Mike Pereira: Gruden Is A Blowhard

[mraynrand]

Good call. I'll go one better. John Madden. Say what you want about his coaching results, he had some serious head scratchers as an announcer.

circa 1997:
John: "Hey Pat, do you know what flows into the Bay of Green Bay?"
Pat: "Water"
John: "Well, yeah, I know that. It's the Fox river!"


(Did you capture the subtle irony there? Madden broadcasts on FOX network and the Fox river flows into Green Bay. Scintillating, isn't it? Did you also notice Pat Summerall was suffering from dementia? or maybe he was just drunk.)

[Patler]

What has Mike Pereira ever done besides be a dick?

When was he a dick?
Personally, I like it when someone who really is an expert on the rules tells us what the rule really is. We are then each free to apply our own interpretation of the play in regard to the rules.

Gruden had a well-publicized reputation for a bad attitude on the sidelines. I think his disrespect for the officials then bleeds through in how he analyzes and describes the game action now. The fact that someone from the officials side may have a bit of a grudge against Gruden is no great shock, Gruden clearly has one agaiunst the officials. Pereira made no bones about it. He started his article by admitting that he does not and never did like Gruden.

Besides, Pereira is correct. If Gruden doesn't understand the differences between the two plays, he clearly is failing in a primary aspect of his job.

[sheepshead]

I dont like him, he calls Gruden names instead of showing some respect. Players and fellow coaches can call Gruden out, not this worm. Just my opinion.

Ok, here's my take. Instant replay has, in my opinion, let the rules evolve to where we now depend on it to make a call. They are written knowing full well the only way to call them is with a camera. The possession rules in the end zone for instance are a joke. We now depend so much on instant replay its taking away from the game. Again, just my opinion. This bozo deciding to make a second career out of second guessing his fellow refs just rubs me the wrong way. Again, maybe Im too much of a purest but it seems to me all this is taking the game down paths that are distracting. Maybe its time to do away with Instant replay and live with the calls on the field.

[mraynrand]

I dont like him, he calls Gruden names instead of showing some respect. Players and fellow coaches can call Gruden out, not this worm. Just my opinion.

Ok, here's my take. Instant replay has, in my opinion, let the rules evolve to where we now depend on it to make a call. They are written knowing full well the only way to call them is with a camera. The possession rules in the end zone for instance are a joke. We now depend so much on instant replay its taking away from the game. Again, just my opinion. This bozo deciding to make a second career out of second guessing his fellow refs just rubs me the wrong way. Again, maybe Im too much of a purest but it seems to me all this is taking the game down paths that are distracting. Maybe its time to do away with Instant replay and live with the calls on the field.

I don't really agree with your conclusions or recommendations. The problem isn't replay; the problem seems to be a new (set of) rules put in place to protect players from injury. Some of them are easy to interpret and enforce (kicking off from the 35) and some are difficult - hitting a QB below the knees and unprotected hits on players. Lurker is right about the unprotected player rule: the rule is clear, the consistency of the calls is not there yet. perhaps it will improve. To the point of this thread: Gruden should know the rule back and forth as an announcer and Pereira seems to have improved explaining the rules. Sometimes he's wrong too. We're imperfect beings.

As to eliminating IR? Not a chance:

This never happens if Rice's fumble was reviewed

[Patler]

I dont like him, he calls Gruden names instead of showing some respect. Players and fellow coaches can call Gruden out, not this worm. Just my opinion.

Ok, here's my take. Instant replay has, in my opinion, let the rules evolve to where we now depend on it to make a call. They are written knowing full well the only way to call them is with a camera. The possession rules in the end zone for instance are a joke. We now depend so much on instant replay its taking away from the game. Again, just my opinion. This bozo deciding to make a second career out of second guessing his fellow refs just rubs me the wrong way. Again, maybe Im too much of a purest but it seems to me all this is taking the game down paths that are distracting. Maybe its time to do away with Instant replay and live with the calls on the field.

Pereira was the head of officiating for the NFL for 11 years under two different titles. Before that, he was an NFL official and I would hazard to guess that before that he was probably a college official. His criticism of Gruden relates to Gruden's knowledge and application of the rules, and his relationship to officials when he was a coach. It seems to me Pereira is in a much better position to criticize Gruden in those areas than a coach or player would be.

I am not a big fan of instant replay either, never have been. However, I don't see that what Pereira is doing now is any different than what Gruden or other players and coaches have done when they take a second career of second guessing their fellow coaches and players. Gruden and other former coaches second guess present coaches, Aikman second guesses players and especially quarterbacks as do the many other former player broadcasters, Pereira second guesses officials. How is it any different? Each are providing analysis based on their area of expertise.

I suspect Fox has instructed Pereira to be more opinionated. When he first started he would simply state the rule, describe what the ref would look for in the replay and what would be needed to overturn the ruling on the field. He didn't offer his own opinion on the outcome. Now the braodcast crew often asks him explicitly for his opinion.

[sheepshead]

Seems to me Gruden just called it as he saw it. Grudens there for entertainment. If Goodell said something then maybe Pereira would have a point. Bottom line, I like Gruden a hell of a lot better then I do Mike Pereira.

[Fritz]

Man, I still can't watch that "catch" without throwing up in my mouth.

[Lurker64]

Seems to me Gruden just called it as he saw it. Grudens there for entertainment. If Goodell said something then maybe Pereira would have a point. Bottom line, I like Gruden a hell of a lot better then I do Mike Pereira.

The "call it like you see it" approach is much better when you actually know what you're talking about, which should be a prerequisite for being a paid football announcer.

Gruden is an ass for complaining about a rule he didn't even understand. Pereira may also be an ass for calling out Gruden like he did, but that doesn't make Gruden a non-ass.

[Patler]

Seems to me Gruden just called it as he saw it. Grudens there for entertainment. If Goodell said something then maybe Pereira would have a point. Bottom line, I like Gruden a hell of a lot better then I do Mike Pereira.

I don't understand your thinking with the reference to Goodell.

Pereira was hired by Fox for his expertise in the rules. It seems any issue that involves the rules is fair game for him. I don't particularly like the tone of his article, but the content of his analysis is good.

Of course, Gruden really rubs me the wrong way, and Pereira doesn't bother me one way or another.

[sheepshead]

Because what Gruden says doesnt matter except from a purely entertainment standpoint. He's a paid entertainer. Color guy on a football telecast. He gave his view of a hit. I dont agree with him either. But it should lie there. This twerp is way out over his skis calling Gruden names.

[Pugger]

Man, I still can't watch that "catch" without throwing up in my mouth.

I won't even open the clip!

[Patler]

Because what Gruden says doesnt matter except from a purely entertainment standpoint. He's a paid entertainer. Color guy on a football telecast. He gave his view of a hit. I dont agree with him either. But it should lie there. This twerp is way out over his skis calling Gruden names.

What Gruden says matters a great deal, because it furthers misunderstanding of the rules by fans who listen to him and assume he is knowledgeable about the rules. Pereira's main purpose is to educate the fan base about the rules. That is how he is used during games and it is the purpose of his regular columns. Identify errors in a TV analyst's discussion of the rules during a national broadcast is a valid subject for Pereira, in my opinion.

Pereira called Gruden a "blowhard" and a "windbag", which are accurate descriptions for Gruden's excessive talking, excessive verbal backslapping and his uniformed pontifications about the rules. Both are actually consistent with the theme of Peeira's article.

I find it interesting that you object to Pereira's name calling, but you have no hesitation to call Pereira names yourself ("dick", "bozo", "twerp"). Why is that?

[Fritz]

Everyone who disagrees with me is a dick, unless I like them.

[sheepshead]

What Gruden says matters a great deal, because it furthers misunderstanding of the rules by fans who listen to him and assume he is knowledgeable about the rules. Pereira's main purpose is to educate the fan base about the rules. That is how he is used during games and it is the purpose of his regular columns. Identify errors in a TV analyst's discussion of the rules during a national broadcast is a valid subject for Pereira, in my opinion.

Pereira called Gruden a "blowhard" and a "windbag", which are accurate descriptions for Gruden's excessive talking, excessive verbal backslapping and his uniformed pontifications about the rules. Both are actually consistent with the theme of Peeira's article.

I find it interesting that you object to Pereira's name calling, but you have no hesitation to call Pereira names yourself ("dick", "bozo", "twerp"). Why is that?

I dont like him. Enough already. Its a God damned opinion.

[Patler]

I dont like him. Enough already. Its a God damned opinion.

As is mine. Am I any less entitled to argue my opinion than you are yours? I have simply responded to your arguments/statements.

Personally, I don't find Gruden or any other announcer, coach or player to be a sacred cow off limits for criticism. They are in very public positions that rely on popularity for success. With that as a base, critique of their work will always be a part of their success and failure.

Gruden criticizes officials repeatedly both directly and indirectly, and did so in the game in question. It should come as no shock that a long time head of officiating might fight back a little.

You complained about Pereira "second guessing his fellow refs..." yet in this instance he is staunchly defending them against criticism from Gruden.