Denny Green is a sore loser(video from post game)

[Dabaddestbear]

You tell me if this doesnt sound like somebody that is a sore loser. If you look at both Lovie Smith and Denny Green's interviews after the game either did the traditional the(insert opposing team here) played us well blah,blah,blah..ect. No one was giving the other team credit for anything. Lovie said something like "well good teams come across bumps in the road every now and then"....Denny Green says "Its sad when you know how to stop a team from getting a TD on you and you still lose".

Both videos can be seen on NFL.com but I got the unedited clip of green here from youtube. Cover your children's ears.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1h71vEQtCM

[]{ilr]3]

Sounds like a guy who is going to loose his job! :shock:

Thats just nuts! I thought he was going to burst into tears walking off the field. :cry:

[Rastak]

{ilr]3]Sounds like a guy who is going to loose his job! :shock:

Thats just nuts! I thought he was going to burst into tears walking off the field. :cry:


Man I completely agree, I've NEVER seen that look on his face and he coached in Minnesota for YEARS. I thought he really was gonna cry.
I've never seen such an "I'm fucked" look like that before.

[GrnBay007]

wow! not a good interview. :shock:

[Bretsky]

Thanks for posting; I never liked Denny when I thought he encouraged the Vikings to be arrogant and dirty at times. Still don't like him.

B

[gbpackfan]

I probably had that same look on my face when the Bears won. I had to eat a HUGE slice of crow pie and it tasted like shit! :D

[MJZiggy]

At least they couldn't say he gave the reporters platitudes without saying what was really on his mind. I'd hate to be working in that film room today...

[chewy-bacca]

To lose that game the way they did, on the 1st Monday night in how long for them..........I would be looking for a loaded gun.

I will say this, I knew going into the half that 20 was not gonna do it.

stupid effing bears

[lord favre]

I still don't get who he thought they were?

Did he think they were weak hearted and would give up after 45 minutes?

Did he think they couldn't stop James? (36 carries for 55 yards..an NFL record for futility)

Did he think the best wy to defend Urlacher was to not block him at all in the 4th quarter?

Did he think by going into a prevent offense for the whole second half was a winning formula?

Same ol shit from this fat assed blow hard that we all witnessed in Minny for years. A team full of talent but with no heart like their coach. A little adversity and watch em fold, just like the good old days.

[GoPack06]

It just seems like he was super pissed, not a sore loser. Its not really his fault they lost. The Bears needed two late fumbles for Td's, a punt return for a TD and a missed very makeable field goal to win.

[BEARMAN]

I kinda feel sorry for them(cards), they played their harts out. I never expected the cards to come with a game plan that stopped DA BEARS in their tracks. Our defence looked horrid the first half. I do have to say one thing, they allowed the BEARS to hang around too long and had several opportunities to put that game away and didn't. The cards also played way to conservative the second half and DA BEARS defence took advantage of that fact.
This will be a gut check for DA BEARS. I am accualy glad they won this way, it will bring them back to the ground and realise they need to play with more intensity all 4 quarters. Cutos to the cards, they game planned this game very well, played us very hard, just did not play to win in the second half.

GO BEARS ! 6 an 0 BABY !

[Lurker64]

I think Denny is on sort of uncharted ground. Never before in sports have I seen such an epic and unparalleled choke by a team. He certainly can't be happy about his team setting a new standard for choking.

Still, his postgame interview is at the same time scary, befuddling, and kind of funny. I just wish he told us who he thought they were.

[Dabaddestbear]

I think Denny Green game planned for this game more than any other. He has just gone mad! I never seen an interview from an opposing coach like that before. I think he hates the Bears more than any team right now.

But I have to take my hats off to the Cards players. They played hard and the rookie showed the same poise as a vetran. Although a mojority of his passes were only 5 yard dumps or less. Urlacher was a beast. The guy had 19 tackles!!

[BEARMAN]

Redbirds, meet Mr. Brian Urlacher, IL for the Chicago BEARS !


GO BEARS ! 6 an 0 BABY !

[Partial]

I think Denny is on sort of uncharted ground. Never before in sports have I seen such an epic and unparalleled choke by a team. He certainly can't be happy about his team setting a new standard for choking.

Still, his postgame interview is at the same time scary, befuddling, and kind of funny. I just wish he told us who he thought they were.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Lurker comes through again!!

[Little Whiskey]

now maybe the national media will take chicago's dick out of their mouth!! if you watched any of the pregame you'd have thought they might as well size them up for their rings now. even better was the crow micheal irving must be eating after saying that the cards have no chance and shouldn't even suit up for the game. idiot!!

[Tarlam!]

He's been watching German soccer interviews. This stuff was made famous by an Italian coach here about a decade ago.

I loved the interview. It's like replacing the Goalie in hockey - a huge insult to the players. I remember in a world cup a few years back when Finland was beating Sweden by 4 goals or something ridiculous.

Coach replaces the goalie and te Swedes rallied and won. I was with a Fin at the time, he knew when they took out the goalie, the game would turn.

Green just replaced the goalie....Let's see what happens....

[BooHoo]

I thought the birds had it won. Denny thought so to. He was probably looking ahead for the the post game interviews and the week of feeling like winners. At the last minutes they lose the game. I was impressed with the birds QB Matt. He played well, especially for a rookie.

[ahaha]

The Cardinals have choked BAD in three games now. In week three, Warner fumbled at the Rams 18 yd line with under two minutes to go and down by two points. Last week they gave up an early 14 pt lead and a 10 pt lead going into the fourth quarter, and then missed a 51 yd FG to tie at the end of the game. And of course, last night's supreme choke job.
It's perfectly understandable why Green would be so pissed at last night's news conference. His team should be 4-2, and instead they're 1-5 and Green is in real danger of losing his job at the end of the season.

[swede]

I went to bed after Anderson had stripped Leinert and chicago scored (My God that Anderson is a beast! I'm so envious.) and AZ and da bears had exchanged 3 and outs with time down to about 10 minutes. I thought da bears had blown their last chance to pull the game out down 10-23 with 10 minutes left and back on D.

I have a hard time being a Bear hater this year. What's gotten into me?

I think it's because they are so much better than us right now that the rivalry thing is temporarily not as meaningful. I'll get my hate back on a little closer to Christmas-time though.

Didn't see the Green interview but he would have been better off straight losing big to Chicago than blowing a big lead like that.

[ahaha]

Something else that really bothered me during last night's game.

2-3-CHI24 (1:04) E.James left tackle to CHI 22 for 2 yards (A.Boone).
3-1-CHI22 (:58) E.James up the middle to CHI 23 for -1 yards (I.Idonije).

The Cardinals had marched down the field through the passing game and still had a minute left at Chicago's 24. Instead of trying a few more short passes to set up a "gimmie" field goal, Green decides to go into "completely conservative" mode. He decides to give the ball to the run game, which had been so overwhelmingly AWFUL in the second half. Predictably, they get one yard on two plays and settle for a 40 yd attempt. I was screaming at the T.V. that you can't COUNT on a kicker to make a game winning FG from 35 or more yards, especially after he'd missed one earlier in the game.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Something else that really bothered me during last night's game.

2-3-CHI24 (1:04) E.James left tackle to CHI 22 for 2 yards (A.Boone).
3-1-CHI22 (:58) E.James up the middle to CHI 23 for -1 yards (I.Idonije).

The Cardinals had marched down the field through the passing game and still had a minute left at Chicago's 24. Instead of trying a few more short passes to set up a "gimmie" field goal, Green decides to go into "completely conservative" mode. He decides to give the ball to the run game, which had been so overwhelmingly AWFUL in the second half. Predictably, they get one yard on two plays and settle for a 40 yd attempt. I was screaming at the T.V. that you can't COUNT on a kicker to make a game winning FG from 35 or more yards, especially after he'd missed one earlier in the game.

ahaha,

No doubt. It's one of biggest pet peeves in football. When you are still at the 25 yard line, you have to try to get more yards. Hasn't anybody learned from Marty Schottenheimer?

[Patler]

I was kind of torn between run and pass myself at that point, especially on third down. The second down run might have caught somone flat footed, thinking a fake run and quick pass. It kept the clock running and did net two yards. But the third down fooled no one. They merely conceded the down to use up whatever time they could.

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

[ahaha]

I was kind of torn between run and pass myself at that point, especially on third down. The second down run might have caught somone flat footed, thinking a fake run and quick pass. It kept the clock running and did net two yards. But the third down fooled no one. They merely conceded the down to use up whatever time they could.

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

A 40 yd FG is usually a "gimmie", but not when it's a game winner. Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

[Patler]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."

[HarveyWallbangers]

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

Rackers missed a 51 yarder last week that would have sent them to OT--which is makeable for someone who is 9 of 14 in his career from 50+. Knowing that, wouldn't the coach want to get him as close as he could. Hell, there was enough time to get him inside 30 yard range.

[ahaha]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."

The odds go down because the quarterback doesn't have to make a play. He doesn't need to force a ball into coverage, and if there's pressure he can throw it away with ease. Plus, James had already fumbled in the same situation. They were trying to salt the game away with the running game when James got stacked up, and two Bears combined to rip it out of his grasp. Turnovers can happen on any play in the game. Coaches can't let that stop them from increasing their chances of winning. Just make sure the quarterback knows the situation and plays smart.

[Patler]

The odds go down because the quarterback doesn't have to make a play. He doesn't need to force a ball into coverage, and if there's pressure he can throw it away with ease. Plus, James had already fumbled in the same situation. They were trying to salt the game away with the running game when James got stacked up, and two Bears combined to rip it out of his grasp. Turnovers can happen on any play in the game. Coaches can't let that stop them from increasing their chances of winning. Just make sure the quarterback knows the situation and plays smart.

As I wrote early, the run on second down did not bother me, but I would like to have seen a pass on 3rd down. Even so, I can't really fault Green's thinking too much, passes run a lot of risks.

If the QB doesn't even have a chance to throw it away, gets blasted and fumbles before he can set up as Leinart had earlier, or has the ball slapped from his hand as Favre did a week ago, a pass play can go awry even without an interception. Or, the rookie QB can misread a defense or coverage and throw an interception. Leinert also had several passes tipped last night, so a safe throw to a wide open receiver can quickly become a tipped interception too. Finally, a sack moves you into even more precarious fieldgoal territory.

Putting the game in the hands (or feet!) of a veteran fieldgoal kicker for a relatively short 40 yarder SHOULD be a fairly safe thing. No comparison between the 40 yarder last night, and a 52 yarder the week before. Anything over 50 yards is not much more than a 50-50 proposition, regardless. A miss from 40 yards by a strong and reliable kicker is an oddity.

If he had called a pass, and Leinert fumbled, threw an interception or was sacked making it a 47 or 48 yard missed attempt, Green would now be called an idiot for giving up the "sure thing" on a 40 yard field goal.

[ahaha]

I like arguing with you Patler. You're very respectful and make good points supported with convicing examples.
Either way, Green could be second guessed if they lose. It's an age old argument on whether to be conservative or aggresive in this situation and both sides can show examples of why they're right. Mine would be Shottenheimer's play-off loss to the Jets a few years back, and the Packers loss to the Bears in '00 or '01, I can't remember exactly. Mistakes happen, and Rackers should have made that field goal. To me it comes down to odds. I'd rather they try to pass for more yards, while stressing to Leinert that he doesn't have to make a play, and if the short pass isn't there right away, just throw it away. To me, the odds in that situation, are better than running, which had already proved to be futile, and relying on a kicker to hit a 40yd game winner.

[Patler]

I like arguing with you Patler. You're very respectful and make good points supported with convicing examples.
Either way, Green could be second guessed if they lose. It's an age old argument on whether to be conservative or aggresive in this situation and both sides can show examples of why they're right. Mine would be Shottenheimer's play-off loss to the Jets a few years back, and the Packers loss to the Bears in '00 or '01, I can't remember exactly. Mistakes happen, and Rackers should have made that field goal. To me it comes down to odds. I'd rather they try to pass for more yards, while stressing to Leinert that he doesn't have to make a play, and if the short pass isn't there right away, just throw it away. To me, the odds in that situation, are better than running, which had already proved to be futile, and relying on a kicker to hit a 40yd game winner.

I don't disagree, actually. However, I don't think the second down run was a completely bad call under the circumstances. I believe they had passed every down in the drive so far, and it could have crossed up the Bears and picked up a first down. They didn't need a long run, just three yards, and at first I thought they might get it. But, the run on third down was "giving up" in a way. I would like to have seen a pass in that situation, if only because the aggressive call might have caught the Bears off guard enough to complete the pass for a 1st down, especially with playaction.

But, as you noted, the fact that they lost made second guessing a certainty. If the fieldgoal was made, nothing would be said.

I guess I don't look at a 40 yard FG as that big of a risk. To me it really isn't much less makable than a 35 yarder, but is a much greater certainty than a 45 yarder, for example. It seems as if the percentages change at around 43-45 yards and beyond.

It's amazing that it came down to that. Two defensive TDs and a punt return TD, all in the same game to get a 1 point lead when the offense can't score a TD. Pretty amazing.

[Rastak]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."


I agree with Patler's point. I'd run the ball, Rackers normally is a very accurate kicker from 40. If Leinart get's sacked they're screwed. If he gets picked they're screwed. I understand perfectly the argument to pass but Rackers should have made the damn field goal.

[Patler]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."


I agree with Patler's point. I'd run the ball, Rackers normally is a very accurate kicker from 40. If Leinart get's sacked they're screwed. If he gets picked they're screwed. I understand perfectly the argument to pass but Rackers should have made the damn field goal.

Realistically, if you can't trust your kicker to make a 40 yarder in that situation, what good is he? I'm sure the Viking's FG kicker :cry: would have made it! He certainly has routinely in the past.

[chewy-bacca]

I have a hard time being a Bear hater this year. What's gotten into me?

I think it's because they are so much better than us right now that the rivalry thing is temporarily not as meaningful. I'll get my hate back on a little closer to Christmas-time though.




that crap last night made it pretty easy for me to keep on the hate. All the shutout talk and how bad they were gonna beat the Cards, it was working out so nice. :mad:

[SD GB fan]

cards beat bears..actually demolished the bears in the preseason. thats why he said "we knew who they were." as in they shud have beaten them because both sides played their starters for a long time in that preseason game. i'd be pissed too

[FavreChild]

Nothing wrong with expressing emotion and frustration - so long as the feelings are directed to the rightful recipients. And Denny's not taking cheap shots at the Bears - he's focusing on his own team's incompetence and failure to execute "what they knew" about the Bears.

So I am not bothered by these comments, but I don't approve of his scapegoating and lack of personal accountability for the debacle.

[mraynrand]

If he had called a pass, and Leinert fumbled, threw an interception or was sacked making it a 47 or 48 yard missed attempt, Green would now be called an idiot for giving up the "sure thing" on a 40 yard field goal.

In Green Bay, they just blame the QB.

[mraynrand]

I think Denny is on sort of uncharted ground. Never before in sports have I seen such an epic and unparalleled choke by a team. He certainly can't be happy about his team setting a new standard for choking.

Perhaps you missed the NFC Championship game in 1998. Denny Green is well educated in the school of incredible choke jobs.

[billy_oliver880]

I would prolly do the same thing in an interview if I was in his position. Except maybe throw stuff too. Perhaps drop a few F-bombs. Do they force coaches to do interviews cause if I was him I would have never came out there. I would be too busy kicking some ass.

[FavreChild]

Are you Bobby Knight? :mrgreen: