NFL 2013 Season Conference Championships Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2018 Season Super Bowl Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Patriots 16 @ Broncos 26
Final
Sun, 1/19/14 2:00pm
2 Picks - 15% 11 Picks - 85%
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
49ers 17 @ Seahawks 23
Final
Sun, 1/19/14 5:30pm
1 Pick - 8% 12 Picks - 92%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Week Record2 - 0
1.000
First Place
2 - 0
1.000
First Place
2 - 0
1.000
First Place
2 - 0
1.000
First Place
Season Record168 - 97
0.634
158 - 107
0.596
167 - 98
0.630
166 - 99
0.626
Scotttime Record1334 - 798
0.626
1286 - 846
0.603
1328 - 804
0.623
1350 - 782
0.633
No-Pack-Vike Record2517 - 1476
0.630
2447 - 1546
0.613
2530 - 1463
0.634
2492 - 1501
0.624
Lifetime Record2011 - 1188
0.629
1897 - 1302
0.593
1998 - 1201
0.625
2009 - 1190
0.628
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:169 - 96
0.638
Lifetime:1354 - 772
0.637
newalex.jpg
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:181 - 84
0.683
Lifetime:1336 - 794
0.627
skull full.jpg
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:105 - 68
0.607
Lifetime:406 - 256
0.613
question_mark.gif
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:131 - 81
0.618
Lifetime:663 - 400
0.624
hambone.jpg
Patriots
Seahawks

Week:1 - 1
0.500
Season:164 - 94
0.636
Lifetime:679 - 379
0.642
077.JPG
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:167 - 98
0.630
Lifetime:602 - 359
0.626
IMG003.jpg
Patriots
Seahawks

Week:1 - 1
0.500
Season:157 - 108
0.593
Lifetime:590 - 329
0.642
2015-08-23 17.06.53.jpg
Broncos
Seahawks

Week:2 - 0
1.000
Season:113 - 67
0.628
Lifetime:113 - 67
0.628
IMG_20131124_132302_774.jpg
Broncos
49ers

Week:1 - 1
0.500
Season:34 - 8
0.809
Lifetime:34 - 8
0.809
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Patriots 16 @ Broncos 26

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
If the Pats win Tom Brady will have at least made the Superbowl in half his seasons. (Or so I've seen.)
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Tired of it.
jon.jpg
Jon
In theory, I was leaning toward the Patriots the last few days. But I can't seem to actually pick them. But I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the Broncos either. But they've got more offensive threats, they've had fewer losses, they're at home, and I want them to win.

49ers 17 @ Seahawks 23

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Toughy. Both really good teams, without any major flaws, which both yet somehow seem fatally flawed somehow.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Hate it.
jon.jpg
Jon
I don't know, I mean, they're at home.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/15/2014 @ 02:08:40 AM
 Quote this comment
Games are up.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
01/15/2014 @ 11:10:56 AM
 Quote this comment
This is Brady's 13th season. He missed most of 2008 with his injury in week 1. So if you discount that season, this would be appearance number 6 in 12 seasons (just confirming Jeremy's game comment). Of course, if they make it an then lose in the Super Bowl, he will have the most Super Bowl losses among active quarterbacks, which obviously should make the Patriots look elsewhere for the QB position next year.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this 2 times, last at 01/15/2014 11:13:23 am
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
01/16/2014 @ 12:26:12 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 11:10:56 AM
This is Brady's 13th season. He missed most of 2008 with his injury in week 1. So if you discount that season, this would be appearance number 6 in 12 seasons (just confirming Jeremy's game comment). Of course, if they make it an then lose in the Super Bowl, he will have the most Super Bowl losses among active quarterbacks, which obviously should make the Patriots look elsewhere for the QB position next year.


By "his seasons" I'm guessing it counts 2008 but not the first 2 when he was the backup. But that's the problem, someone finds out an interesting stat and then it gets repeated over and over and more and more qualifiers get dropped or changed subtly.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/16/2014 @ 01:35:41 PM
 Quote this comment
if it counts 2008 then he's been the "starter" for 13 seasons. He played in only 1 game in 2000 (his rookie season), and he became the starting QB in 2001 (playing in 15 of 16 regular season games). So it's not that absurd to discount 2008 since he only started one game (played less than 1 quarter, I think) and say something like "of the 12 seasons that he has started most or all of their games", or more simply, "of the seasons where Brady was the regular starter, half of those seasons resulted in Super Bowl appearances."* Also, I heard that "stat" for the first time on your game comment this week, so it must not exactly be making the rounds that rabidly.

*although perhaps the fact that we are having this discussion and talking about the degree of absurdity it belongs is evidence of "what's the point of the stat anyway" since it has to be qualified at all? Why not just say "if the Patriots win this weekend, Tom Brady will have appeared in 42.8% of all the Super Bowls during that time". Why is that so much less impressive than using "half"?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 1000000 posts (and counting!)
01/19/2014 @ 02:12:37 PM
 Quote this comment
I just feel like putting this out there; I'm not totally sure why.
I'm not a Patriot hater. I kind of like them sometimes. I think having Tom Brady in fantasy and then having some of the other players might have helped over the years. You gotta be amazed at how good they are.

That said, I'm a Peyton Manning fan and I really dislike a lot of the narratives that go along with Manning vs. the Patriots. So I really want the Broncos to win. But if the Patriots do, kudos to them, because that's impressive.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - many posts
01/19/2014 @ 05:31:30 PM
 Quote this comment
And for my NFC comment, I'm a little surprised at how the Seahawks were the overwhelming choice on here. Granted, it's a small sample size. I could be wrong, but my guess is that almost everyone felt it could go either way but gives a slight edge to Seattle. Anyway, should be interesting.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
01/19/2014 @ 05:53:05 PM
 Quote this comment
The 49ers "survived" the Packers in the first round. I'm giving a slight edge to the Seahawks.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 05:40:07 AM
 Quote this comment
Here's an interesting take on Richard Sherman's post-game interview. For all the barbs being tossed at Sherman for being crazy at the end of the game, it's nothing more than a product of an industry that sees value in shoving a mic in the face of a player mere seconds after making the biggest play of his career, or attempting to garner some newsworthy information from the half-time coach interview as he is heading to or from the locker room. For all we know, Crabtree could have been saying some pretty nasty things to Sherman all game, and since Erin Andrews was the first person to talk to Sherman after the play, the emotion just came out. It was, however, the cleanest crazy-person-live-emotion-sports-rant in the history of such rants.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
01/20/2014 @ 10:23:37 AM
 Quote this comment
Jon Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:31:30 PM
And for my NFC comment, I'm a little surprised at how the Seahawks were the overwhelming choice on here. Granted, it's a small sample size. I could be wrong, but my guess is that almost everyone felt it could go either way but gives a slight edge to Seattle. Anyway, should be interesting.


I was too.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 10:24:43 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 05:40:07 AM
Here's an interesting take on Richard Sherman's post-game interview. For all the barbs being tossed at Sherman for being crazy at the end of the game, it's nothing more than a product of an industry that sees value in shoving a mic in the face of a player mere seconds after making the biggest play of his career, or attempting to garner some newsworthy information from the half-time coach interview as he is heading to or from the locker room. For all we know, Crabtree could have been saying some pretty nasty things to Sherman all game, and since Erin Andrews was the first person to talk to Sherman after the play, the emotion just came out. It was, however, the cleanest crazy-person-live-emotion-sports-rant in the history of such rants.



Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
01/20/2014 @ 10:31:47 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:53:05 PM
The 49ers "survived" the Packers in the first round. I'm giving a slight edge to the Seahawks.


Missing a mugging in the endzone, and the most obvious hold in the history of the world on the most vital play in the game might have had something to do with that. Just saying.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 10:46:53 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:31:47 AM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:53:05 PM
The 49ers "survived" the Packers in the first round. I'm giving a slight edge to the Seahawks.


Missing a mugging in the endzone, and the most obvious hold in the history of the world on the most vital play in the game might have had something to do with that. Just saying.


because obviously those were the only non-calls that had any impact whatsoever on a game where the refs basically kept their flags in their belts the entire game.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 10:56:22 AM
 Quote this comment
Calling no penalties doesn't mean it was even.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 01:25:09 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:56:22 AM
Calling no penalties doesn't mean it was even.


emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - As Seen On The Internet
01/20/2014 @ 01:42:55 PM
 Quote this comment
I take it you disagree?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
01/20/2014 @ 01:59:34 PM
 Quote this comment
Well, I don't remember suggesting that somehow a 1-1 penalty score equates to both teams being treated equally, so I suppose we can agree on that football principal that always seems to be brought up in these situations. But I also know that given the physicality of the 49ers defense and the skill of the Packers QB that the likelihood that the 49ers didn't get away with any questionable non-called plays is probably fairly low. There were 5 penalties called (or rather accepted) the entire game. San Francisco averages 6.2 penalties per game and were only called for 2. My guess is that they probably were allowed to "just play" just as the Packers were.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/20/2014 2:01:14 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/20/2014 @ 02:39:51 PM
 Quote this comment
In other, non packers-opponents-are-always-getting-screwed-royally news, while Richard Sherman was getting blasted for calling Michael Crabtree a mediocre receiver, Bill Belichick was flat out accusing Wes Welker of deliberately taking out Aqib Talib, and virtually no one called out Belichick for anything. In other words, after a loss, Belichick baselessly slanders a player he used to coach and no one cares, and Richard Sherman is a thug for saying an opposing player isn't very good after a win. I don't expect Twitter to be level-headed, but commentators and writers you would hope could be a little more diligent in their reactions.

*just for clarification, I'm not saying that Richard Sherman's post-game actions were the shining example of how one should engage oneself after a win. I just think the reaction was a bit strong. And, for his part, Sherman called out his own fans for someone throwing food at Navorro Bowman as he was getting carted off the field, so he's not completely without class. It appears that he just really dislikes Michael Crabtree.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 4 times, last at 01/20/2014 2:47:14 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/21/2014 @ 02:51:08 PM
 Quote this comment
One was 5 seconds after an event 80% of the country was tuned in live for and saw happen in front of their own eyes. One was from a monday morning press conference.

I think there is a fair amount of false equivocation going on with this whole thing. Expecting people not to react to that is silly. Expecting the amount of people to react to that anywhere near an event that happened in a presser no one tuned in for, or, as Jason Whitlock mentioned (in his seemingly non stop effort to throw race cards all over the place), a hockey fight, is silly.

However, I have to say, I'm seeing way way way more people tilting at the "Richard Sherman is seen as Hitler" windmill, than I see people actually seeing him as Hitler. Almost everything I'm seeing is a reaction to a reaction that, IMO, largely didn't actually happen.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Resident Tech Support
01/21/2014 @ 03:33:08 PM
 Quote this comment
It was 2 seconds worth of trash talk 5 seconds after the biggest play of his career. Live TV or not, it got covered a ton by every media outlet for 2+ days and counting. Bill Belichick accusses an opposing player of deliberately trying to injure one of his players. Belichick's comments were unprovoked, mind you, while Erin Andrews asked Sherman "who was talking about you" (a different question like "tell me about that play" may have extinguished the whole situation, so in a certain since she set Sherman up). And yet the coverage of Sherman (and the social media reaction) would make you think that the Belichick thing didn't even happen.

Seen by millions or not, Belichick's comments were direct and specific about the character and intentions of a specific player about a specific play. The equivocation here might be false, but perhaps for the opposite reason than you probably intended. Honestly, Belichick should be the one getting fined here, essentially for slandering another player. In the real world, Welker would have legal grounds to sue Belichick for defamation of character. I suppose, though, that if the Patriots had won, this might be getting more play, but we'll probably never know. Either way, Belichick's comments irrespective of the comparison to Sherman, was probably the most classless, disgraceful thing that came out of the entire championship weekend and should be beneath one of the most respected coaches in NFL history, yet I'm sure no NFL writer or sports personality will ever ask him about it for the rest of his career; I guarantee you that Sherman's Rant will follow him where ever he goes. That's the double standard I'm talking about.

Regarding the reaction to the reaction, I'll admit that the it might have been equally over-the-top. But that's only because the initial reaction was over-the-top.. When you've got guys on ESPN practically in tears saying they would never let their kids act like that, that is a reaction worth reacting to. I'm not condoning Sherman's 2 sentence rant (and, well, the calmer, yet still crabtree-targeting comments later), but people need to get off their high horses. People immediately jumped to accuse Sherman of making it all about him and that his rant was calculated, when the only people making it about Sherman were the people sobbing about it afterwards. In summary, when the initial reaction is so unjustified, the reaction to that reaction is probably going to seem that much harsher. Basically, I think people need to cool the heck down. The Richard Sherman thing is basically a manufactured controversy.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 3 times, last at 01/21/2014 3:40:13 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Robots don't say 'ye'
01/21/2014 @ 03:45:55 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:33:08 PM
The Richard Sherman thing is basically a manufactured controversy.


I think a lot of it is a manufactured manufactured controversy. I've seen way more high horsing about people on high horses over this than I've seen people on high horses over this.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
01/21/2014 @ 04:48:16 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 03:45:55 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:33:08 PM
The Richard Sherman thing is basically a manufactured controversy.


I think a lot of it is a manufactured manufactured controversy. I've seen way more high horsing about people on high horses over this than I've seen people on high horses over this.


I'm not sure where you're looking, but I've seen far less high horsing of high horsing then I have of regular high horsing. I mean, I know you can't trust twitter to be level-headed, but his name has been trending for 48 hours now, and most of what I've seen on there isn't exactly flattering to Mr. Sherman.

I'm usually the guy who is all over the Richard Sherman's of the sports world. In fact, when the play in question happened, I was first excited, but then I saw him run over and get in Crabtree's face and it upset me a little bit. I didn't think much about the interview except that it was a bit hilarious (at the time). I'm not sure what it was, but there was something about this particular instance that rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe I've turned over a new leaf of not piling on guys when they are down. I mean, on that facebook post from ESPN 1500, one guy responded to my comment saying I was 100% right, and another guy responded saying I was an f'ing racist idiot while at the same time blasting Sherman for lacking professionalism, or something like that. On a deeper level, I'd say Sherman has a hatchet to bury with Michael Crabtree. If he is indeed the kind of guy who gets down on his knees and prays when he sees a fellow play hurt the way Bowman was, then he probably also needs to check whatever bitterness caused him to explode like that in the first place.

*update: Richard Sherman is no longer trending (4:58 pm)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 6 times, last at 01/21/2014 4:58:21 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/21/2014 @ 05:01:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott is referring to an article here:

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/How_does_Richard_Shermans_reaction_compare_to_Mike_Zimmers_cursing012014

I don't see the "you're a racist" comment. Are you talking about the comment that starts, "Scott, I lost a bit of respect for you here. I only have time to give you a short response. You come off here a someone with misplaced white guilt."? If so I'm guessing he was talking about the author of the article, who is also named Scott.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
01/21/2014 @ 05:07:40 PM
 Quote this comment
It was on the facebook link that I got from your timeline. I don't know how to link to it, but here's the text:

Aaron Landon Scott Matson ....he gets paid extremely well to be a professional. Way more than I do. And his job is in the publics eye. Mine is not, but had I acted like that at my job, and degraded another in the work place, even though I would not of been being watched by millions........I would of got fired. If you take a job as a professional....act like one. That was not professional, keep your emotions in check, he knew he was on tv. If you cant even control your emotions at times like that, you are not a professional........and that had nothing to do with the fact that hes black and has dreadlocks......that's the dumbest fuckin thing ive heard
15 hours ago · Like

upon further reading, he might be directing his "nothing to do with he's black and has dreads" comment towards the author, but the comment was explicitly directed towards my comment. I'm not sure if he though my comment was the dumbest f'ing thing he's ever heard, or the article, or the fact that he's is so much more f'ing professional than Mr. Sherman.


*****************
Here was the comment that Mr Aaron Landon was referring to:
I can't figure out exactly what everyone was so upset about in the first place. Shove a mic in the face of a well known emotional and dramatically outspoken guy right after he made a career defining play at the most impactful point of a game against a receiver that he apparently has a really bad history with and you have to expect a certain degree of unexpectedness. I'm not saying I condone it, but people need to adjust their expectations, especially since a lot of the people freaking out are a big reason why we have sideline reporting in the first place. In other words, people have asked for this kind of spectical, and then freak out when something like this happens.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 01/21/2014 5:10:41 pm
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
01/21/2014 @ 05:16:06 PM
 Quote this comment
There's also a chance I am directing my rage to the Twitter/facebook world at large, which is probably about as productive as having an argument with a kicthen table. But I think there is some legitimacy to the rage. I generally don't considering it "high horsing" when some is calling someone else out for "high horsing". Unless you are calling them out by flat out saying "I'm a better person for you for NOT piling on", which there may have been a decent amount of that going on. In that case you might be right about the recursive high horsing. I'm trying to avoid that aspect of it, but I'll call out high horsing when I see it, depending on the height of said horsing.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/21/2014 5:16:55 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
01/21/2014 @ 05:20:02 PM
 Quote this comment
I guess we'd need to define terms, such as "vilification", which was the one used in the above article. Is it "vilification" if 40-100 million "Stay classy, Sherman", "What a jerk", "So Sherman is kind of a crazy person eh" type tweets go out? Let's even assume, for the sake of argument, that there was no pro Sherman tweets, and that none of the lingering trending was talking about the talking about the Sherman thing. They're all people reacting is a less than flattering nature to the original incident. Those are all still, at their core, individual people taking 4 seconds to say something, and then a vast vast majority of them moved on with their lives. Of course there's a time and place to consider the impact you have as one piece of the giant machine, but I don't know if I'd count that as vilification worthy of 392238 rebuttals to an argument that never really got made.

Yes, deadspin and others have dug up some truly terrible things said about Sherman, but there's a quarter of a billion people on there, you're going to find scum on everything, they're not representative, or even indicative of an issue. I don't see the mounting argument being made anywhere that Sherman is an irredeemable human being who represents everything wrong with sports and humanity, that those comments have no place in society, thus we should cast Sherman from it. All I really see is millions of people each taking 4 seconds to say "Lolz, what a tool".

As for Aaron Landon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/21/2014 5:22:54 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/21/2014 @ 05:24:35 PM
 Quote this comment
That's a good point about the Twitterverse in general. One of the things I brought up in addition was the blubbering by the national media, especially right away and not knowing what exactly went on between Sherman and Erin Andrews, or between Crabtree and Sherman. Anyway, I'm moving on too.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i
01/21/2014 @ 05:39:22 PM
 Quote this comment
One thing I'm left with is I have seen a lot of the, "well we want them to say more than cliches, and then freak out every time something like this happens" arguments. I'll think the same things too once in a while. However, I do have to remind myself that there's a middle ground between "Well, you know, that other team is the best there is, and we were fortunate to make a couple more plays than they did today." and "I'm the best, they suck."

Cliches are boring, and I think we'd all like to see more genuine emotion, but those aren't the only options. What about, for example, unbridled joy? Either way it's not like there was any kind of implied immunity for saying stupid things.

Also, while we're on it, Belichick is King of the say nothing cliche interviews, and if widely critizied for it. So, by that line of thinking, he shouldn't be criticized for saying the stuff about Welker.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 1 bajillion posts
01/21/2014 @ 09:18:19 PM
 Quote this comment
I didn't read most of the comments here...or many on twitter, etc. I haven't listened to too much of the media either because I just don't do that too much these days.

But here are my thoughts. I thought his initial interview was unfortunate and off-putting. It was also something worthy of about a minute, maybe five or ten, of discussion and then could easily have been set aside while everyone resumed their normal lives. That's not to say you couldn't have a really worthwhile long conversation about it...I'm just not sure I've heard/read any.

But since everyone is dissecting it into a million pieces, I'll gladly join in!

1. When I say it was unfortunate and off-putting, it's because of the content. He managed to declare himself the best and also verbally kick his opponent while he was down, all in the matter of a few seconds. That's a lot of pride/arrogance and sore-winner-ship to pack into one half-interview. I mean, John Hollinger would need to develop a new formula to properly measure that type of efficiency. Anyway, people seem to focus a lot of the discussion on how intense he was or that he was scary or something, but it's really about the message that he was delivering. The delivery itself just accentuated it. A crazy sounding positive/neutral interview would have been a short-lived novelty on you tube, but probably not much else. A calm interview where he said the same things he said would have still created tons of angst because it's just not pleasant.

Meh, I'm going to leave it at just one point because it's not worth much more. Except this...there are good arguments to be made for people calming down about this, but why do people feel like one of those arguments is that Sherman went to Stanford and had notable academic achievements/pursuits? How does that matter? What is the implication here? Are intelligent, scholarly people immune from criticism for bad behavior or lapses in judgment? I feel like what these people are trying to do is "shatter your preconceived notions of what that scary dreadlocked athlete is" by encouraging you to embrace your preconceived notion of Stanford students as mild mannered, bookish folks who couldn't possibly be anything like the rest of those football players.
In other words, they're telling us, "See? He doesn't fit in the pigeon hole you made for him! He fits in this one we made for him!"
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - infinity + 1 posts
01/21/2014 @ 09:28:38 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:33:08 PM
... Belichick's comments were unprovoked, mind you, while Erin Andrews asked Sherman "who was talking about you" (a different question like "tell me about that play" may have extinguished the whole situation, so in a certain since she set Sherman up). ...


Also, to nitpick a bit, I would say it's not Erin Andrews' job to extinguish it unless it was going in some really bad direction. As it was, he broached the topic of people talking about him and she understandably asked for a follow-up. At least that's how I remember it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jon screwed with this at 01/21/2014 9:29:54 pm
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
01/22/2014 @ 10:00:47 AM
 Quote this comment
Jon Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:28:38 PM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:33:08 PM
... Belichick's comments were unprovoked, mind you, while Erin Andrews asked Sherman "who was talking about you" (a different question like "tell me about that play" may have extinguished the whole situation, so in a certain since she set Sherman up). ...


Also, to nitpick a bit, I would say it's not Erin Andrews' job to extinguish it unless it was going in some really bad direction. As it was, he broached the topic of people talking about him and she understandably asked for a follow-up. At least that's how I remember it.


I didn't mean for it come across that I was suggesting that Andrews was somehow responsible for it. I was just contrasting that he didn't just give up the "Crabtree" thing as opposed to Belichick essentially starting his press conference (20 hours after the fact, when he had ample time to decide exactly what he was going to say) with "Wes Welker is guilty of the most intentionally dirty play I've ever seen. To her credit, she said that she never felt like things were out of control and that she wanted to continue the interview. Her handlers pulled the plug on it, which she speculated was because of fear that the language might have gone sour if it continued. According to Andrews, she said that Sherman "lost his mind and it was awesome."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i
01/22/2014 @ 12:07:01 PM
 Quote this comment
Jon Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:18:19 PM
Except this...there are good arguments to be made for people calming down about this, but why do people feel like one of those arguments is that Sherman went to Stanford and had notable academic achievements/pursuits? How does that matter? What is the implication here? Are intelligent, scholarly people immune from criticism for bad behavior or lapses in judgment? I feel like what these people are trying to do is "shatter your preconceived notions of what that scary dreadlocked athlete is" by encouraging you to embrace your preconceived notion of Stanford students as mild mannered, bookish folks who couldn't possibly be anything like the rest of those football players.
In other words, they're telling us, "See? He doesn't fit in the pigeon hole you made for him! He fits in this one we made for him!"


628452.jpg
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/22/2014 @ 12:09:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:00:47 AM
Jon Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:28:38 PM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:33:08 PM
... Belichick's comments were unprovoked, mind you, while Erin Andrews asked Sherman "who was talking about you" (a different question like "tell me about that play" may have extinguished the whole situation, so in a certain since she set Sherman up). ...


Also, to nitpick a bit, I would say it's not Erin Andrews' job to extinguish it unless it was going in some really bad direction. As it was, he broached the topic of people talking about him and she understandably asked for a follow-up. At least that's how I remember it.


I didn't mean for it come across that I was suggesting that Andrews was somehow responsible for it. I was just contrasting that he didn't just give up the "Crabtree" thing as opposed to Belichick essentially starting his press conference (20 hours after the fact, when he had ample time to decide exactly what he was going to say) with "Wes Welker is guilty of the most intentionally dirty play I've ever seen. To her credit, she said that she never felt like things were out of control and that she wanted to continue the interview. Her handlers pulled the plug on it, which she speculated was because of fear that the language might have gone sour if it continued. According to Andrews, she said that Sherman "lost his mind and it was awesome."


Andrews: “Richard, let me ask you about the final play. Take me through it.”
Sherman: “Well, I’m the best corner in the game. When you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree, that’s the result you’re going to get. Don’t you ever talk about me.”
Andrews: “Who was talking about you?”
Sherman: “Crabtree. Don’t you open your mouth about the best. Or I’m ma shut it for you real quick. L.O.B. ” (Legion of boom, the nickname of the Seahawks secondary)
Andrews: “Alright, before … and, Joe, back over to you.”
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/22/2014 12:14:17 pm
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
01/22/2014 @ 01:34:04 PM
 Quote this comment
Ah, so apparently I was wrong about when the crabtree reference was or wasn't solicited (although perhaps that was how he saw the final play "i'm the best, he's not good, and you saw what happened"--that last part was mostly tongue in cheek). Based on her take from the Dan Patrick show, the "alright, before...and joe, back over to you", must have been them going "cut it! Cut It! Cut it! kill it with fire!" She also said that she was initially torn between moving on and getting him to talk about the play specifically; (which obviously is a decision that can only last about .02 seconds). She didn't want people to get the impression that she or others in the media were talking about him. All that being said, we don't know what went on between the Sherman and Crabtree during the game, although Sherman later mentioned that it went back to Crabtree getting in a fight with Sherman at some offseason charity event.

Either way, if someone is going to create a meme calling Sherman an asshole, than Belichick deserves an equally snarky and vulgar comment basically saying the same thing. He had an entire day to think about what he was going to say, and he did a ton worse to the character of his target than Sherman did of Crabtree. To borrow Trent Dilfer's post game cryfest, I probably don't want my kids to act the way Sherman did, but I would be much more upset if my kids baselessly accused someone else of something so egregious as intentionally trying to hurt someone. In summary, if Sherman is an asshole, then by the standards that people are using to assign that characteristic to him, so is Belichick.*

*I am seeing that as the week goes on, more sources are calling out Belichick for his classlessness. Although for his part, he apparently is unrepentant.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/22/2014 1:40:21 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/22/2014 @ 02:40:50 PM
 Quote this comment
Here's another question for thought: if Sherman was on your team and instead of celebrating a big play by calling out an opponent on live TV, he mimed an act of dropping his pants and wiping his now pretend naked bottom on the opposing team's goalpost (in their stadium no less, also on live TV), and then the the announcer called said act "disgusting", what would your reaction be to the initial reaction, and then to the reaction to whether the initial reaction was over the top, and not to mention the player himself?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this 3 times, last at 01/22/2014 2:42:16 pm
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
01/22/2014 @ 03:10:01 PM
 Quote this comment
Jon Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:18:19 PM
Anyway, people seem to focus a lot of the discussion on how intense he was or that he was scary or something, but it's really about the message that he was delivering. The delivery itself just accentuated it. A crazy sounding positive/neutral interview would have been a short-lived novelty on you tube, but probably not much else. A calm interview where he said the same things he said would have still created tons of angst because it's just not pleasant.


I have another question, this time for Jon. Do you think the setting was important to people remembering it? In other words, being on live national TV right after a highly viewed sporting event? And that even if he was calm about it the reaction would have been just as angst-filled? And if so, do you think people in general would have reacted the same way if Bill Belichick's comment had come during a post-game on field interview, in his typical calm and seemingly icy way of delivering his responses?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - 3354 Posts
01/22/2014 @ 04:24:32 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 01:34:04 PM
Either way, if someone is going to create a meme calling Sherman an asshole, than Belichick deserves an equally snarky and vulgar comment basically saying the same thing.


Isn't it already widely known and accepted that Belichick is an asshole?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - many posts
01/22/2014 @ 09:05:02 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:10:01 PM
I have another question, this time for Jon. Do you think the setting was important to people remembering it? In other words, being on live national TV right after a highly viewed sporting event? And that even if he was calm about it the reaction would have been just as angst-filled?


Not "just as" angst-filled, but people would still react strongly to it. I liken it in some ways to radio waves, though admittedly I know very little about them and I'm making up the analogy as I go. The unusual way he delivered his message is sort of like the carrier wave. It's what allowed his message to travel as far and wide as it did.

Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:10:01 PM
And if so, do you think people in general would have reacted the same way if Bill Belichick's comment had come during a post-game on field interview, in his typical calm and seemingly icy way of delivering his responses?


A larger more interested audience definitely would have garnered more attention to his comments, but I don't know how it would have played out. He's not really the first coach to question an opponent's motives when his own player was injured. Dare I say there's something understandable to that sentiment from a coach? Especially if it came right away. (Not that it makes it right, blah blah, disclaimer blah).

I'm out of time so I'm ending this comment for now.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.