Well, it was a former Boilermaker -- Bernard Pollard -- who may have altered the course of NFL history with his knee-buckling hit on Tom Brady yesterday, about twenty minutes into the Pats 2008 season. Peter King was very somber on NBC last night, implying this was bad for the entire league and "cast a pall" over everything. What? Shut up, Peter. It's an injury. It happens. Terrific Tom hasn't missed a game since he took over for Bledsoe back in '01 and, well, his luck ran out.I was amused at Randy Moss' postgames comments on the hit:
"I don’t really want to get into it, but for me personally, I think it was dirty,” Moss said. “When I came back in (to watch the replay), it looked dirty to me. I’ve never been a dirty player. I honestly don’t even know how to play dirty. I just play the game. Any time you see something like that that looks foul, that looks dirty, it opens your eyes. So for me personally, it looked dirty."
You don't want to get into it, but you will. And shouldn't Randy be more concerned with, you know, holding on to the ball that he fumbled on that very play? Maybe he was distracted trying to determine if Pollard's hit looked "foul."
It's amazing how no matter what happens to the Patriots anymore, there's always whining and excuses. Pollard is now dirty even though he was blocked into Brady. The Giants shouldn't have won because there was holding on the Tyree play. The Giants shouldn't have won because the Pats dropped a sure interception. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You're just another team, Patriots. And now you're one with Matt Cassell as the starter -- until they sign Chris Simms to start, anyway.
Pollard, of course, swears it wasn't dirty but he's in a completely no-win situation. What's he going to say? That he kind of wanted to take out Brady's golden knee? (By the way, I was all set to link over to Kissing Suzy Kolber and their "bounty" they'd put on Tom Brady last season -- and then I go look to provide links -- and they're already awarding it to Pollard. Well-done, gentlemen.)
6 comments:
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080908/SPORTS0601/809080366/1004/SPORTS
Our pal Hutchens is pretty excited about the Murray State win. Also, check out some of the comments below especially the one from George Orwell.
Wow, that is kind of incredible. And I particularly love that Terry doesn't seem to ever temper his impressed-ness with a comment acknowledging the cupcake nature of the IU early-season schedule.
Sure glad they could hammer Murray State at home! And yeah, commenters predicting only three losses... yet saying they could beat OSU and UM -- so wait, shouldn't they go unbeaten this year!
Hoosiers for national title game!
Well, despite you revealing the real root of your commentary (relating it back to the Giants), it is still a little bit bad news for the league. I mean, he was the MVP and record holder from last season. It was fun to watch him put up video game numbers like no one else. Now that is gone. It would have been sad for LDT to go down the same way right after his record season.
So how come they don't sign Culpepper to throw bombs to moss all season long? That would have been fun to watch again.
I'm going to name my kid Bernard!! You got a problem with that?! (in regards to the tags)
I have one bit of disagreement... Pollard wasn't blocked into Brady. He was finishing his play because Brady still had the ball. Look at the replay pulled away from the impact. Brady was in his throwing motion with ball still in had when Pollard hit him. If Pollard had come up a little bit further, Brady probably wouldn't have got the throw out of there at all. So, let's not give the blocker any credit for this one, it was all Bernard Pollard, baby.
J - just for you: watching last night's Broncos/Raiders game, it was Mike and Mike calling it, with Ditka doing something there as well. One of the most painful games I've ever sat through.
Yes, I saw/heard it. Painful barely describes it.
E, yes, the Culpepper idea is a great one and I'm surprised they're not considering it. But this is Belichick's arrogance, I think. He's going to prove he can win even with Matt Cassell.
As for the jab about the "root" of my commentary having to do with the Giants, I'm not sure I even follow..... my point was just what I said -- there's always an excuse these days with the Pats. Always a whine attached to things. Always a "but, but, but..."
Suck it, Patriots.
Post a Comment