Saints v. Skins Gameday Thread

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Excuse me, didn't we cheer when Sean Taylor would level someone like that on special teams?

Taylor would go for the tackle, not forego the TD saving tackle to block an opposing player.

He would have jacked up the other player later, when he thought no one was looking.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Taylor would go for the tackle, not forego the TD saving tackle to block an opposing player.

He would have jacked up the other player later, when he thought no one was looking.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

SEE!!
There you go...ST always played....by the book

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Taylor would go for the tackle, not forego the TD saving tackle to block an opposing player.

He would have jacked up the other player later, when he thought no one was looking.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Not sure I recall Taylor going for a cheap shot instead of a tackle.

Maybe not a tackle, but here's a similar situation. (Skip to 4:40.)



The defender that Sean blocks is behind the play. Taylor blasts him. Fair enough, if the runner cuts back the defender could get him.... these are football players.... play to the whistle.... keep your head on swivel.... etc.

Look back at the Browner hit. Browner is almost even but some distance from the runner. If the runner cuts back, Browner could get him, and possibly get blocked by Long. So Browner decided to take out Long. Hey, if you can't get to the play, make sure an opponent can't either... these are football players... play to the whistle... etc.

Browner made a clean hit high, no headshot, nor to the knees. I don't see a problem with either Browner's or Taylor's hit.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Maybe not a tackle, but here's a similar situation. (Skip to 4:40.)



The defender that Sean blocks is behind the play. Taylor blasts him. Fair enough, if the runner cuts back the defender could get him.... these are football players.... play to the whistle.... keep your head on swivel.... etc.

Look back at the Browner hit. Browner is almost even but some distance from the runner. If the runner cuts back, Browner could get him, and possibly get blocked by Long. So Browner decided to take out Long. Hey, if you can't get to the play, make sure an opponent can't either... these are football players... play to the whistle... etc.

Browner made a clean hit high, no headshot, nor to the knees. I don't see a problem with either Browner's or Taylor's hit.

What ST did there was block a guy. Completely different than what Browner did. ST wasnt going to make a tackle since it was a Redskin that had the ball. What Browner did was to not even try to save a TD. Browner very possibly could have made that tackle had he tried. He chose to slow down and hit an OL that was behind the play. These arent comparable situations. ST made the right play for that situation, Browner did not.

If its simply whether it was a clean play or cheap shot, fair enough. But that is not what most are talking about. Browner made it about him, not his team. ST made the right play there, he did not sacrifice the success of his team so he could brag about a hit.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

What ST did there was block a guy. Completely different than what Browner did. ST wasnt going to make a tackle since it was a Redskin that had the ball. What Browner did was to not even try to save a TD. Browner very possibly could have made that tackle had he tried. He chose to slow down and hit an OL that was behind the play. These arent comparable situations. ST made the right play for that situation, Browner did not.

If its simply whether it was a clean play or cheap shot, fair enough. But that is not what most are talking about. Browner made it about him, not his team. ST made the right play there, he did not sacrifice the success of his team so he could brag about a hit.

Taylor was ahead of the runner, but turned back to de-cleat a pursuer, instead of staying ahead of the runner to help him advance. Sure he didn't sacrifice the team like Browner did?

I don't think you can nitpick players this much especially for decisions made in an instant during chaotic play, and it would be unfair to judge Browner or Taylor that way. Both saw a chance to contribute to the play and level an opponent. It's easy to look back in hindsight how the play went, but there was no guarantee while it happened what the runner was going to do in either case. Juke, cut back, get held up or slowed by another defender, etc. Then we could talk about how both hits saved the play for their team.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Taylor was ahead of the runner, but turned back to de-cleat a pursuer, instead of staying ahead of the runner to help him advance. Sure he didn't sacrifice the team like Browner did?

I don't think you can nitpick players this much especially for decisions made in an instant during chaotic play, and it would be unfair to judge Browner or Taylor that way. Both saw a chance to contribute to the play and level an opponent. It's easy to look back in hindsight how the play went, but there was no guarantee while it happened what the runner was going to do in either case. Juke, cut back, get held up or slowed by another defender, etc. Then we could talk about how both hits saved the play for their team.

Except if you look at both plays, thats just not the case. Watch as the Redskins player running the ball (I think it was James Thrash) cuts inside about 10 yards later. If ST hadnt blocked the one pursuing, its play over right there (barring a broken tackle). ST gained yards for the team.

Browner had the chance to stop a TD, he chose to not care about team needs. No where in any of that can you say that ST chose not to care about team needs, no where. ST picked out someone that could have possibly made the tackle and blocked him. Browner picked out a blocker behind the play and blocked a blocker. That makes sense for a 3-4 NT who is trying to clear the way for a LB, but that is not the play for Browner. There is nothing about that that made sense football wise. Browner didnt contribute to the play at all from a Saints perspective.

The play for Browner was to tackle the ball carrier, there is no other play there for him from a football perspective. He ignored that and went for bragging rights. The play for ST was to block someone that potentially could have made the tackle, he did just that.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Except if you look at both plays, thats just not the case. Watch as the Redskins player running the ball (I think it was James Thrash) cuts inside about 10 yards later. If ST hadnt blocked the one pursuing, its play over right there (barring a broken tackle). ST gained yards for the team.

Browner had the chance to stop a TD, he chose to not care about team needs. No where in any of that can you say that ST chose not to care about team needs, no where. ST picked out someone that could have possibly made the tackle and blocked him. Browner picked out a blocker behind the play and blocked a blocker. That makes sense for a 3-4 NT who is trying to clear the way for a LB, but that is not the play for Browner. There is nothing about that that made sense football wise. Browner didnt contribute to the play at all from a Saints perspective.

The play for Browner was to tackle the ball carrier, there is no other play there for him from a football perspective. He ignored that and went for bragging rights. The play for ST was to block someone that potentially could have made the tackle, he did just that.

Like I said above, you are using hindsight to justify what Taylor and Browner couldn't have know at the time. (Whether the runner would slow or not) Taylor could have blocked someone ahead of the runner, he chose instead to get a good running start and nail an opponent head-on. On Browner's play if Jones slows down, Long is a factor as a blocker.

I think we are going to disagree on this no matter what. I do think it's hypocritical to think Taylor's hit is good and Browner's bad.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Like I said above, you are using hindsight to justify what Taylor and Browner couldn't have know at the time. (Whether the runner would slow or not) Taylor could have blocked someone ahead of the runner, he chose instead to get a good running start and nail an opponent head-on. On Browner's play if Jones slows down, Long is a factor as a blocker.

I think we are going to disagree on this no matter what. I do think it's hypocritical to think Taylor's hit is good and Browner's bad.

We are going to have to agree to disagree, however I do want to make a couple of comments about what you put. If Jones slows down and Browner stayed on point, he makes the tackle, regardless of what Long does. So to me, that part of your post is a non-issue. I dont buy that Long is a blocker for a guy that was tackled (if Jones slowed down that is). At that point, Long is an OL heading back to the huddle with 7 less points on the board.

As for that last line you typed. To me, its not about clean or dirty. Its about putting yourself above the team. Its about whether the player was selfish or team oriented. The reason I bolded the last line in my post is because to me, thats the crux of the situation. I dont really care if anyone calls both hits dirty, both hits cheap, both hits clean, or one is and one isnt. That was never my point.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

The defender that Sean blocks is behind the play. Taylor blasts him.

I dont want to belabor a point and wont post about this again but .... going to the 4:40 mark, ST blocked a dude in direct pursuit of a redskins ball carrier. That was his no. 1 job. The skins had the ball.

ST should have been blocking whereas Browner should have been trying to avoid blocks to make a tackle. I think you are missing the distinction that Browner, as a defender, should be avoiding blocks instead of initiating them.

-------

"Sunday Night Football" analyst Rodney Harrison said: "I don't understand. I'm watching and I'm like, go make the tackle. He comes back and he peels back and hits a lineman. This is why this is the worst defense in the league. That's just a selfish play."
-------

Former Saints linebacker Scott Shanle was one of those players. He tweeted, “just when you thought you have seen it all. I just dont understand what going on… speechless, confused, etc etc”

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

“Obviously when you’re playing a screen pass, you want to get to the ball,” Payton said, via Christopher Dabe of the New Orleans Times-Picayune. “And those are some of the mistakes we’re discussing. . . .

“You’ve got to get to the ball. You’ve got to play the ball. Every once in a while there are certain battles, . . . you don’t want to fight a battle if it doesn’t involve getting to the football.”

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

I dont want to belabor a point and wont post about this again but .... going to the 4:40 mark, ST blocked a dude in direct pursuit of a redskins ball carrier. That was his no. 1 job. The skins had the ball.

ST should have been blocking whereas Browner should have been trying to avoid blocks to make a tackle. I think you are missing the distinction that Browner, as a defender, should be avoiding blocks instead of initiating them. .”

There's plenty of times, even in open field, it's better to make a hit on a blocker than get taken out by that blocker.

-------

Originally Posted by over the mountain

"Sunday Night Football" analyst Rodney Harrison said: "I don't understand. I'm watching and I'm like, go make the tackle. He comes back and he peels back and hits a lineman. This is why this is the worst defense in the league. That's just a selfish play."
-------

Former Saints linebacker Scott Shanle was one of those players. He tweeted, “just when you thought you have seen it all. I just dont understand what going on… speechless, confused, etc etc”

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

“Obviously when you’re playing a screen pass, you want to get to the ball,” Payton said, via Christopher Dabe of the New Orleans Times-Picayune. “And those are some of the mistakes we’re discussing. . . .

“You’ve got to get to the ball. You’ve got to play the ball. Every once in a while there are certain battles, . . . you don’t want to fight a battle if it doesn’t involve getting to the football.”

Someone actually pulled out Rodney Harrison (Coaches validate Harrison's rep as NFL's dirtiest player)
and a Saints player from the team that actually committed the sins that would become Bounty-gate? Really?

And no, I am not saying that they have no right to change their tune now. I am saying that both these player's careers actually invalidate what you quoted above. The Patriots won with Harrison, and some of Shantes teammates, maybe even himself, GOT PAID BOUNTIES for actual dirty hits that had nothing to do with the play in progress.

SMH.

edit: TLDR - It's either OK to make a hit trailing a runner or it's not. Let's not try to have it both ways.