Mike Pereira: NFL Doesn't Protect Brady

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by wiggins!, Oct 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wiggins!

    wiggins! Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Don't shoot the messenger. I just post what I find!


    The chief NFL official will not apologize for the roughing-the-passer penalties called on the Ravens in their loss to the Patriots last week, even if not all NFL analysts agree with him.

    NFL VP of officiating Mike Pereira said officials were correct to flag Baltimore's Haloti Ngata and Terrell Suggs for roughing penalties against Patriots QB Tom Brady. Ravens LB Ray Lewis had called the penalties, which both extended Patriots TD drives, "embarrassing."

    Pereira acknowledged the roughing call is a tough play to adjudicate, but said he will support his officials because the penalties are aimed at guarding players' safety.

    "We are constantly out to protect the knees and legs of players and to protects the heads," Pereira said in an appearance on the NFL Network.

    "I'm not going to tell the officials to back down on it. If they feel that it's a forcible hit, the call it and we will support that. Because we don't want players to get into their minds that they can go low."

    Showtime analyst Cris Collinsworth argued on Inside the NFL on Wednesday that Brady's status as one of the league's premier players (who suffered a season-ending knee injury on a low hit in Week 1 last year) influences the decisions by the league and officials:

    "You said it was all about the players and players' safety, that's not true. It's all about the money. Tom Brady is the money in this league. He is so valuable, not just to the Patriots. This is like, did you ever see that insurance commercial where they've got the little stack of money and the eyeballs on top of it? Well Tom Brady is the Empire State Building with the little eyeballs on top of it. This is a guy, they are going to protect him at all costs. They make this rule essentially because of Tom Brady. Remember now, Carson Palmer got hurt the exact same way. There was no rule there. Tom Brady has it happen to him, now you can't touch him. So now we've set a standard, we have precedent at this point. Now if you touch him at all ... below the knee that now has to be a penalty."

    Pereira said it's "ludicrous" to think the league wants to protect Brady more than any other player.

    "That's not the way that we officiate," he said. "Nobody is going to officiate that way because it would affect their chances to get into the playoffs or the Super Bowl.

    "They're going to officiate that play for what it is without regard to the player."
  2. borg

    borg In the Starting Line-Up

    Florio wrote an excellent summation on why these enforced rules make sense.

    "Passers are acting against every self-preservation instinct by standing in a swirling mass of large men, some of whom are trying desperately to hit him and some of whom are trying to protect him. To be effective, the passer must be able to have a certain amount of confidence that he won't be hit too low or too high and that, if he is, his team will derive a 15-yard advantage for the trouble."
  3. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    I didn't watch Inside the NFL so even though I may be taking Colinsworth's comments out of context, I'll comment on them regardless. In my opinion his comparison to Carson Palmer is way off base because the league did indeed make a rule after Palmer was hurt. Second of all the 'Brady rule' is actually a clarification of the 'Palmer Rule'. Thirdly the only thing the 'Brady Rule' talked about is a player that is on the ground lunging at the quarterback's knees.

    Fourth, if Colinsworth and others are trying to say the 'Brady Rule' is not about hitting the QB in the knees, but is about the league penalizing anybody that hits Brady, please rewatch the second game of the season against the Jets, or the preseason hit Brady took from Albert Haynesworth; no penalty flags (and rightfully so) in either case. The theory that the league is 'going to protect him at all costs' is suspect at best because there simply is no valid evidence to back that claim. Lastly Colinsworth, as almost every media member outside of New England has done, ignores the Mike Wright call, the fact there were an equal number of penalties on both teams, and the stats that show the crew that officiated that game have called more penalties than any other crew the last two years in a row.

    Will anybody shoot in the media shoot holes in Colinsworth's argument? Very doubtful. It's as if we're seeing a miniature repeat of 2007 when the media panders to the majority and tells them what they want to hear in order to drive up ratings and web hits with baseless conspiracy speculation. The real story here is how different one game to the next can be based on the officiating crew of that game that day. But that would never show up because even if there is more truth to that story, it doesn't cater to fans emotions. And it's those emotions that drive ratings.
  4. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Absolutely correct. These guys make asses out of themselves because they trust each other not to call them on it but rather to parrot each other. Know the freakin' rules, how much is that to ask of guys who land these lucrative, plum sports media gigs.

    Same deal with those locally and nationally criticizing Brady for calling attention to a foul. Manning raised PI calls to an art form. This is about survival. As Perriera stated the league doesn't want players to think they may get away with it because then it's a far less effective deterrent.
  5. olschool

    olschool Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Collinsworth is wrong yet again. Roughing the passer has been in effect for years, as have late hit penalties. The Carson Palmer hit resulted in clarification of the rule, to outlaw hits to the knees or below. The Brady hit resulted in another clarification, to outlaw a blocked/downed, player from getting up and lungeing below the knees with second effort, which is exactly what happened with Pollard and Suggs.

    In the end, the NFL is right to protect it's star QB's. For example, who outside of New Orleans and New England, would care about a Superbowl, without Brees and Brady ?
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2009
  6. mfaith

    mfaith Rookie

    These RTP calls (and rules) are getting crazy. It's still football right?
  7. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    I have no problem with the rules giving quarterbacks extra protection. They are the marquee players in the league and they are also the most vulnerable. Every position, if you get the ball you are running with it. I mean sure, sometimes a RB will slow down to set up blocks, or they will cut and juke, but QB is the only position where the guy with the ball will pretty much just stand there completely focused on the action 30 yards downfield.

    It is easy to complain about the rules because you never get to see the injuries we avoid because of those same rules.
  8. Bill B.

    Bill B. Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    How come nobody made a big deal when the NFL made it against the rules to do a crackback block? Or when they made a rule saying you can't block a defensive lineman below the knees? These rules were made to protect players and rightfully so. Defensive players did not say anything about the game going soft or being ruined when these rules are enforced.
  9. stevedogc

    stevedogc Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    So by his definition, Collinsworth must feel the Trent Edwards is a marque player in this league. After the way the referees called a borderline (thats being polite) RTP call against Wilfork in week 1. Its funny that with all these analysts talking about the calls on Brady in week 4, that they convienently forget the calls made against the Pats just three week earier! This is spygate all over again. No one care about the Bills or Trent Edwards because they stink and are irrelevent. And if the Ravens were playing the Bills this past week and it was Edwards that Suggs lunged at, no one would be talking about it. Most of the NFL fans around the country dont like the Pats. Simply because they have been on top for so long. The same way most NFL fans hated the Cowboys of the 90's. Or in baseball when everyone hated the Yankees in the 90's. Analysts distort or not report all of the facts to simply appease the masses.
  10. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #91 Jersey

    This whole thing is bizzare, Suggs clearly dove at a QB's knees and got flagged, if a pats player did the same thing he would have been flaged for the same thing. But from the coach on down they act like the hurt party.

    The same coach curses out the reff's and gets a personal foul, (i've been watching football for forty five years and have never seen that before) then sends the tapes of the games to the league office complaining.

    If a Patriot dove at Flaccos knees they would have gotten flagged.

    In a way i like this because i think BB and the Patriots will take it as an US vs Them situation and feed off of it.

    I'm going to have to ressurect my signature fron '07.... Embrace the Hate....
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2009
  11. BSR

    BSR In the Starting Line-Up

    You realize RTP rules have been in place for decades, right?
  12. patological

    patological Practice Squad Player

    Some things just never change. Ole Pencilneck's bias against the Pats doesn't abate just because he's in the big time. In fact, the only change is they've finally made him dress so his wrists don't stick out of the ends of his suit jacket arms by 3 inches and his shirt collars don't overlap from being two sizes too large.
  13. Buchanty

    Buchanty Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    #51 Jersey

    There is a strange echo of 07 about all this as you infer, Collinsworth's rant reminds me of the Inside the NFL session prior to the Patriots-Jets game that year and Collinsworth was given the opportunity to act as Mangini and one of the others (I cant remember but think it was Carter) as Bellichick, each doing the pre-game address. Collinsworth was almost apoplectic in his exhortation to hit Brady as hard and often as possible.

    Both diatribes are polarized against the Patriots or Brady and suggest the man is a few sandwiches short of a picnic, even though he is one of the better in-game commentators (but the bar on that one is really low).
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2009
  14. Bill B.

    Bill B. Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    I went to NFL.com to read some of the message boards over there and it is 90% anti-Patriot. Even if you try to have intelligent discourse over there, the posts just degenerate to namecalling. I think the posters there are 10 years old or younger. Having guys like Sapp and Faulk just fuel the ant-Patriots fervor around the country.
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2009
  15. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #91 Jersey

    I don't get the hate because its not like were coming off a SB or two. These people should be hating the Steelers. I thought now that the team wasn't on soem 15 or twenty game winning streak the haters would find a new team to be JEALOUS of.
  16. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #91 Jersey

    I remember that, there was a lot of invective tossed the partiots way by a number of these anylists but Collinsworth was particurly nasty.

    Like i said earlier i think BB and the team will take this personally and use it as motivation.
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2009
  17. BradyFTW!

    BradyFTW! PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    Getting? That implies that they're new. None of the hits that were flagged on Sunday were "Brady rule" hits- those have all been penalties since at least 2006.
  18. Seacoast Fan

    Seacoast Fan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    #75 Jersey

    You hit the nail squarely on the head.
    You could also add, the rule against horse collar tackles. That rule protects ball carriers of all kinds....RBs, WRs, even big fat lineman who scoop up a fumble.
    People who complian about the game getting soft, or QBs being coddled, ignore teh obvious: the game is not the same as it was even twenty years ago. The players are much bigger, faster and stronger. The rules have to change along with that.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page