Interesting. I wonder if this was because of the Percy Harvin speculation article or due to a general dislike of Pelissero.yezzir wrote:Judd Zulgad @1500ESPNJudd 5m
Jerome Simpson took time to call out @TomPelissero today after the game. Tom wasn't there, he called him Tom Presso and said he was d-bag.
Post-game thoughts
Moderator: Moderators
- Texas Vike
- Hall of Fame Inductee
- Posts: 4673
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
- x 405
Re: Post-game thoughts
-
- Commissioner
- Posts: 24788
- Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
- Location: Des Moines, Iowa
- x 108
Re: Post-game thoughts
Probably dislike of Pelissero. Pelissero has been critical of Simpson (and Jenkins) the entire season. Granted, I think most of that is justified.Texas Vike wrote: Interesting. I wonder if this was because of the Percy Harvin speculation article or due to a general dislike of Pelissero.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Re: Post-game thoughts
Yes, I had the same feeling about the so-called "blocks" by the WRs. They were committing offensive pass interference like crazy and apparently the NFL refs have decided that it's okay for the Pack to do that. Ridiculous.John_Viveiros wrote: It was so obvious too - at least the one I am thinking of. Anyone else gets a offensive PI on that. Like the Bears receiver who drew three in a game. And the weird stuff with the inadvertent red flag not invalidating the replay. They'll screw the Lions on that call, but will figure out some way for the Packers to gain the benefit.
Re: Post-game thoughts
Well, they decided it was okay for the Packers to commit defensive holding and pass interference years ago so we should have seen this coming. I've never seen a team get away with more jersey-grabbing and contact beyond 5 yards than Green Bay.losperros wrote:Yes, I had the same feeling about the so-called "blocks" by the WRs. They were committing offensive pass interference like crazy and apparently the NFL refs have decided that it's okay for the Pack to do that. Ridiculous.
-
- Starting Wide Receiver
- Posts: 19150
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
- Location: Crystal, MN
- x 114
- Contact:
Re: Post-game thoughts
Me neither. It's stupid, and I hate when the announcers say that it is just them being "physical". When a Viking defender farts within 2 yards of a WR, every ref, including those in other games, throw their flags.Mothman wrote: Well, they decided it was okay for the Packers to commit defensive holding and pass interference years ago so we should have seen this coming. I've never seen a team get away with more jersey-grabbing and contact beyond 5 yards than Green Bay.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
Re: Post-game thoughts
I think I'm missing something too.Purplemania wrote:Alright, someone please clarify this for me:
All TD and TO's are automatically reviewed right? Or is it that it has to be "controversial" in order to be reviewed? What if the ref doesn't get buzzed and the coach thinks it's worth reviewing so he challneges a TD or TO? Does that result in a penalty?
Also, is there a difference in penalty vs. TD and TO review if the coach challenges the play? Here's my deal. Yesterday during the AD fumble review, Frazier challenged, we got an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. During the JJones TD, McCarthy challenged, and THEY also got an unsportsmanlike conduct that was initiated during the kick off...if there is no difference between a TO and TD unsporstmanlike challenge, and the Packers did get penalized too, why is there such a big fuzz in here am I missing something?
When a rule like that is damn near impossible to understand/explain/address/figure out/comprehend......its time to change it.
- Raptorman
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3403
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pm
- Location: Sebastian, FL
- x 67
Re: Post-game thoughts
The penalty on the AD fumble was from Loadholt, not the coach. He knocked the ball out of the Packer players hand on the sideline. The coach never challanged it.Purplemania wrote:Alright, someone please clarify this for me:
All TD and TO's are automatically reviewed right? Or is it that it has to be "controversial" in order to be reviewed? What if the ref doesn't get buzzed and the coach thinks it's worth reviewing so he challneges a TD or TO? Does that result in a penalty?
Also, is there a difference in penalty vs. TD and TO review if the coach challenges the play? Here's my deal. Yesterday during the AD fumble review, Frazier challenged, we got an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. During the JJones TD, McCarthy challenged, and THEY also got an unsportsmanlike conduct that was initiated during the kick off...if there is no difference between a TO and TD unsporstmanlike challenge, and the Packers did get penalized too, why is there such a big fuzz in here am I missing something?
Vikings fan since Nov. 6, 1966. Annoying Packer fans since Nov. 7, 1966
- CbusVikesFan
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:07 pm
- Location: Columbus, Ohio
Re: Post-game thoughts
It sure would be nice if the Vikings put it to the Falcons in the Championship game and end up in the Super Bowl.Rus wrote:For anyone who thinks the Vikings will be mincemeat in the playoffs...they just beat two of the best teams that are going into the playoffs in a row. They started off the season kicking the crap out of SF. They also have experience playing all three of the teams that they would end up playing if they were to get past the Packers and Falcons. They definitely have the potential to be the upstart.
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter
Re: Post-game thoughts
I completely agree. This Vikings team has amazed me. Not just because they have improved but because they are one of the better teams in the NFL right now.John_Viveiros wrote:I'll drop this into the "post-game thoughts" thread, but it's more "post-season". The Vikings beat a 10-6 team, two 11-5 teams, and a 12-4 team this year. Have we ever beaten four double digit winning teams in a year before?
It's a tough game coming up, but the Vikes are legit. They belong in the playoffs - no fluke about it.
-
- Transition Player
- Posts: 398
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:17 pm
- Location: Ormond Beach, Florida
- x 12
Re: Post-game thoughts
I don't know if this has been previously discussed, but I think that one of the most impressive things about this season is how the Vikings consistently have most, if not all, of their timeouts remaining at the end of games. There really hasn't been one time this season where we needed a timeout but didn't have one and were forced to spike the ball or rush to the line of scrimmage. Jax, and yesterday immediately come to mind. In the Childress years it seemed like we were always a day late and a dollar short in terms of clock management.
Re: Post-game thoughts
Biggest post-game question I have is: Why was Mistral Raymond on the field for so many plays? Was Sanford hurt, were they using Raymond in nickel or dime packages, or were they just giving Sanford a rest? Sanford is borderline adequate at safety, while Raymond is a liability.
Sherels was by far the weakest link in that secondary, followed by Raymond and A.J. Jefferson. Robinson didn't have a very good game, either. The whole secondary is going to need to step up its game next week. Hopefully, they get Winfield back, but even then there are just too many soft spots out there.
Sherels was by far the weakest link in that secondary, followed by Raymond and A.J. Jefferson. Robinson didn't have a very good game, either. The whole secondary is going to need to step up its game next week. Hopefully, they get Winfield back, but even then there are just too many soft spots out there.
-
- Commissioner
- Posts: 24788
- Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
- Location: Des Moines, Iowa
- x 108
Re: Post-game thoughts
Raymond is generally better in coverage. He had a pretty bad game yesterday though. I remember cussing out Sanford for his coverage "skills" the last couple of seasons. Bottom line, they're both not very good.Eli wrote:Biggest post-game question I have is: Why was Mistral Raymond on the field for so many plays? Was Sanford hurt, were they using Raymond in nickel or dime packages, or were they just giving Sanford a rest? Sanford is borderline adequate at safety, while Raymond is a liability.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
-
- Practice Squad
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:50 am
Re: Post-game thoughts
Green Bay did benefit from that just like the Vikings benefitted from that deep ball Ponder threw that hit the ground @ was ruled a catchHunter Morrow wrote:I don't understand why when Atlanta and Detroit challenged touchdown plays that weren't eligible for challenging it cancelled the review upstairs but when the Packers did it on us they gave us some straight up horsecrap about the review booth buzzing first. Oh wait, the Green Bay Bad Calls would benefit from that.
This team has a marketable quarterback and a cult mystique so it gets to use the Rodgers Rulebook and I'm sick of it. We nearly got screwed at home!
Edit: Of course, all the Packers in this rotten state of Wisconsin are having a raging case of butthurt and complaining about the refs when they literally got gifted a road touchdown.
Re: Post-game thoughts
Yeah, it's illogical to me that there's no way a challenge can be initiated unless a team has timeouts remaining. It defeats the purpose of why instant replay was introduced to the game to begin with, which is to get calls right. And they blew that one big time.VltrophyXLV wrote:like the Vikings benefitted from that deep ball Ponder threw that hit the ground @ was ruled a catch
Re: Post-game thoughts
Personally, I think if that was truly why they re-introduced instant replay into the game, there would be no challenge flag system in the first place. I've always felt instant replay was more about placating people than about getting calls right.Eli wrote: Yeah, it's illogical to me that there's no way a challenge can be initiated unless a team has timeouts remaining. It defeats the purpose of why instant replay was introduced to the game to begin with, which is to get calls right. And they blew that one big time.