Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Belichick on Wes Welker: 'It was a deliberate play ... to take out Aqib'
CBS Sportsline ^ | 1-20-14 | By Josh Katzowitz | NFL Writer

Posted on 01/20/2014 6:53:19 AM PST by rawhide

For the second-straight season, the loss of Aqib Talib during the AFC title game affected the way the Patriots defense played the rest of the game, and not coincidentally, New England, without its No. 1 cornerback, lost to the Ravens last year and to the Broncos on Sunday.

As soon as Talib, who collided with Wes Welker while trailing Demaryius Thomas on a crossing route, was injured and had to leave the game, Denver quarterback Peyton Manning begin targeting Welker and cornerback Devin McCourty.

On Monday, Belichick said in his postseason press conference that Welker -- Belichick's former player who contributed mightily to New England for many seasons, mind you -- deliberately hurt Talib.

"The way that play turned out, I went back and watched it, which I didn't have a chance to [Sunday]," Belichick said Monday morning, via ESPN Boston. "It was a deliberate play by the receiver to take out Aqib. No attempt to get open. I'll let the league handle the discipline on that play, whatever they decide. It's one of the worst plays I've seen."

(Excerpt) Read more at cbssports.com ...


TOPICS: Sports
KEYWORDS: belichick; morewhinemrb; nfl; welker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last
To: SomeCallMeTim

It is not a clean block. You cannot argue with the rule. If the rule was different, that would be another case. If the receiver touches the ball first or catches it first, that is another case.

But if Welker slams into Talib BEFORE the receiver touches the ball, it is NOT a “clean block”, it is a penalty. It doesn’t make any difference whether it is a timing play or not, that is completely irrelevant to the point. It IS of course a timing play, but if he fails to execute the timing correctly, it doesn’t become a legal hit because he didn’t really mean to mis-time it. His intention has no bearing whatsoever.

Do not confuse the characterization of Welker’s hit as “illegal” (which it clearly is) with it being “dirty” or “intentional”. I am sure Wes didn’t mean to hit Talib before the ball was touched, and he sure didn’t try to injure him in my opinion.

The issue here is not whether or not the penalty was called. That is irrelevant. Did you even hear a single peep out of me about it not being called a penalty?

No. You couldn’t have, because I didn’t.

What I DO have an issue with is people STATING it was a “clean block” when it is 100% clearly and unequivocally NOT a “clean block”.

And this is not about having or not having sympathy for the Patriots, Belichick or starving children in Biafra. That is irrelevant here, who is looking for sympathy?

This related discussion on this thread is about the fact of what happened on that particular play and nothing else.


161 posted on 01/20/2014 8:10:24 PM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof

The video of both plays is available on this thread, or on links here.

Edelman didn’t hit helmet to helmet, nor did he target the guys head. He was blocking for a receiver running with the ball.

Welker didn’t hit helmet to helmet, nor did he target the guys head. He was also blocking for a receiver downfield.

But there was a difference - Welker wasn’t blocking for a ball carrier, but an eligible receiver who had not yet caught the ball. Why didn’t he catch the ball? Welkers pick had him so wide open...but watch the replay. The other receiver knew he had to cross so close to Wes that the guy was watching Wes and not the ball.

Really not that hard to see. Welker had a job on that play, and he did what he was supposed to do. Manning was late with the ball, and his delay put Welkers actions outside the rules. It happened fast, and the refs missed the call.

Instead of admitting it, some have gone to great lengths to compare it to a legal play. Doesn’t change the fact that it was an illegal pick.


162 posted on 01/20/2014 8:42:02 PM PST by LearnsFromMistakes (Yes, I am happy to see you. But that IS a gun in my pocket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
Good post at #106.
163 posted on 01/21/2014 3:44:47 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

I stand corrected. Was this a challengable play?

Zapruder would admire your work.


164 posted on 01/21/2014 7:00:09 AM PST by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

I’d think more of your analysis if you posted a pic showing the receiver, talib and welker in the same frame. Is it just my ipad? The pic you posted as evidence doesnt show welker and talib, just the receiver and the ref.


165 posted on 01/21/2014 7:23:38 AM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: LearnsFromMistakes

So, you don’t understand what Belichick is upset about it. He’s not upset at the officials for not throwing a flag. He’s upset at Welker for throwing what you, yourself, say is a clean block other than the timing. Belichick wants Welker fined, not the officials.

That’s why the Edelman block is relevant. Belichick is saying Welker delivered a cheap shot to take out his best corner. So if he’s going to make that charge, it’s no different than what Edelman did the series before and Edelman went higher.

I’m sorry that you don’t understand the nature of Belichick’s gripe. I can’t make it any clearer for you.


166 posted on 01/21/2014 7:37:01 AM PST by OrangeHoof (2001-2008: "Dissent Is Patriotism!" 2009-2016: "Dissent Is Racism!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: detective

“Even if the incomplete pass hit the receivers hand a fraction of a second after initial contact refs will not call it. It may technically be a penalty but it is almost never called. There is this kind of contact all the time on crossing routes over the middle.”

Agree. The pick play is football’s version of the “phantom tag at 2nd” in baseball’s double-play. It’s a play that seldom gets called, but you see it all the time.


167 posted on 01/21/2014 7:43:52 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Good reply , , , but dont forget, it is just a game for your entertainment.


168 posted on 01/21/2014 8:31:08 AM PST by ßuddaßudd (>> F U B O << "What the hell kind of country is this if I can only hate a man if he's white?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof

The same bump with a shoulder that is legal during most of the game becomes a cheap shot when outside the rules of the game. I would hope we can agree on that.

Had the defender been expecting a block, Welker’s block was completely legal. If a punt returner is waiting for the ball to land in his arms, that same shoulder-bump is illegal, a penalty, and yes, a cheap shot. If a dback is chasing a receiver, what would have been a completely legal hit in less than a second is illegal.

I doubt Welker gets fined for the illegal hit. Edelmans hit was completely legal. Welkers was completely illegal. That to me is a significant distinction. Completely taken out of context, both hits were similar, and Edelmans was the harder hit. Taken in context, Edelmans hit remains completely legal, and Welkers - an illegal pick.

Edelman’s block is no more relevant than any other legal block on any other play. During that same play, Denver had a handful of lineman blocking. Blocking is a big part of the game of football, and we have rules around blocking. Very seldom do players go out to injure others...but it still happens. When it happens outside the rules (illegal, some may say ‘cheap’), people tend to get upset about it.


169 posted on 01/21/2014 8:35:13 AM PST by LearnsFromMistakes (Yes, I am happy to see you. But that IS a gun in my pocket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
It is not a clean block.

When I say "clean block"... I'm only intending to say it wasn't "dirty".. or a "cheap shot".

I agree with you that, technically... Welker's hit was a fraction of a second too early. By rule, that SHOULD have been a penalty.

However, I think the timing was SO CLOSE, that I give the referee the benefit of the doubt. It was very hard to tell in real time. Especially if, you were watching the ball.

170 posted on 01/21/2014 9:06:00 AM PST by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: SomeCallMeTim

Ah. I understand.


171 posted on 01/21/2014 9:17:33 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: ßuddaßudd

Thanks...what made me post was the apparent piling on by people who probably saw the play live and went from there.

It is a game...you are correct. In the past, it has been a character flaw that I was unable to keep the game in that context...which is critical.


172 posted on 01/21/2014 9:19:52 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: dmz

It might be your iPad...if you look to the far right, I outlined in a red box Talib and Welker, who are very far into their impact (the contact shows Welker’s head sideways and his shoulder buried into Talib’s bicep and forearm and Talib’s head is twisted to the side)


173 posted on 01/21/2014 9:23:43 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: kidd

I don’t think it was challengeable nor (in my opinion) should it be. I don’t even think it was a terrible non-call.

It just was not a legal hit, which was my point. It was aggressive, but it wasn’t dirty. And it most certainly didn’t compare to the earlier play by Edelman on Rogers-Cromartie.

As a Pat’s fan, I had no problem with it, and I don’t think Belichick should have either. I am guessing he is just frustrated.


174 posted on 01/21/2014 9:26:44 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
Th play may have been technically illegal, by a fraction of a second, but it is a play in crossing routes over the middle that is very common in the NFL.

I think what Belichik is doing is threatening Welker and trying to brand him as a “dirty player”. He is trying to make him unpopular, He is trying and to get him fined and trying to hurt his career. He also may be saying I am going to instruct my players that you are dirty and to take you out the next time we play.

The Patriots treated Welker badly. They refused to give him a contract. They refused to pay him what he was worth. They forced him to leave. Welker was Tom Brady's close friend and his favorite receiver. I believe Welker said one of the reasons he left the Patriots was because of Belichik.

Belichik has a history of this. He also forced out Deion Branch the Superbowl MVP.

175 posted on 01/21/2014 9:36:07 AM PST by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: detective

You could argue however, that part of the Patriots’ success is not being sentimental, and going ahead and letting go of players right before their downward slide.


176 posted on 01/21/2014 9:39:37 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
With Brady and Deion Branch the Patriots won 3 Superbowls in 4 years. Then they traded Branch to Seattle and the next year Seattle went to the Superbowl.

How many Superbowls have the Patriots won since then?

Also, look at the way the Patriots treated Logan Mankins.

177 posted on 01/21/2014 9:56:14 AM PST by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: LearnsFromMistakes

The NFL says officially the play was legal

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000316738/article/nfl-wrong-call-on-navorro-bowmans-fumble-recovery

Play the video and you’ll see the NFL’s rules reviewer Dean Blandino explain why the Welker hit was not a foul.

Now we’ll see if you do, indeed, learn from your mistakes. ;-)


178 posted on 01/23/2014 5:10:41 AM PST by OrangeHoof (2001-2008: "Dissent Is Patriotism!" 2009-2016: "Dissent Is Racism!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

The NFL disagrees with you. They said the hit was legal.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000316738/article/nfl-wrong-call-on-navorro-bowmans-fumble-recovery

Play the video and you’ll see their official explanation.


179 posted on 01/23/2014 5:13:30 AM PST by OrangeHoof (2001-2008: "Dissent Is Patriotism!" 2009-2016: "Dissent Is Racism!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof

You honestly have never, ever read a relase from the NFL officiating managers about a controversial play, have you?


180 posted on 01/23/2014 9:10:00 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson