<p>I like swagger in my DB. Wish he played for my team.</p>
<p>The interview is part of his brand he is cultivating. Remember the Pats loss to the Seahawks in Oct?
[Seahawks</a> CB Richard Sherman taunts Tom Brady on Twitter](<a href=“http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2012/10/14/seattle-seahawks-richard-sheerman-taunts-tom-brady-on-twitter/1633659/]Seahawks”>Seahawks CB Richard Sherman taunts Tom Brady on Twitter)</p>
<p>I like Bill Cowher’s recent answer when asked by a Pittsburgh host. He said the Patriots didn’t cheat, that every team tries to capture the other team’s signals. I really can’t understand the depth of irrationality about this kind of thing. It’s just sports and team after team, coach after coach has said it wasn’t a big deal. That Marshall Faulk can’t accept his Rams team lost and thus needs to imagine the Patriots spied on his practice shows the limitations of his mind. That people connect Hernandez to the Patriots team shows something worse about those people.</p>
<p>Did you hear Belichick tee off on Welker, saying he purposely hit Aqib Talib to knock him out of the game:</p>
<p>It is a deliberate play by the receiver to take out Aqib. No attempt to get open.* And Ill let the league handle the discipline on that play.* Its not for me to decide, but its one of the worst plays Ive seen.* And thats all Im going to say about that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They were fined for videotaping the offensive and defensive signals of the opposing coaches from 2000 to 2008, against league rules. They used the videos to study the signals, then, when they recognized what play was being used, would radio it in to their players. Without the (illegal) videos they would not have been nearly as successful at stealing signals during games.</p>
<p>As to Richard Sherman, the 49er/Seahawk trash-talking has been a constant this season, trying to play up a rivalry where none previously existed (Seattle used to be AFC). It seems many of my east coast friends were taken by surprise by his comments - nobody in Seattle or SF was.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Vast enough to overcome 3 Kaepernick turnovers in the 4th quarter?</p>
<p>Shout out to the Seahawks for making it to the Super Bowl. We screamed so loud at the house that the dog ran and hid in the master bath. Poor thing thought someone was being murdered. Go Hawks!</p>
<p>I saw a second interview with Sherman dressed in a suit and he was calm and articulate. The sportscasters said players should not be interviewed on the field because many of them have their emotions so high and are not in control.</p>
<p>
It wasn’t possible to radio plays in to the defense, because they didn’t have radios in their helmets back then. And radios have been used on offense to send in plays since the 80’s. What offensive signals are there to steal?</p>
<p>The radios to the offensive are cut off 15 seconds before the play clock expires. There isn’t time to radio the offense anything related to the defense.</p>
<p>Teams change their signals all time.</p>
<p>And anyway, the Patriots’ winning percentage improved after they got caught, which negates any claim of “would not have been nearly as successful”.</p>
<p>But I get the hate. Everyone loves a winner, unless they win too much, then everyone wants to see them torn down. It’s jealousy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For me, it’s neither hate nor jealousy. My grandmother is from Foxborough and I have rooted for the Patriots for a long time. What got them caught is that it became obvious to the Jets that the Patriots knew what plays were being run, so they started looking around. By the time they were caught, teams were taking special precautions when playing against the Patriots because they all knew the signals were being monitored. Other teams were also suspected but not sanctioned by the league.</p>
<p>I’m never surprised by professional athletes and teams cheating, but I don’t like the whining and excuses when they get caught. It’s a big money game and the potential rewards are huge. </p>
<p>Their winning percentage is good because they have had great teams.</p>
<p>Wow. Hatred about a football team? Really. And ignorant hatred at that? Double wow. </p>
<p>Left out in the correction was that any team could tape signals from anywhere in the stadium until the league put out a memo that limited this taping to specific locations not on the field. The Patriots, for unknown reasons, didn’t follow the memo, which was issued in 2006. They were caught in the first game of 2007. The league did and continues to allow taping from locations with roofs other than the coaches’ box. (The operations manual for 2007 literally says: “All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.”) </p>
<p>The assistant who did the taping eventually turned over a total of 6 tapes, all from the 2006 season and the 2007 preseason. I’ve seen some of the tape. (It may be available on line.) It’s a shot of 3 or 4 defensive coaches waving their arms and then a shot of the clock, shot from the sidelines opposite the coaches. You have no idea who is signaling the actual play. To use the tape, you’d have to sit down and transcribe each play against the clock and then look for patterns because, bluntly, once the play starts it can be difficult to determine what the pre-snap defensive call was. </p>
<p>As to usefulness, teams expected sign stealing - as Jimmy Johnson said, he was taught this stuff decades ago - so they’d do what baseball does and would change week to week the “signifier” in the sequence of motions. That means this week they’d say “touch the nose and the call is the motion after that” and next week it would " touch the “right elbow and the call is the motion after that”, etc. Beyond that, defenses typically got their call around the same time as the offense, often after - and at home, usually after. That changed the next season with radios for defensive calls too. As notrichenough says, in the limited window for offensive radios, you couldn’t decode a defensive call and send in a play.</p>
<p>So why do it? The real reason, the one the haters and idiots don’t understand at all, is that it’s useful for analyzing tendencies. As I said, once a play is called, you often can’t figure out what the defensive call was because they react to the offense. So you see x DT moving this way and y DE moving that way and if you have a chance to analyze the signals maybe you see that this is a planned move. You already think that because you look at tendencies anyway but if you can see this was a call then you maybe can game plan to encourage that call and use that to your advantage. In other words, the advantage, to the extent there was one, was in game planning and understanding defensive tendencies. That’s all. It wasn’t useful on the field. Since you already look at tendencies - and map them and have oodles of film on them - analyzing the signals was an extra layer of information on top. But idiots can’t understand and so … </p>
<p>BTW, the snow plow guy was interviewed when the anniversary of the game rolled around. He was on work release from prison. [url=<a href=“http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2010/01/03/brush_with_immortality/?page=full]Here[/url”>http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2010/01/03/brush_with_immortality/?page=full]Here[/url</a>] is an interview with him.</p>
<p>I don’t generally watch television and certainly not sporting events.
But in the spirit of keeping H company, I watched the Sunday game.</p>
<p>I have thought about why Sherman’s behavior upon leaving the field didn’t surprise me, or even bother me even though I am not a fan of testosterone poisoning.</p>
<p>Actually, I was surprised that " interviews" were done upon leaving the field, before players had a chance to shower or even pee. Adrenaline is high, and after being physically revved up for several hours, I wasnt expecting anyone to make a coherent sentence, let alone a modulated response.</p>
<p>It seems the bad feeling between the two players harkens back to a charity event involving both, where Crabtree refused to shake Shermans hand. But whatever it was, it seems that the goal was to get a news worthy soundbite & the best way to do that, is when they are charged up from nervous tension & adrenaline.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Bill</a> Plaschke: It’s hypocritical to rip Seahawks’ Richard Sherman for rant - latimes.com](<a href=“It's hypocritical to rip Seahawks' Richard Sherman for rant”>It's hypocritical to rip Seahawks' Richard Sherman for rant)</p>
<p>[Erin</a> Andrews is happy that Richard Sherman lost his mind in postgame interview | For The Win](<a href=“http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/01/erin-andrews-happy-richard-sherman-interview/]Erin”>Erin Andrews is happy that Richard Sherman lost his mind in postgame interview | For The Win)</p>
<p>
I don’t agree with this.</p>
<p>If Sherman had limited his rant to how great he was and great his team was, most people would not have had the reaction they had.</p>
<p>When you throw in the choke sign, which is one of the most unsportsmanlike, nasty gestures an athlete can make, and his verbal abuse of a specific player, that is where is crossed the line for a lot of people.</p>
<p>Nobody likes a sore winner.</p>
<p>McEnroe took a lot of heat for his antics on the court, but they were always aimed at the officials. I don’t ever remember him going off on an opponent saying “I am the best player in the world, when you try me with a player like that blah blah” and “He’s mediocre” etc.</p>
<p>
Is he really remorseful or is it damage control?</p>
<p>Sherman has a history of trash talking and being a big mouth so it’s no surprise he spouted off after Sunday’s game. It was absolutely classless to go off on an opponent. I don’t know much about the Seahawks but unfortunately, I think Sherman has colored what many people think of the team and makes it all too easy to cheer Denver on. It’s too bad since Wilson seems to be a class guy. And I’ve been following the story of Derrick Coleman, who’s deaf. He’s so inpiring to so many younger deaf/hard of hearing kids.</p>
<p>Thoughts? A good PR move with little down side? Which topic do you think Goodell rather have people complaining about between now and the Super Bowl, concussions or extra points?
Is this PR 101: Change the conversation?
I think it would be strange not to have it. At the high school level, they can be an adventure.</p>
<p>[Roger</a> Goodell: NFL considering proposals to eliminate extra points](<a href=“http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24415126/roger-goodell-nfl-considering-proposal-to-eliminate-extra-points]Roger”>http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24415126/roger-goodell-nfl-considering-proposal-to-eliminate-extra-points)</p>
<p>Maybe move the PAT to be a 40-yard kick?
The majority of those would still be made, would it be far enough where there is some question and it might be enough to make the defense actually try to block it?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I watch a lot of football games. Interviews are ALWAYS done immediately after the game while the players are still on the field. Adrenaline is high for all of the them, but rarely do these players make a spectacle of themselves such as Mr. Sherman did. If this was so understandable, so common, so predictable, it would happen A LOT, and the fact is, it rarely does, even among players who have just LOST a close game. Post game interviews are an expected part of the job. These guys are professionals and get paid a lot of money to play and to represent their teams both on and off the field. Somehow most of them manage to avoid public meltdowns and narcissistic rants when meeting this obligation.</p>
<p>On another note, DH and I were rather subdued last night with no Monday night football game to watch. :(</p>
<p>Belichick has been saying for years that it is a pointless play, and I am sure his opinion was made even stronger when the Patriots lost Gronk last year for a while due to a freak injury on a PAT.</p>
<p>The success rate in 2013 on 30-39 yard field goals was about 90%, so moving the PAT line of scrimmage to the 20 would probably give a success rate in the 88% range, maybe a little less.</p>
<p>It wold be interesting to see if some teams started going for 2 all the time if that happened. The overall success rate for two point conversions is right around 50%, which means statistically they’d be better off.</p>
<p>^^^I think it would add a lot more excitement (and heartbreak) to eliminate the kicked point after and just go with the additional play.</p>
<p>In that same vein, field goals inside the 30 or 35 are almost automatic now. I think those field goals should only be worth 2 points. Maybe anything with the LoS inside the 20.</p>
<p>And to prevent teams from deliberately taking a penalty or a loss to push them back into a higher scoring field goal, if the line of scrimmage was ever inside the 20 on that drive, a fg can only be worth 2 points regardless of where it is kicked from.</p>
<p>Quote:
Nobody likes a sore winner.
McEnroe took a lot of heat for his antics on the court, but they were always aimed at the officials. I don’t ever remember him going off on an opponent saying “I am the best player in the world, when you try me with a player like that blah blah” and “He’s mediocre” etc.</p>
<p>Ali got some mileage out of trash talking about his opponents.</p>