Mike Pereira: Gruden Is A Blowhard

[Scott Campbell]

The other thing is, whether you like Gruden or not, he's out there apparently vying for a HC job. Who is this jerk to start ripping the shit out of him as he begins the process.

He's the guy who just made it tougher. I imagine that some owners prefer to hire coaches that know the rules.

[Zool]

I get exhausted just listening to Gruden. I can't think of anyone else who drones on and on as much, while saying so little of substance. His use of superlatives is excessive. He makes a lot of mistakes and comes across to me as a bit unprepared most of the time. Wasn't he the one who referred to the Packers being a great screen team? Maybe 8+ years ago they were, but they haven't been for a long time.

This ^

Gruden rambles on about nothing. When are we going to get the option to mute the announcers and not the game audio?

[Cheesehead Craig]

Ok, I just went to Gruden's wikipedia page. There a line on it about what happened after his Super Bowl win that's I had to share.

"With no emerging talent in the fold and no money to afford replacements, the team was decimated by injuries to many of the Super Bowl stars, including Joe Jurevicius, Nigger, Greg Spires, Shelton Quarles, Charlie Sheen and Brian Kelly"

Here's the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Gruden The line I referenced is about half way down the page.

You know, I don't remember players by all those names on the team.

[sharpe1027]

Not sure what specific comment you are refering too, but Gruden would do no such thing. Yes, he is on the side of more aggressive football, but these things are subjective. I have agreed with every objection I've heard from Gruden. Gruden knows the rules and respects the intention of the rules, he just sides with a more "let them play" interpretation.

The comment about not understanding why the penalty flag was thrown when a WR got hit helmet-to-helmet. He either is advocating for helmet to helmet hits or he is an idiot that can't figure out when a helmet to helmet hit occurs or why it is a flag. From the article:

THE PLAY: Saints quarterback Drew Brees completes a 9-yard pass to Marques Colston. Atlanta’s Curtis Lofton is called for an illegal hit on a defenseless receiver. Lofton hit Colston helmet-to-helmet, which was acknowledged by ESPN play-by-play announcer Mike Tirico. Replays clearly confirmed the helmet-to-helmet contact before Colston had completed the catch and clearly become a runner.

GRUDEN’S COMMENTS: “I don’t know. Going to get Lofton for spearing. I’d throw the ball every play if that’s a penalty. Hopkins is entitled to play in the middle of the field.”

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/m...-saints-122811

[pbmax]

I get exhausted just listening to Gruden. I can't think of anyone else who drones on and on as much, while saying so little of substance. His use of superlatives is excessive. He makes a lot of mistakes and comes across to me as a bit unprepared most of the time. Wasn't he the one who referred to the Packers being a great screen team? Maybe 8+ years ago they were, but they haven't been for a long time.

It has escaped almost everyone's attention, but the screen game is working again (this does not explain Gruden's comments as its a recent and fitful development). But sometimes it seems like the M3 forgets it as well.

Seriously, the screens this year have been as productive as they were prior to McCarthy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The comment about not understanding why the penalty flag was thrown when a WR got hit helmet-to-helmet. He either is advocating for helmet to helmet hits or he is an idiot that can't figure out when a helmet to helmet hit occurs or why it is a flag. From the article:

THE PLAY: Saints quarterback Drew Brees completes a 9-yard pass to Marques Colston. Atlanta’s Curtis Lofton is called for an illegal hit on a defenseless receiver. Lofton hit Colston helmet-to-helmet, which was acknowledged by ESPN play-by-play announcer Mike Tirico. Replays clearly confirmed the helmet-to-helmet contact before Colston had completed the catch and clearly become a runner.

GRUDEN’S COMMENTS: “I don’t know. Going to get Lofton for spearing. I’d throw the ball every play if that’s a penalty. Hopkins is entitled to play in the middle of the field.”

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/m...-saints-122811

OK, I remember that play exactly, I agree 1000% with Gruden, if such a thing is possible. There was a slight contact with the face mask of the receiver. It was NOT a blow to the head by any sane interpretation.

I agree Gruden is prone to exaggeration & bloviation, and like most national color commentators doesn't know teams as well as he postures. If you don't like him, fine, but Gruden is voice of reason when it comes to interpretation of the roughing penalties.

[Patler]

It has escaped almost everyone's attention, but the screen game is working again (this does not explain Gruden's comments as its a recent and fitful development). But sometimes it seems like the M3 forgets it as well.

Seriously, the screens this year have been as productive as they were prior to McCarthy.

I agree, the screens are working OK, and actually did at times last year too, but I think it is a lot because of "surprise" and not that the Packers run them particularly well. It seems a lot pick up yardage because they are not well defensed, but when defenders show up they are not particularly well blocked either. That said, there have been a couple long ones that were very well executed. Still, its not a big part of their offense. As somewhat of an indicator, last year and this year, backs will have about 70 receptions

Under Sherman. the Packers were a pretty darn good team running screens. The several different types of screens, all very effectively. It was a bread and butter play, that every defense knew was coming, but very few could stop. Linemen and backs were very adept at running them. As an indicator, under Sherman, backs routinely caught 110-120 passes.

[hoosier]

OK, I remember that play exactly, I agree 1000% with Gruden, if such a thing is possible. There was a slight contact with the face mask of the receiver. It was NOT a blow to the head by any sane interpretation.

The best angles are at 0:48-0:55. Lofton makes contact with the shoulder and the helmet (to Colston's helmet) at virtually the same time. If this is not hitting a defenseless receiver with the helmet and on the helmet, then those concepts have no meaning.

[sheepshead]

Ok, I agree the way Colstons head popped its a good call. Lofton could have easily wrapped him up. The tool calling out a super bowl winning coach is what creases me. Fuck that guy.

[sharpe1027]

OK, I remember that play exactly, I agree 1000% with Gruden, if such a thing is possible. There was a slight contact with the face mask of the receiver. It was NOT a blow to the head by any sane interpretation.

I agree Gruden is prone to exaggeration & bloviation, and like most national color commentators doesn't know teams as well as he postures. If you don't like him, fine, but Gruden is voice of reason when it comes to interpretation of the roughing penalties.

I strongly disagree. BF obaloo, the play was a textbook example of the type of hits they said they want to stop with the new rule. Take another look at the play, then take a look at the examples the NFL provided in the video at the front of Pereira's article. Links to both videos are in this thread.

[hoosier]

Ok, I agree the way Colstons head popped its a good call. Lofton could have easily wrapped him up. The tool calling out a super bowl winning coach is what creases me. Fuck that guy.

Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl too.

[mraynrand]

Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl too.

[sharpe1027]

Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl too.

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.

[Patler]

Announcers like Gruden routinely criticize the work performance of players, coaches, and officials. I have absolutely no problem with someone criticizing the performance of an announcer. The fact that he is a former coach, a Super Bowl winner or anything else is irrelevant, in my opinion.

Pereira gave a detailed explanation of the two plays that Gruden had compared. Pereira gave a detailed analysis of why he finds great fault in the opinion given by Gruden about those plays. Pereira himself is now a columnist/analyst who has offered an opinion about Gruden. If Gruden or his supporters believe Pereira is wrong, they are free to point out errors in the description and analysis that Pereira has given.

[sheepshead]

What has Mike Pereira ever done besides be a dick?