Richard Sherman talks about that final play against Julio

[253hawk]

Apparently NFL Films and Showtime's Inside the NFL edited the last play so that they took Julio Jones starting to run completetly free from the footage of some completely another snap, with no Sherman in sight, and ended it with the "blatant" PI... The ridiculousness of this.

http://q13fox.com/2016/10/19/seattle-se ... lio-jones/

I saw it on the Mic'd Up and Inside the NFL versions, but I think it has less to do with what many have been implying here and more that it looks more dramatic with two receivers flying off the line together in a desperate hail-mary play. The press coverage look doesn't make it look like as much of a race.

It's just funny, because Jones was the only one going deep on the play and Ryan was locked onto him the whole time and didn't even try to look off. Nope, just a 50 yard bomb right down the middle into double coverage against two 1st Team All-Pro defensive backs.

What looks 'dramatic' was in reality a complete hope and a prayer that DPI would bail them out after failing on three straight standard passes before that. Couldn't get 10 yards on those...surely 50 yards against Sherman and Thomas will be a catch!

 

[pmedic920]

Your completely entitled to your opinions, and welcome to post them.
I'm bustin' your chops a bit :{)

If you don't think that video was edited to fit a specific agenda that's your prerogative but I'd bet you are in a very small minority here.

I'd also bet that most football fans, if willing to look at the whole situation without bias, would probably come to the same conclusion. Somebody when out of their way to edit that video, it was done for a reason.

The NFL sells a product, they will go to extreme lengths to promote and protect that product as they see fit.

Sherman mentioned it in the press conference, NFL wants to promote offense/scoring.

I'm not saying this was done against the Seahawks, I'm saying it was done to fit the agenda they are following.

What if?
What if, they had showed Sherm getting blasted?
What if, they had slowed down the video at the beginning of that play, and highlighted the shot to his head?

What do you think the national narrative would be about the last play of that game?

Again, I'd bet that the national talk would be much more like it is here, than what's it's been. Herm E. Is the only one that I've heard that comes close to "getting it".

Edit:
As the NFL let it play out, this was the biggest story going on Monday morning.

Bigger than Ben R. needing knee surgery.
You seriously don't think that video was edited with purpose?

"COME ON MAN"

The video is edited with purpose, just maybe not for the purpose that most of our fans think it may be. While I agree that the NFL focuses on packaging the product, it's hard to say how much what your'e saying flows into NFL Films' day-to-day operations. At some point, this starts sounding like a well-planned and executed conspiracy, and that's often a difficult thing to pull off even with high quality employees.

If the intent was to edit it to fit, it may have just been the lower level employees making it work with the announcing that Barber or the Falcons announcer did.

I don't have a strong opinion about how the end product got where it did, and I agree that it doesn't represent the play well since they missed Jones' penalty at the line. The good news (besides the win) is that the refs let both go; had Sherman been flagged but not Jones that would have been really aggravating, particularly if the Falcons scored.

Like I said, you're entitled to yours.

Good day, Sir.

 

[DJrmb]

I'm glad he addressed that aspect as the national media has completely overlooked it.

Sherman had a terrible game and a complete meltdown as he lost his composure but he'll be back and ready for Arizona.

Personally I disagree with the "terrible game" portion of this.

Yes, some points were scored when he was in the area but I'm still not convinced that the "break downs" were is "fault".

^^^ This.

There are WAY too many people simply looking at the stat line to judge how well Sherman played against Julio. The fact is that Sherman played quiet well against Julio for most of the game. They showed a graphic after Julio's touchdown on the TV Broadcast of passes to Julio Jones in which Sherman was covering him. It was something like 4 plays for 48 yards... Again that was After the touchdown and after Julio had around 104 yards and 1 TD. He ended up with 139 yards and 1 TD. So even if you give Sherman all of the remaining yards he still held Julio under 100 yards and no scores when he was covering him.

The people claiming Sherman got run over in this game by Julio are mistaken.

Yup. The ESPN reporter that covers the Hawks wrote this in his latest article. Sherman lined up with Jones for 40 some plays and gave up 4 catches for 40 some yards. People are just seeing the total yards and saying Sherm got destroyed. Simply not true.

Thanks, I still wish I had the Graphic from the TV Broadcast but this is good too. I don't understand how any knowledgeable person determines that Sherman had a bad game against Julio.

Sherman was on Jones for 30 of 46 coverage snaps. On those plays, when Matt Ryan targeted Jones, he went 3-for-5 for 40 yards and an interception

http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-se...sed-richard-sherman-to-explode-vs-the-falcons

 

[VivaEfrenHerrera]

Your completely entitled to your opinions, and welcome to post them.
I'm bustin' your chops a bit :{)

If you don't think that video was edited to fit a specific agenda that's your prerogative but I'd bet you are in a very small minority here.

I'd also bet that most football fans, if willing to look at the whole situation without bias, would probably come to the same conclusion. Somebody when out of their way to edit that video, it was done for a reason.

The NFL sells a product, they will go to extreme lengths to promote and protect that product as they see fit.

Sherman mentioned it in the press conference, NFL wants to promote offense/scoring.

I'm not saying this was done against the Seahawks, I'm saying it was done to fit the agenda they are following.

What if?
What if, they had showed Sherm getting blasted?
What if, they had slowed down the video at the beginning of that play, and highlighted the shot to his head?

What do you think the national narrative would be about the last play of that game?

Again, I'd bet that the national talk would be much more like it is here, than what's it's been. Herm E. Is the only one that I've heard that comes close to "getting it".

Edit:
As the NFL let it play out, this was the biggest story going on Monday morning.

Bigger than Ben R. needing knee surgery.
You seriously don't think that video was edited with purpose?

"COME ON MAN"

The video is edited with purpose, just maybe not for the purpose that most of our fans think it may be. While I agree that the NFL focuses on packaging the product, it's hard to say how much what your'e saying flows into NFL Films' day-to-day operations. At some point, this starts sounding like a well-planned and executed conspiracy, and that's often a difficult thing to pull off even with high quality employees.

If the intent was to edit it to fit, it may have just been the lower level employees making it work with the announcing that Barber or the Falcons announcer did.

I don't have a strong opinion about how the end product got where it did, and I agree that it doesn't represent the play well since they missed Jones' penalty at the line. The good news (besides the win) is that the refs let both go; had Sherman been flagged but not Jones that would have been really aggravating, particularly if the Falcons scored.

Hmm, I see where you are going here, but can't get there with you. Obviously, we don't know all the ins and outs of their video production process. But I have a hard time coming up with any "legitimate" reason to make *this particular* edit of *this particular* play. If its just for issues of timing, as you suggest as possible, it's hard to see this approach being the easiest. What, you need a couple seconds so you fish around to find something similat enough? Possible, I suppose.

Also, the "conspiracy" to do something like this wouldn't have to be as large or well-oiled as you suggest, I don't think. It'd take one manager aware of the league's business priorities (Protect the Shield!), and one other staff member.

It seems much more likely that they did this to frame the situation in a particular way, because they thought it was better business to do so. And it worked! Maybe even better than they wanted....

 

[TwistedHusky]

Sherman is right.

Two penalties egregiously shift the balance so significantly in the favor of the offense that football games are hard to watch.

Want to know why ratings are dropping? Some of it is saturation, and some is that skill development is dropping as teams favor rookies over veterans (for cost reasons), but some is that the rules have left the land of reasonable long ago.

On a 3rd and 25, a holding penalty for 5 yards suddenly erases all the great plays a defense makes and gives a team 1st downs. Not only does it gut the ability of defense to be productive but a small error by a ref for what would normally be 5 yards can suddenly reset a drive for a team.

Go look at the #s, since those rule changes QBs are averaging about 100 yds or so more passing per game.

PI issues are even worse. Consider a defender playing tight defense, perfectly positioned. The QB underthrows the ball and the receiver suddenly stops running and crashes into the defender who does not get a chance to get his head turned around. By the letter of the law, the receiver was 'interfered' with.

But it was not a defender purposely breaking a rule to try to break up the pass or disadvantage the receiver. Instead, the receiver initiates contact and unless the referee is feeling fair, the reward can be 30-40 yards or even an opportunity right outside of the endzone.

(This change in the rules favoring receivers is also dangerous to them however.

Consider that if the defender knows the route, he cannot impede the route by running in front of the receiver, if the receiver runs up his back that penalty is on the receiver.

So how in the world can you possibly stop the pass if you cannot contact after 5 yards and you cannot even position yourself in the route to cut the receiver off?

You have to wait until the receiver is about to catch the ball and hit the receiver with enough force to dislodge the ball. Which means the stupid rules the NFL puts in to give receivers and QBs an advantage also put them at more physical risk because the only other option is to hammer the receiver in catch or after the catch.)

The argument that if the guy gets burned he is going to grab the receiver because the penalty is only 15 yards is bad anyway. The penalty is 15 in college and you rarely see defenders grabbing receivers to avoid the breakout. You still see guys break open all the time.

Both the 5 yard after contact and 15 yard rules need to be amended. The 5 yard holding should have incidental and egregious holding, and it should not be an automatic first down.

The PI should be 15, if you want incidental vs egregious I am fine with that. But gifting someone 30-40 yards for a penalty that could almost be subjectively called close to as often as holding? No thank you.

 

[ivotuk]

I found the author's translation of audio to text odd

. “It’s not affecting points being scared[/b].

What do points have to be scared of? I know, LOB!

 

[Hawks46]

I saw it on the Mic'd Up and Inside the NFL versions, but I think it has less to do with what many have been implying here and more that it looks more dramatic with two receivers flying off the line together in a desperate hail-mary play. The press coverage look doesn't make it look like as much of a race.

I think this post has less to do with "keeping it real" and more to do with needing some attention.

I think almost everyone knows why the video was edited in the manner it was.

Fact is, we ain't as stewpud as the NFL thinks we be.

I see a few possibilities about the end product in that video, but I'm not in the position of caring about how it makes the team "look" so I don't assume the worst. I don't think it's a high probability that there is some concerted effort by the NFL's organizations to edit videos to make the play look a certain way to swing opinion about the play, but it's possible.

What's with the first sentence in your post? Are you saying I'm posting this just to rile people up? If so, I disagree with that.

Your completely entitled to your opinions, and welcome to post them.
I'm bustin' your chops a bit :{)

If you don't think that video was edited to fit a specific agenda that's your prerogative but I'd bet you are in a very small minority here.

I'd also bet that most football fans, if willing to look at the whole situation without bias, would probably come to the same conclusion. Somebody when out of their way to edit that video, it was done for a reason.

The NFL sells a product, they will go to extreme lengths to promote and protect that product as they see fit.

Sherman mentioned it in the press conference, NFL wants to promote offense/scoring.

I'm not saying this was done against the Seahawks, I'm saying it was done to fit the agenda they are following.

What if?
What if, they had showed Sherm getting blasted?
What if, they had slowed down the video at the beginning of that play, and highlighted the shot to his head?

What do you think the national narrative would be about the last play of that game?

Again, I'd bet that the national talk would be much more like it is here, than what's it's been. Herm E. Is the only one that I've heard that comes close to "getting it".

Edit:
As the NFL let it play out, this was the biggest story going on Monday morning.

Bigger than Ben R. needing knee surgery.
You seriously don't think that video was edited with purpose?

"COME ON MAN"

2nd Edit:
Wonder why the narrative is, Sherm got away with cheating?

Why isn't the focus on officiating?
The refs blew 2 calls on that 1 play.

The converse to this is that the NFL doesn't want to keep show casing how bad the officiating is getting. The product is starting to get a bit worse, with the lack of contact and practice time teams are allowed you're getting sloppier play. Add to that worse and worse officiating, and the NFL at some point has to try to smooth over a lot of the egregious bad calls.

 

[jammerhawk]

I'm glad he addressed that aspect as the national media has completely overlooked it.

Sherman had a terrible game and a complete meltdown as he lost his composure but he'll be back and ready for Arizona.

The national media is seriously wrong doing what they did and not acknowledging they screwed up and had an agenda or a storyline they were pushing. Fairness is about honest reporting w/o any agenda.

West TX I heartliy disagree with your comments Sherman did not have a bad game but was made to look like he did because of the meltdown /c of McCray's miscommunication leading to the Jones TD and the DPI that was made much of by the national media. I still beleive he is the best or one of the best CBs in football today.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I can not recall a single moment where a WR was flagged for that. It just doesn't happen. Not to say it shouldn't be flagged, but that I just can't remember it ever being called. So in that respect, we are very fortunate that PI wasn't called there.

All that said, the Falcons did take a 7 point lead in this game.. it's up to them to hold onto that and to never let a game come down to the officials. So.. meh.