, what is your stake in this?

How am I not being objective? I don't have a stake, which is exactly why I think I am being objective. I'm just participating in a discussion that interests me as a football fan.

 

[Zigg]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

You're not being objective either. As a Chargers fan, what is your stake in this?

How am I not being objective? I don't have a stake, which is exactly why I think I am being objective. I'm just participating in a discussion that interests me as a football fan.

Because you reached a conclusion after the game and you refuse to waiver from it. The non-roughing call was the only bad call(non-call) that went against the Vikings. Maybe a little Brees envy.

 

[Jeremy]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

You're not being objective either. As a Chargers fan, what is your stake in this?

How am I not being objective? I don't have a stake, which is exactly why I think I am being objective. I'm just participating in a discussion that interests me as a football fan.

It just seems a little one sided from your POV. You're arguing this exactly as I would expect a Vikings fan to argue it. You're putting much more scrutiny on the questionable calls/non calls that went against the Vikings.

 

[Tau837]

So Brees should've thrown a pick when he got clobbered to make it fair? Too funny. There was a noncall on both QBs. It's fair. It evened out.

You are just revealing that either you can't be objective about this or you don't understand the discussion.

You're not being objective either. As a Chargers fan, what is your stake in this? :(

How am I not being objective? I don't have a stake, which is exactly why I think I am being objective. I'm just participating in a discussion that interests me as a football fan.

It just seems a little one sided from your POV. You're arguing this exactly as I would expect a Vikings fan to argue it. You're putting much more scrutiny on the questionable calls/non calls that went against the Vikings.

Not sure I'm putting more scrutiny on any particular calls. In this and various threads, I've discussed all the calls/non-calls that posters brought up as being questionable, whether they favored the Saints or Vikings. For example, until this thread and the linked video, I wasn't aware of the hit to Brees's head that could have been called, and I recognized that above.Perhaps you meant I put more weight on the questionable calls/non-calls that went against the Vikings. That is true. Because two of those calls/non-calls determined possession for the Saints. I am not aware of any questionable calls/non-calls that determined possession for the Vikings. Thus, the calls/non-calls that went against the Vikings had more impact IMO.

 

[encaitar]

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

A lot of people are saying the Vikings got screwed because of 3 questionable calls in overtime. I guarantee that if the NFL had on OT period that allowed both teams to touch the ball and the Vikings had a chance to match that score but were unable to, then there wouldn't be any #####ing. It just "felt" unfair because the refs were at least partially responsible for putting the Saints in FG range, whether you agree with the calls or not. So, blame the NFL's OT rules for the screwing if you want, but it was a farce.

How? Which 3 calls? The PI that was upheld by the NFL? What were the other 2? The non-call on Favre certainly didn't happen in OT. How about we blame Favre for throwing away their SB dreams.

I never said 3 "wrong" calls. I said 3 "questionable" calls. A little reading comprehension would go a long way. The spot on 4th down could've gone either way. Had the refs marked him short and held it up due to the ball being knocked loose, it would've been an acceptable call. If they hadn't thrown the flag on the PI, I don't think anyone says a word about that play(even the NFL who ruled that it was PI said that whether it was uncatchable was a judgement call). If they had ruled the other way on the Meachem catch and said it hit the ground, most people would've been ok with that decision. Like I said, three questionable calls that all went in the Saints favor. They wouldn't have been a big deal if the NFL had different OT rules, but because the Vikings didn't get a chance to tie or take the lead in OT it "felt" a bit unfair. Now, in regulation, I felt that the refs were missing calls on both ends and just didn't call a very clean game. I don't think either team had an advantage in shady reffing before that. You can go and bring up all the videos you want on missed calls on the Vikings. I could go and find 3 times as many missed calls just on Bushrod. Jared Allen was tackled a few times without getting a holding call. Like I said, I don't think the refs had a very clean game for either team. I also don't think anyone talks about the missed calls if the NFL had a different OT rule that allowed both offenses to get the ball. So, fault the NFL on that one.

 

[gianmarco]

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

A lot of people are saying the Vikings got screwed because of 3 questionable calls in overtime. I guarantee that if the NFL had on OT period that allowed both teams to touch the ball and the Vikings had a chance to match that score but were unable to, then there wouldn't be any #####ing. It just "felt" unfair because the refs were at least partially responsible for putting the Saints in FG range, whether you agree with the calls or not. So, blame the NFL's OT rules for the screwing if you want, but it was a farce.

How? Which 3 calls? The PI that was upheld by the NFL? What were the other 2? The non-call on Favre certainly didn't happen in OT. How about we blame Favre for throwing away their SB dreams.

I never said 3 "wrong" calls. I said 3 "questionable" calls. A little reading comprehension would go a long way. The spot on 4th down could've gone either way. Had the refs marked him short and held it up due to the ball being knocked loose, it would've been an acceptable call. If they hadn't thrown the flag on the PI, I don't think anyone says a word about that play(even the NFL who ruled that it was PI said that whether it was uncatchable was a judgement call). If they had ruled the other way on the Meachem catch and said it hit the ground, most people would've been ok with that decision. Like I said, three questionable calls that all went in the Saints favor. They wouldn't have been a big deal if the NFL had different OT rules, but because the Vikings didn't get a chance to tie or take the lead in OT it "felt" a bit unfair. Now, in regulation, I felt that the refs were missing calls on both ends and just didn't call a very clean game. I don't think either team had an advantage in shady reffing before that. You can go and bring up all the videos you want on missed calls on the Vikings. I could go and find 3 times as many missed calls just on Bushrod. Jared Allen was tackled a few times without getting a holding call. Like I said, I don't think the refs had a very clean game for either team. I also don't think anyone talks about the missed calls if the NFL had a different OT rule that allowed both offenses to get the ball. So, fault the NFL on that one.

Well, since you're at it and knocking his reading comprehension, where did he say "wrong" calls or said that you said "wrong" calls?

 

[Harrassment Panda]

The impact of the calls was not the same. If you can't see that, you're the one with blinders on.

The Vikings had two drives extended (both of them scoring drives) because of bad calls against the Saints defense on third down. It's very possible the Saints would have run away with the game at the point of the first roughing the passer call had the Vikings not been allowed to keep the ball. Obviously we can never truly know how it would have played out. Just throwing that out there.

 

[Harrassment Panda]

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

A lot of people are saying the Vikings got screwed because of 3 questionable calls in overtime. I guarantee that if the NFL had on OT period that allowed both teams to touch the ball and the Vikings had a chance to match that score but were unable to, then there wouldn't be any #####ing. It just "felt" unfair because the refs were at least partially responsible for putting the Saints in FG range, whether you agree with the calls or not. So, blame the NFL's OT rules for the screwing if you want, but it was a farce.

As a Saints fan, I've been hearing about how good teams are supposed to overcome penalties, bad officiating, unfair overtime procedures, etc. etc. etc. for years and years.I feel bad for the Vikings fans. I really do. But it seems like now that its the Saints on the other side of the equation everybody is all up in arms because now all of a sudden these things are "unfair."

 

[Tau837]

The impact of the calls was not the same. If you can't see that, you're the one with blinders on.

The Vikings had two drives extended (both of them scoring drives) because of bad calls against the Saints defense on third down. It's very possible the Saints would have run away with the game at the point of the first roughing the passer call had the Vikings not been allowed to keep the ball. Obviously we can never truly know how it would have played out. Just throwing that out there.

What third down calls are you referencing here? I'm not aware of any that fit your description here.If you are talking about the roughing the passer call for the hit on Favre where the defender lifted him and drove him into the ground, I posted a link to a video on that yesterday... can't remember if it was this thread or another one. In the video, Mike Pereira reviewed that call and discussed why it was correct. Also, that wasn't a scoring drive. It was the drive when the Saints intercepted Favre on the play where they should have been flagged for hitting him low.And that latter non-call is what I've been getting at. Instead of 1st & 10 in the red zone for the Vikings, due to that non-call it was Saints ball. That's a bigger impact than the calls/non-calls that favored the Vikings.

 

[Maik Jeaunz]

The impact of the calls was not the same. If you can't see that, you're the one with blinders on.

The Vikings had two drives extended (both of them scoring drives) because of bad calls against the Saints defense on third down. It's very possible the Saints would have run away with the game at the point of the first roughing the passer call had the Vikings not been allowed to keep the ball. Obviously we can never truly know how it would have played out. Just throwing that out there.

What third down calls are you referencing here? I'm not aware of any that fit your description here.If you are talking about the roughing the passer call for the hit on Favre where the defender lifted him and drove him into the ground, I posted a link to a video on that yesterday... can't remember if it was this thread or another one. In the video, Mike Pereira reviewed that call and discussed why it was correct. Also, that wasn't a scoring drive. It was the drive when the Saints intercepted Favre on the play where they should have been flagged for hitting him low.And that latter non-call is what I've been getting at. Instead of 1st & 10 in the red zone for the Vikings, due to that non-call it was Saints ball. That's a bigger impact than the calls/non-calls that favored the Vikings.

there was another call early in the game, 3rd and long for the Vikes, and the ref called illegal contact on Randall Gay to give the Vikes a first down. but on the replay, the contact clearly was made within 5 yards from scrimmage.I don't want to get too deep into this discussion, just to point out one call early in the game that I thought easily went against the Saints.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Just pointing out that for every bad call against the Vikes there was one against the Saints. What else do you want to know?

A lot of people are saying the Vikings got screwed because of 3 questionable calls in overtime. I guarantee that if the NFL had on OT period that allowed both teams to touch the ball and the Vikings had a chance to match that score but were unable to, then there wouldn't be any #####ing. It just "felt" unfair because the refs were at least partially responsible for putting the Saints in FG range, whether you agree with the calls or not. So, blame the NFL's OT rules for the screwing if you want, but it was a farce.

How? Which 3 calls? The PI that was upheld by the NFL? What were the other 2? The non-call on Favre certainly didn't happen in OT. How about we blame Favre for throwing away their SB dreams.

I never said 3 "wrong" calls. I said 3 "questionable" calls. A little reading comprehension would go a long way.

The spot on 4th down could've gone either way. Had the refs marked him short and held it up due to the ball being knocked loose, it would've been an acceptable call. If they hadn't thrown the flag on the PI, I don't think anyone says a word about that play(even the NFL who ruled that it was PI said that whether it was uncatchable was a judgement call). If they had ruled the other way on the Meachem catch and said it hit the ground, most people would've been ok with that decision. Like I said, three questionable calls that all went in the Saints favor. They wouldn't have been a big deal if the NFL had different OT rules, but because the Vikings didn't get a chance to tie or take the lead in OT it "felt" a bit unfair. Now, in regulation, I felt that the refs were missing calls on both ends and just didn't call a very clean game. I don't think either team had an advantage in shady reffing before that. You can go and bring up all the videos you want on missed calls on the Vikings. I could go and find 3 times as many missed calls just on Bushrod. Jared Allen was tackled a few times without getting a holding call. Like I said, I don't think the refs had a very clean game for either team. I also don't think anyone talks about the missed calls if the NFL had a different OT rule that allowed both offenses to get the ball. So, fault the NFL on that one.

Outrageously funny that you try to slam my reading comprehension while performing terrible reading comprehension yourself. . I said "which 3" were you alluding to. I dunno where you got "wrong" from but it really, really shows exceptionally poor reading comprehension on your part. At least I agree with you that reading comprehension does go a long way. When you get some, let me know.