Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Massive NFL policy change that nobody is talking about


SSOG

Recommended Posts

If the Broncos OL didn't play dirty they wouldn't worry about speaking to the media.

Denver's OLine doesn't play any dirtier than any offensive lineman, defensive lineman, linebacker, safety, or Cornerback in the entire league.Denver's OLine uses a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. When a WR runs a crossing pattern, and the safety or LB levels him, what do you think that is? That's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And when a DE intentionally levels a QB (John Teerlink, the DLine coach for Indy, teaches his players to run THROUGH the QB and use his body to cushion their fall), that's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And what about the fact that every coach in the entire NFL teaches his defensive players that the first thing they should do on an INT return is look for the QB and level him, because it's essentially a free hit? That's not even a tactic to cause the other player to WORRY about getting injured (because INTs are not a reliable event), that's flat-out a tactic designed to injure the other player. Is every defensive player in the entire NFL dirty, too?I'm not even going to argue that every OLine in the entire NFL cut blocks. Every single one. Not as frequently as the Broncos, but apparently it's okay if you do it only 20% of the time instead of 60% of the time, right? I mean, how frequently are you allowed to do it before it becomes a dirty tactic? I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average.In order to be a dirty player, in my mind, you have to actually TRY TO INJURE the other player- not try to make them worry about it, but actually go out of your way to cause an injury. In that respect, the last (and only) dirty OL to play under Shanahan was Dan Neil, and he's already left town.If you disagree, JohnnyU, tell me what percentage of the time it is acceptable to cut block? I mean, obviously you don't think cut blocking is wrong, or else you'd realize your beloved Colts OLine is as dirty as the hated Broncos. Is it wrong if you do it more than 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? How many times are you allowed to block a man low before it becomes dirty? Inquiring minds want to know.If you want to complain about dirty units, why not talk about the Colts D-Line, for my money the dirtiest unit in the league. Or is it only dirty if it doesn't happen on your beloved team?
I just asked the question, is the reason for Denver OL not wanting to speak to the media because of the fear of them asking about dirty play?As far as your comment "I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average", do you have any data to support this, or a link?In summary, you may be right that the rest of the league cut blocks just as much as Denver, I don't know. However, it is a perception thing and Denver has to deal with it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is bs. I an not a Broncos fan and not sure whether this is aimed at them or not, but players should have the right not to talk as well as talk if they so choose. As long it is a choice by the player, they should be allowed to do what they choose.

I disagree. The NFL should have the right to tell their own employees what to do.
I agree. It is a privilege to play in the NFL. The players should understand that a partial sacrifice of enjoying a larger priviledge is being required to speak to the media.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is going to blow up in the NFL's face. Do they not realize that they have more than their fair share of shady people playing the game? Do you really want those guys out talking to the media on a weekly basis? Would you want a Chris Henry talking to the media on a weekly basis? No. Because you know what he's up to off the field and you do not want attention drawn to that, but this will invariably do just that.And, you know what the press is going to make the loudest noise about, not how good a game some guy had, but how stupid some guys comments were about something non-game related. It will simply increase the amount of distractions to the game itself.Imagine if Pac-Man was giving weekly interviews. Questions about what he's up to off the field will come up and he's probably stupid enough to answer them truthfully, which would not be good.

The NFL can feign indignation all it wants in these circumstances, but these types bring in attention, and that is all that matters.
I don't think so. The NFL is not some run of the mill organization that needs and will gladly take press however it can get it. It's the most popular sport in the country. It needs to protect its brand and image and that means putting the clamps down on off the field stupidity and the attention drawn to it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a business decision and speaking to the media should be part of the job. We are talking about free publicity here, what company wouldn't kill or that. Any player that won't speak to the media thinks he is bigger than the game and doesn't have a clue about business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really flying under the radar, not getting much publicity, but the new NFL media policy mandates that all players will be required to speak to reporters at least once a week during the season or be subject to a fine. As a Broncos fan, I'm outraged by what is clearly an attack against our offensive line and their long-standing policy to not speak to the media. Here's hoping that the big boys up front take a stand against this injustice and pay the fines rather than talking.Come on guys, stick it to the man! :unsure:

Could they not just say 'Hey media- we are looking forward to our game next week. See ya later!' or is there a min word limit on the mandate as well?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is bs. I an not a Broncos fan and not sure whether this is aimed at them or not, but players should have the right not to talk as well as talk if they so choose. As long it is a choice by the player, they should be allowed to do what they choose.

I disagree. The NFL should have the right to tell their own employees what to do.
As far as behavior, yes. But not on whether or not they should speak.
LOL! Many jobs put requirements on employees likes this...
Link to post
Share on other sites

Big deal. Write a script. Everyone repeats it verbatim, sticking it to the man!

I would swipe Denny Greens script. "The [opponents name] are who we thought they were and we let them off the hook. If you want to crown them, then crown their ###"
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Broncos OL didn't play dirty they wouldn't worry about speaking to the media.

Denver's OLine doesn't play any dirtier than any offensive lineman, defensive lineman, linebacker, safety, or Cornerback in the entire league.Denver's OLine uses a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. When a WR runs a crossing pattern, and the safety or LB levels him, what do you think that is? That's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And when a DE intentionally levels a QB (John Teerlink, the DLine coach for Indy, teaches his players to run THROUGH the QB and use his body to cushion their fall), that's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And what about the fact that every coach in the entire NFL teaches his defensive players that the first thing they should do on an INT return is look for the QB and level him, because it's essentially a free hit? That's not even a tactic to cause the other player to WORRY about getting injured (because INTs are not a reliable event), that's flat-out a tactic designed to injure the other player. Is every defensive player in the entire NFL dirty, too?I'm not even going to argue that every OLine in the entire NFL cut blocks. Every single one. Not as frequently as the Broncos, but apparently it's okay if you do it only 20% of the time instead of 60% of the time, right? I mean, how frequently are you allowed to do it before it becomes a dirty tactic? I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average.In order to be a dirty player, in my mind, you have to actually TRY TO INJURE the other player- not try to make them worry about it, but actually go out of your way to cause an injury. In that respect, the last (and only) dirty OL to play under Shanahan was Dan Neil, and he's already left town.If you disagree, JohnnyU, tell me what percentage of the time it is acceptable to cut block? I mean, obviously you don't think cut blocking is wrong, or else you'd realize your beloved Colts OLine is as dirty as the hated Broncos. Is it wrong if you do it more than 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? How many times are you allowed to block a man low before it becomes dirty? Inquiring minds want to know.If you want to complain about dirty units, why not talk about the Colts D-Line, for my money the dirtiest unit in the league. Or is it only dirty if it doesn't happen on your beloved team?
:thumbup: SSOG, what proof do you have for calling out the Colts O and D lines for dirty play? I can't even believe you even said it. Maybe I missed Sportscenter the day they played the highlights of the Colts line playing dirty? :blackdot:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Players are not property of the NFL. They are not "The Product". They are only employees. And no, you aren't required to speak to the media in any other profession, so why the NFL?

The players are free to find another profession at any time they wish. Companies can require their workers to do certain tasks. This is one of them.
I don't necessarily agree with this. They were hired to play football. That's like me being hired to do computer programming, and then tell me that one day each week I need to clean the toilets.Sure they can find another profession. Sure they can be fired. Or, sure they can sit there and answer "No comment" for a full hour each week.
No it is more like you getting hired to do computer programming, then have to talk to me the client as to why/how you did your techie thing.The players are the product, we are the consumers, the NFL is merely making the product more available to us the consumers.If the players don't want to comment on something they don't have to, they just have to be available to the media. Christ some of you in here are asking like they are going to have to go do 40 hours of community service or something, they just need to be available for questions a couple of extra hours a week. I would have thought this would be a good thing for a bunch of Fantasy Football junkies, nothing but more information out there.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we really need more player interviews? I don't listen to the ones that are aired now. In order to be successful in their ultra-competitive profession, pro football players need to be incredibly focused on the tasks at hand, to a degree that most of us regular joes cannot fathom. Most of them are really not very good at thinking about the things that interest us as fans. And they're not trained communicators anyway, which makes them pretty mundane to listen to.

One of the great things about Kornheiser's old radio show here in the DC area was that he almost never had athletes on the program. Instead, he invited people in the communication business -- and interesting conversation flowed. Two very pleasant hours flew by every day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't Russia..........Is this Russia? This isn't Russia.People have the right to remain silent in this country. It what is called an inalienable right. That means can't be seperated from the citizen. The NFL is becoming a little too big for their britches IMO by trying to circumvent the Constitution on the basis that they "own" the players.Players are not property of the NFL. They are not "The Product". They are only employees. And no, you aren't required to speak to the media in any other profession, so why the NFL? :thumbup: to the NFL.

this is russia. as an employee we all give up our rights. the right of free speach, the right of free will, the right of freedom of expression just to heve a job. and as an employee we are all told to do things we dont want to do, but have to do no matter how we feel about it. another way to look at it is that slavery is alive and well in america today, we just now call it the labor force. and if you work for the government you give up more rights that if you work for the private sector. so if an nfl player is told that he has to speak to the media. i say do what everyone else does. complain about it,say your going to your union about it, and do it even though you might not want to. at least they get paid a lot more money to be unhappy about their jobs than the rest of us. :banned:
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Broncos OL didn't play dirty they wouldn't worry about speaking to the media.

Denver's OLine doesn't play any dirtier than any offensive lineman, defensive lineman, linebacker, safety, or Cornerback in the entire league.Denver's OLine uses a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. When a WR runs a crossing pattern, and the safety or LB levels him, what do you think that is? That's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And when a DE intentionally levels a QB (John Teerlink, the DLine coach for Indy, teaches his players to run THROUGH the QB and use his body to cushion their fall), that's a tactic that causes the other player to worry about getting hurt in the future. And what about the fact that every coach in the entire NFL teaches his defensive players that the first thing they should do on an INT return is look for the QB and level him, because it's essentially a free hit? That's not even a tactic to cause the other player to WORRY about getting injured (because INTs are not a reliable event), that's flat-out a tactic designed to injure the other player. Is every defensive player in the entire NFL dirty, too?I'm not even going to argue that every OLine in the entire NFL cut blocks. Every single one. Not as frequently as the Broncos, but apparently it's okay if you do it only 20% of the time instead of 60% of the time, right? I mean, how frequently are you allowed to do it before it becomes a dirty tactic? I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average.In order to be a dirty player, in my mind, you have to actually TRY TO INJURE the other player- not try to make them worry about it, but actually go out of your way to cause an injury. In that respect, the last (and only) dirty OL to play under Shanahan was Dan Neil, and he's already left town.If you disagree, JohnnyU, tell me what percentage of the time it is acceptable to cut block? I mean, obviously you don't think cut blocking is wrong, or else you'd realize your beloved Colts OLine is as dirty as the hated Broncos. Is it wrong if you do it more than 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? How many times are you allowed to block a man low before it becomes dirty? Inquiring minds want to know.If you want to complain about dirty units, why not talk about the Colts D-Line, for my money the dirtiest unit in the league. Or is it only dirty if it doesn't happen on your beloved team?
I'm not sure which is funnier: this post or the the one that started the thread. Let's see, someone who breaks the rules constantly is no worse than someone who breaks them occassionally? Someone who worries the other team because they have injured so many players using illegal tactics is no worse than someone who makes other teams worry because they use legal tactics? Someone who intentionally breaks the law is no worse than those of us who might occassionally lose focus and drive over the speed limit? OK, yeah. Of course, that belief system ties in with the right to "silence", which is actually the only right to avoid self-incrimination. But, don't worry, when the police start conducting the TV interviews and asking about "assault with intent to injure" charges, they'll still be able to use teh Constitutional protection.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Broncos OL didn't play dirty they wouldn't worry about speaking to the media.

...
:penalty:

SSOG, what proof do you have for calling out the Colts O and D lines for dirty play? I can't even believe you even said it. Maybe I missed Sportscenter the day they played the highlights of the Colts line playing dirty? :rolleyes:

It was all over Sportscenter. John Teerlinck, their D-line coach, recently got flipped off during a game by Byron Leftwich for the low hits the Colts D was using. Leftwich was later fined for it.

Teerlinck has a reputation for teaching unethical tactics, enough so that when he was coaching the Lions prior to coming to Indy, he had been summoned to Tagliabue's office and warned about what the league considered unethical and sinister tactics. And before anyone gripes about the use of the word "sinister", that was the NFL's word, not mine.

The Colts line has gotten a reputation for doing the same thing since he started coaching them, as evidenced by Teerlinck getting the finger from Leftwich. That game was also arguably the start of a dislike between the Jags and Colts. The next time they played a couple of Jags players took some cheap shots back at the Colts and got some back to back unnecessary roughness calls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't Russia..........Is this Russia? This isn't Russia.People have the right to remain silent in this country. It what is called an inalienable right. That means can't be seperated from the citizen. The NFL is becoming a little too big for their britches IMO by trying to circumvent the Constitution on the basis that they "own" the players.Players are not property of the NFL. They are not "The Product". They are only employees. And no, you aren't required to speak to the media in any other profession, so why the NFL? :rolleyes: to the NFL.

this is russia. as an employee we all give up our rights. the right of free speach, the right of free will, the right of freedom of expression just to heve a job. and as an employee we are all told to do things we dont want to do, but have to do no matter how we feel about it. another way to look at it is that slavery is alive and well in america today, we just now call it the labor force. and if you work for the government you give up more rights that if you work for the private sector. so if an nfl player is told that he has to speak to the media. i say do what everyone else does. complain about it,say your going to your union about it, and do it even though you might not want to. at least they get paid a lot more money to be unhappy about their jobs than the rest of us. :penalty:
Dude...give me a break. If you don't ever want to be told what to do or how to act...start your own business. O wait, that won't work...OSHA will get in your way. Then again, if your employees follow your brilliant example, you'll be out of business quickly.I guess you could go win a big lottery, buy your own small island off the AFrican coast or something, and do whatever you want.Free speech, free will and free expression have nothing to do with the performance of a job. To suggest that this simple thing is a violation of any of those inalienable rights, or that it is akin to slavery or a communist regime is not only assinine, but it is insulting to those who lived as slaves, or fought and died to obtain and protect these rights which you so clearly have misunderstood and abused.I can see the argument that this may not be a wise thing for the NFL to do because of some of the fools they have in the NFL, or because of the distractions it could cause the players, but let's argue about that rather then how this is a violation of the Constitution or our "inalienable rights."
Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't Russia..........Is this Russia? This isn't Russia.

People have the right to remain silent in this country. It what is called an inalienable right. That means can't be seperated from the citizen.

The NFL is becoming a little too big for their britches IMO by trying to circumvent the Constitution on the basis that they "own" the players.

Players are not property of the NFL. They are not "The Product". They are only employees. And no, you aren't required to speak to the media in any other profession, so why the NFL?

:goodposting: to the NFL.

this is russia. as an employee we all give up our rights. the right of free speach, the right of free will, the right of freedom of expression just to heve a job. and as an employee we are all told to do things we dont want to do, but have to do no matter how we feel about it. another way to look at it is that slavery is alive and well in america today, we just now call it the labor force. and if you work for the government you give up more rights that if you work for the private sector. so if an nfl player is told that he has to speak to the media. i say do what everyone else does. complain about it,say your going to your union about it, and do it even though you might not want to. at least they get paid a lot more money to be unhappy about their jobs than the rest of us. ;)

Dude...give me a break. If you don't ever want to be told what to do or how to act...start your own business. O wait, that won't work...OSHA will get in your way. Then again, if your employees follow your brilliant example, you'll be out of business quickly.

I guess you could go win a big lottery, buy your own small island off the AFrican coast or something, and do whatever you want.

thats the over the top point i was making about the players having to talk to the press. you can be unhappy but do what your job says you have to do. and when they retire they can buy an island and do what ever they want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a business decision and speaking to the media should be part of the job. We are talking about free publicity here, what company wouldn't kill or that. Any player that won't speak to the media thinks he is bigger than the game and doesn't have a clue about business.

I disagree.Players may recognize that the media can't wait to "throw them under the bus" for any comment real or imagined that could incite emotional response from the public.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Broncos OL didn't play dirty they wouldn't worry about speaking to the media.

...
:moneybag:

SSOG, what proof do you have for calling out the Colts O and D lines for dirty play? I can't even believe you even said it. Maybe I missed Sportscenter the day they played the highlights of the Colts line playing dirty? :lmao:

It was all over Sportscenter. John Teerlinck, their D-line coach, recently got flipped off during a game by Byron Leftwich for the low hits the Colts D was using. Leftwich was later fined for it.

Teerlinck has a reputation for teaching unethical tactics, enough so that when he was coaching the Lions prior to coming to Indy, he had been summoned to Tagliabue's office and warned about what the league considered unethical and sinister tactics. And before anyone gripes about the use of the word "sinister", that was the NFL's word, not mine.

The Colts line has gotten a reputation for doing the same thing since he started coaching them, as evidenced by Teerlinck getting the finger from Leftwich. That game was also arguably the start of a dislike between the Jags and Colts. The next time they played a couple of Jags players took some cheap shots back at the Colts and got some back to back unnecessary roughness calls.

Ok, so Leftwich gets jacked up by legal hits and now the Colts play dirty on both sides of the ball? Got it!
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?r.../0703280053.php

The league has enacted several new media rules for 2007, including one prompted by the way Favre stopped doing weekly Wednesday press conferences last season. All players will now be required to speak to reporters once during the week and after every game.

--------------

The NFL doesn't care about the Denver OL. You should all know by now that all things in the NFL revolve around Brett Favre! :thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is bs. I an not a Broncos fan and not sure whether this is aimed at them or not, but players should have the right not to talk as well as talk if they so choose. As long it is a choice by the player, they should be allowed to do what they choose.

Fans sign their paychecks really, not the owners, the team, or the NFL. Fans like to hear from players, get their autographs etc. Often times fans can't speak to players directly but instead have to deal with the press being the middleman. Since papers sell real well in America I'm figuring fans are OK with this. Fans cough up tons of money for these players to live like kings, the least they could do is chat once a week.
Too much of the media is about smut-peddling these days. You have a lead story of the death of Anna Nicole Smith, and the mainstream press drags that thru the mud for months. Its pure smut. You seriously would want to give an interview to ANY "news' agency that promoted a story like that? Not me.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really flying under the radar, not getting much publicity, but the new NFL media policy mandates that all players will be required to speak to reporters at least once a week during the season or be subject to a fine. As a Broncos fan, I'm outraged by what is clearly an attack against our offensive line and their long-standing policy to not speak to the media. Here's hoping that the big boys up front take a stand against this injustice and pay the fines rather than talking.Come on guys, stick it to the man! :thumbup:

are they allowed to talk in "tongue" that would be some pretty funny stuff
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just asked the question, is the reason for Denver OL not wanting to speak to the media because of the fear of them asking about dirty play?

The not talking to the media thing actually was implemented by Alex Gibbs, who wanted to cloak his offensive lineman in a veil of anonymity, create a sort of "we aren't important, it's what we do that is important" mentality. I heard once that Gibbs took the media silence policy with him when he went to Atlanta. Denver's linemen have continued the tradition (and, truly, embraced it) on their own.

As far as your comment "I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average", do you have any data to support this, or a link?

This was reported to me by somebody I met on another football message board who had been hired by the league to compile data on injuries (for instance, to see if certain field types were causing a higher incident of injury than other field types). He had lots of data backing up all of his claims, so I never suspected he might have been anything other than what he said he was. He told me that Denver injured QBs at a lower rate than the league average, although the difference certainly wasn't statistically significant.

I did a quick search, but I had no luck finding this conversation again. I can't even remember what his s/n was, to be honest. :excited:

:thumbup:

SSOG, what proof do you have for calling out the Colts O and D lines for dirty play? I can't even believe you even said it. Maybe I missed Sportscenter the day they played the highlights of the Colts line playing dirty? :shock:

I called the Colts O-Line dirty because they cut block. If cut blocking makes the Broncos dirty, then it makes the Colts dirty, too (just like it makes every offensive lineman in the entire league dirty).

As for the D-Line... how much time do you have? Here, I'll give you some quick highlights.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2005/09/2...-and-blue/2913/ - search Teerlink and you'll get this little gem:

On the NFL Channel’s morning show there was an interesting conversation.

Byron Leftwich flipped off the Colts DL Coach, John Teerlink, late in the game on Sunday and was fined $10K. Reportedly, Teerlink gave Leftwich the throat-slash gesture, and that prompted Leftwich’s response.

Dan Reeves and someone else were discussing this incident, and the guest host, Boomer Esiason, said “You want me to tell you what happened here, I can tell you what this is about.” Then he went on to relate how John Teerlink used to be DL coach for the Vikes during the John Randall days. According to Boomer, Teerlink teaches his DLineman to hit QBs low and try to take them out of the game. His rep is really bad in some league circles, according to Esiason. He also said that DelRio wouldn’t be stupid enough to say anything in public, but that he wouldn’t be surprised if the Jags send a message back the other way during their next meeting with the Colts.

This conversation set off an alarm bell in my head. Why? Because two weeks ago the Colts DLine knocked out Ravens QB Kyle Boller by tackling him low.

If you want a more reliable source for that incident, there's this link- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...SPGAVG60GV1.DTL

Used to be that no one got upset about the Indianapolis defense because the Colts were soft and didn't hurt anyone, let alone beat them with their defense.

So maybe this is another sign of Indy's stature now, but after the Colts' 35-3 victory over Tennessee last week, Titans players accused the Colts defense of "illegal hits."

"I would defend our players and the way we play," Dungy said.

Perhaps.

Defensive line coach John Teerlinck joined the Colts in 2002 and it's no surprise, with him on the staff, that there are complaints about the team's tactics.

During the 10-3 victory over Jacksonville -- today's opponent -- on Sept. 18, Jaguars QB Byron Leftwich and Teerlinck jawed at each other. A few days later, former QB and current TV analyst Boomer Esiason said Teerlinck coaches his players to dive at quarterbacks' knees.

Esiason is not the first to question Teerlinck. In 1996, while with the Detroit Lions, Teerlinck was called to New York by NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, and they met for four hours to discuss complaints that Teerlinck was teaching illegal tactics.

Last one. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/print/2971/

Teerlinck’s sour relationship with opposing quarterbacks dates at least to 1996, when Commissioner Paul Tagliabue summoned Teerlinck, then with the Detroit Lions, to the league office. There, Tagliabue reviewed film with Teerlinck, detailing what he saw as dirty play by Detroit linemen. The following year, Sports Illustrated asked 150 NFL players to name the dirtiest player in the league. First among defensive linemen was the Minnesota’s John Randle, and several players mentioned that Teerlinck was Randle’s mentor.

Teerlinck calls his tactics rough but legal, and judging by the penalties called on his players, he has a point. In Teerlinck’s four seasons in Indianapolis, Colts linemen have been flagged for only four roughing the passer penalties - Dwight Freeney, Raheem Brock, Montae Reagor, and Robert Mathis have had one apiece. Those four players have given the Colts 80 sacks in that time.

His players might not break the rules, but that doesn’t mean Teerlinck shows any concern for opposing quarterbacks’ health. He once told the coaching magazine American Football Monthly that one of his commandments to defensive linemen is: “Run through the quarterback. Use his body as a cushion to break your fall.”

Many quarterbacks despise Teerlinck’s tactics — sometimes even including his own team’s quarterbacks. Defensive linemen know that hitting the quarterback in practice is verboten, but with the Lions, quarterback Scott Mitchell accused Teerlinck’s linemen of ignoring that protocol. (It’s fair to say, however, that Teerlinck knows better than to let any of his linemen hit Peyton Manning.)

If, for some reason, this isn't enough to satisfy you, there's countless other examples available. A simple search of "John Teerlinck" and "dirty" will turn up hundreds of other articles to peruse at your leisure.

I'm not sure which is funnier: this post or the the one that started the thread. Let's see, someone who breaks the rules constantly is no worse than someone who breaks them occassionally? Someone who worries the other team because they have injured so many players using illegal tactics is no worse than someone who makes other teams worry because they use legal tactics? Someone who intentionally breaks the law is no worse than those of us who might occassionally lose focus and drive over the speed limit? OK, yeah. Of course, that belief system ties in with the right to "silence", which is actually the only right to avoid self-incrimination. But, don't worry, when the police start conducting the TV interviews and asking about "assault with intent to injure" charges, they'll still be able to use teh Constitutional protection.

The Denver Broncos don't break the rules consistantly, though. In fact, they don't break the rules, period. IIRC, Denver hasn't been whistled for an illegal block once during the past 3 years (I don't know about before that, but I do know that if it has happened, it is no more frequently than any other team).

The Denver Broncos don't injure so many players using illegal tactics, either. First off, as I said, their tactics aren't illegal... and second off, as I said earlier, they actually injure players at a clip *BELOW THE LEAGUE AVERAGE*.

Also, the claim that other teams might "occassionally lose focus" and cut block is hilarious. Every other team knows what they're doing when they cut block. They do it with every bit as much knowledge and intent as the Denver Broncos. In fact, they do it even MORE recklessly, because Denver practices cut blocking and is extremely efficient at it (meaning there's less chance of them screwing up and placing the other player at risk because they're unfamiliar with the tactic), and because opponents are expecting it more from the Denver Broncos (and are therefore more on their guard).

Ok, so Leftwich gets jacked up by legal hits and now the Colts play dirty on both sides of the ball? Got it!

I understand how upset you are. From experience, it can be very upsetting when someone accuses your team of being dirty solely because they perform at a very high level, playing extremely disciplined football and only use perfectly legal tactics that every other team in the league also engages in to some degree or another. In many ways, it's easy to ignore because it rings of jealousy and petulance, although if people keep parroting the same ludicrous claims in the face of overwhelming information, it just gets annoying.

Something to consider if you ever in the future feel the urge to call Denver's O-line dirty (not that I'm saying that you have ever called or will ever call Denver's O-line dirty, just making a point). I don't think the Colts D-Line is dirty, even if they use tactics designed to cause the opposition to worry about injury, because all D-lines do that to some extent or another. Likewise, it's silly to call the Broncos O-line dirty for the same reason. If, however, the Broncos O-line *IS* somehow dirty, then so is every O-line in the entire NFL, as well as every D-Line and Secondary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand how upset you are. From experience, it can be very upsetting when someone accuses your team of being dirty solely because they perform at a very high level, playing extremely disciplined football and only use perfectly legal tactics that every other team in the league also engages in to some degree or another

...or because their reputation is well-earned. :thumbup:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just asked the question, is the reason for Denver OL not wanting to speak to the media because of the fear of them asking about dirty play?

The not talking to the media thing actually was implemented by Alex Gibbs, who wanted to cloak his offensive lineman in a veil of anonymity, create a sort of "we aren't important, it's what we do that is important" mentality. I heard once that Gibbs took the media silence policy with him when he went to Atlanta. Denver's linemen have continued the tradition (and, truly, embraced it) on their own.

As far as your comment "I'm also not even going to bring up the point that Denver's offensive line actually winds up injuring a lower percentage of opposing DLinemen than the league average", do you have any data to support this, or a link?

This was reported to me by somebody I met on another football message board who had been hired by the league to compile data on injuries (for instance, to see if certain field types were causing a higher incident of injury than other field types). He had lots of data backing up all of his claims, so I never suspected he might have been anything other than what he said he was. He told me that Denver injured QBs at a lower rate than the league average, although the difference certainly wasn't statistically significant.

I did a quick search, but I had no luck finding this conversation again. I can't even remember what his s/n was, to be honest. :(

:penalty:

SSOG, what proof do you have for calling out the Colts O and D lines for dirty play? I can't even believe you even said it. Maybe I missed Sportscenter the day they played the highlights of the Colts line playing dirty? :D

I called the Colts O-Line dirty because they cut block. If cut blocking makes the Broncos dirty, then it makes the Colts dirty, too (just like it makes every offensive lineman in the entire league dirty).

As for the D-Line... how much time do you have? Here, I'll give you some quick highlights.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2005/09/2...-and-blue/2913/ - search Teerlink and you'll get this little gem:

On the NFL Channel’s morning show there was an interesting conversation.

Byron Leftwich flipped off the Colts DL Coach, John Teerlink, late in the game on Sunday and was fined $10K. Reportedly, Teerlink gave Leftwich the throat-slash gesture, and that prompted Leftwich’s response.

Dan Reeves and someone else were discussing this incident, and the guest host, Boomer Esiason, said “You want me to tell you what happened here, I can tell you what this is about.” Then he went on to relate how John Teerlink used to be DL coach for the Vikes during the John Randall days. According to Boomer, Teerlink teaches his DLineman to hit QBs low and try to take them out of the game. His rep is really bad in some league circles, according to Esiason. He also said that DelRio wouldn’t be stupid enough to say anything in public, but that he wouldn’t be surprised if the Jags send a message back the other way during their next meeting with the Colts.

This conversation set off an alarm bell in my head. Why? Because two weeks ago the Colts DLine knocked out Ravens QB Kyle Boller by tackling him low.

If you want a more reliable source for that incident, there's this link- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...SPGAVG60GV1.DTL

Used to be that no one got upset about the Indianapolis defense because the Colts were soft and didn't hurt anyone, let alone beat them with their defense.

So maybe this is another sign of Indy's stature now, but after the Colts' 35-3 victory over Tennessee last week, Titans players accused the Colts defense of "illegal hits."

"I would defend our players and the way we play," Dungy said.

Perhaps.

Defensive line coach John Teerlinck joined the Colts in 2002 and it's no surprise, with him on the staff, that there are complaints about the team's tactics.

During the 10-3 victory over Jacksonville -- today's opponent -- on Sept. 18, Jaguars QB Byron Leftwich and Teerlinck jawed at each other. A few days later, former QB and current TV analyst Boomer Esiason said Teerlinck coaches his players to dive at quarterbacks' knees.

Esiason is not the first to question Teerlinck. In 1996, while with the Detroit Lions, Teerlinck was called to New York by NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, and they met for four hours to discuss complaints that Teerlinck was teaching illegal tactics.

Last one. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/print/2971/

Teerlinck’s sour relationship with opposing quarterbacks dates at least to 1996, when Commissioner Paul Tagliabue summoned Teerlinck, then with the Detroit Lions, to the league office. There, Tagliabue reviewed film with Teerlinck, detailing what he saw as dirty play by Detroit linemen. The following year, Sports Illustrated asked 150 NFL players to name the dirtiest player in the league. First among defensive linemen was the Minnesota’s John Randle, and several players mentioned that Teerlinck was Randle’s mentor.

Teerlinck calls his tactics rough but legal, and judging by the penalties called on his players, he has a point. In Teerlinck’s four seasons in Indianapolis, Colts linemen have been flagged for only four roughing the passer penalties - Dwight Freeney, Raheem Brock, Montae Reagor, and Robert Mathis have had one apiece. Those four players have given the Colts 80 sacks in that time.

His players might not break the rules, but that doesn’t mean Teerlinck shows any concern for opposing quarterbacks’ health. He once told the coaching magazine American Football Monthly that one of his commandments to defensive linemen is: “Run through the quarterback. Use his body as a cushion to break your fall.”

Many quarterbacks despise Teerlinck’s tactics — sometimes even including his own team’s quarterbacks. Defensive linemen know that hitting the quarterback in practice is verboten, but with the Lions, quarterback Scott Mitchell accused Teerlinck’s linemen of ignoring that protocol. (It’s fair to say, however, that Teerlinck knows better than to let any of his linemen hit Peyton Manning.)

If, for some reason, this isn't enough to satisfy you, there's countless other examples available. A simple search of "John Teerlinck" and "dirty" will turn up hundreds of other articles to peruse at your leisure.

I'm not sure which is funnier: this post or the the one that started the thread. Let's see, someone who breaks the rules constantly is no worse than someone who breaks them occassionally? Someone who worries the other team because they have injured so many players using illegal tactics is no worse than someone who makes other teams worry because they use legal tactics? Someone who intentionally breaks the law is no worse than those of us who might occassionally lose focus and drive over the speed limit? OK, yeah. Of course, that belief system ties in with the right to "silence", which is actually the only right to avoid self-incrimination. But, don't worry, when the police start conducting the TV interviews and asking about "assault with intent to injure" charges, they'll still be able to use teh Constitutional protection.

The Denver Broncos don't break the rules consistantly, though. In fact, they don't break the rules, period. IIRC, Denver hasn't been whistled for an illegal block once during the past 3 years (I don't know about before that, but I do know that if it has happened, it is no more frequently than any other team).

The Denver Broncos don't injure so many players using illegal tactics, either. First off, as I said, their tactics aren't illegal... and second off, as I said earlier, they actually injure players at a clip *BELOW THE LEAGUE AVERAGE*.

Also, the claim that other teams might "occassionally lose focus" and cut block is hilarious. Every other team knows what they're doing when they cut block. They do it with every bit as much knowledge and intent as the Denver Broncos. In fact, they do it even MORE recklessly, because Denver practices cut blocking and is extremely efficient at it (meaning there's less chance of them screwing up and placing the other player at risk because they're unfamiliar with the tactic), and because opponents are expecting it more from the Denver Broncos (and are therefore more on their guard).

Ok, so Leftwich gets jacked up by legal hits and now the Colts play dirty on both sides of the ball? Got it!

I understand how upset you are. From experience, it can be very upsetting when someone accuses your team of being dirty solely because they perform at a very high level, playing extremely disciplined football and only use perfectly legal tactics that every other team in the league also engages in to some degree or another. In many ways, it's easy to ignore because it rings of jealousy and petulance, although if people keep parroting the same ludicrous claims in the face of overwhelming information, it just gets annoying.

Something to consider if you ever in the future feel the urge to call Denver's O-line dirty (not that I'm saying that you have ever called or will ever call Denver's O-line dirty, just making a point). I don't think the Colts D-Line is dirty, even if they use tactics designed to cause the opposition to worry about injury, because all D-lines do that to some extent or another. Likewise, it's silly to call the Broncos O-line dirty for the same reason. If, however, the Broncos O-line *IS* somehow dirty, then so is every O-line in the entire NFL, as well as every D-Line and Secondary.

Seems to me that you're making my point. 4 penalties in the span of 80 sacks seems like their playing fair to me?!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that you're making my point. 4 penalties in the span of 80 sacks seems like their playing fair to me?!

By that measure (penalties), the Denver Broncos O-Line is one of the cleanest in the league.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand how upset you are. From experience, it can be very upsetting when someone accuses your team of being dirty solely because they perform at a very high level, playing extremely disciplined football and only use perfectly legal tactics that every other team in the league also engages in to some degree or another

...or because their reputation is well-earned. :doh:
Oh geez, I never really thought of it that way.Thank you for your in-depth and eye-opening analysis on this subject. The way you researched and rebutted every single one of my points before presenting your sweeping conclusions was truly inspiring. You are clearly a master- nay, an artist!- at your craft, and in the future I shall use your brilliant response as a template that I will try to follow when rationally and reasonably discussing facts with other football fans. You have totally changed my mind on this subject, and have made me a better person for it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This was reported to me by somebody I met on another football message board who had been hired by the league to compile data on injuries (for instance, to see if certain field types were causing a higher incident of injury than other field types). He had lots of data backing up all of his claims, so I never suspected he might have been anything other than what he said he was. He told me that Denver injured QBs at a lower rate than the league average, although the difference certainly wasn't statistically significant.

What does this have to do with Denver's offensive line and their propensity to injure?
Link to post
Share on other sites

This was reported to me by somebody I met on another football message board who had been hired by the league to compile data on injuries (for instance, to see if certain field types were causing a higher incident of injury than other field types). He had lots of data backing up all of his claims, so I never suspected he might have been anything other than what he said he was. He told me that Denver injured QBs at a lower rate than the league average, although the difference certainly wasn't statistically significant.

What does this have to do with Denver's offensive line and their propensity to injure?
Sorry, typo, I meant DLs.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand how upset you are. From experience, it can be very upsetting when someone accuses your team of being dirty solely because they perform at a very high level, playing extremely disciplined football and only use perfectly legal tactics that every other team in the league also engages in to some degree or another

...or because their reputation is well-earned. :no:
Oh geez, I never really thought of it that way.Thank you for your in-depth and eye-opening analysis on this subject. The way you researched and rebutted every single one of my points before presenting your sweeping conclusions was truly inspiring. You are clearly a master- nay, an artist!- at your craft, and in the future I shall use your brilliant response as a template that I will try to follow when rationally and reasonably discussing facts with other football fans. You have totally changed my mind on this subject, and have made me a better person for it.
Sorry, I guess I just didn't have the time to come up with an "expert analyst" from another "message board" to corroborate my "evidence" with a link that I can't provide. I don't know what I was thinking. I suppose the league-wide reputation thing that is so prevelant among the people who actually play the game is going to have to do.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...