Talk:Helmet Catch

Helmet Catch received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

National Football League Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Don't Merge!

I personally think that this should not be merged into Super Bowl XLII. This is the greatest play during the most watched Super Bowl ever.

As for a "suggestion," I suggest the name "The Clutch Catch." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.65.185.42 (talk) 12:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I'm proposing that this be merged into Super Bowl XLII. Granted the play was significant, but for the time being it's still too early to say for sure what is going to mean more in Super Bowl lore: that one play, or the drive (converting on 2 3rd downs and a 4th). DrFishcake (talk) 10:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is not WikiNews. There is no reason to make an article about a pass that has not stood the test of time to indicate that it is truly notable (ie: The Catch (American football)). -- kainaw ™ 14:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What test would that be? There's already more articles specifically about this one play than most notable topics have received. Torc2 (talk) 18:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief. There's another article up on this same catch, under The Catch (2008). Do we move to merge all three, or wait until the first two are straightened out? Snowfire51 (talk) 08:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to delete all of the articles and then incorporate into the Super Bowl XLII article relevant information. Just have a section versus a whole article. The Little Corporal (talk) 16:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the most useless articles on Wikipedia that I've ever seen. Anytime there's another discussion on merging or deleting this bullshit contact me.--WhereAmI (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name

What do you guys think the name of the play should be?I've read some great names people posted on yahoo answers like..

The Giant Connention,The Slip and Grip,The Great Escape(even though this doesn't pertain to Tyree's end of the play,it's still a great title),The Miracle,The Imperfect Play For The Perfect Ending(even though this is A great name and perfectly explains the play,it is entirely to long) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daverich313 (talk • contribs) 11:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about "The pass that was on all the highlight reels in February of 2008 and then showed up in a few top 10 catches of all time lists in 2009 and then was forgotten about by 2010"? There is no reason to assume that this catch is notable. Nobody has traveled back in time from 2018 to let us know that this catch will be remembered as significant in any way. -- kainaw ™ 14:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under no circumstances should we be giving this play a name. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and everything here must be properly referenced with secondary sources. If someone else from a reliable source has given this play a name (such as the Holy Roller or the Immaculate Reception, we can use it. If not, giving it a name would be WP:OR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowfire51 (talk • contribs) 16:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reliable source calling it "The Great Escape"? Snowfire51 (talk) 22:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably one or two sources calling that, but nothing that establishes widespread acceptance. I doubt that will stick since it doesn't acknowledge Tyree's part in this. We shouldn't put it in the article yet. Torc2 (talk) 22:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree,I havn't heard a official name or nickname from any notable source,we should just leave it simply as "Eli Manning Pass To Tyree" and whether this will be football lore....uhmmmm I don't know,it will be for sure to Giants fans,but will just have to wait and see,but This play was extremely significant for multiple reasons,everyone was almost certain that patriots were going to win and no one thought the the giants had A chance at 1:15 and miraculously manning escaped and it almost looked for sure that Manning was sacked and then he throws the ball and Tyree leaps in the air and BARLEY catches it and holds onto against his helmet,the play was amazing and not just the play it,but the unbelievable win.the video plays on youtube total well over 1,000,000 and this is only 2 days later and I've already seen the replay on multiple sports news shows over 20 times.We have definitely witnessed history guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daverich313 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although it did appear in the LA Times as "Hail Manning" I believe that is a very misleading name since it was obviously not a "Hail Mary" play. And in all seriousness one sportswriter calling it "Hail Manning" does not warrant the mention "also known as "Hail Manning""Nazionale (talk) 13:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, the play was referred to as "The Cheater Beater" on YouTube and a number of football message boards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.125.22.66 (talk) 20:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Catch (2008)

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Catch (2008), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Catch (2008). Thank you. Endless Dan 14:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eli Miracle

That's what I believe most people call them. Many media and NFL.com says the play is Eli Miracle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.131.233 (talk) 20:50, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Video of the play

Youtube took down the video claiming NFL copyright and that's probably going to be the case for any video that's put up there that isn't from the NFL's website. There, however, all I could find is clips of the whole game and not the play itself. Kika chuck (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Is there a good reason to believe this play will become known as "The Catch" hereafter? I ask from the POV of maintaining the disambiguation page The Catch, to which one of the three articles on this pass has been added. --Sturm 19:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain this play won't be called The Catch, since we've already got one of those. Snowfire51 (talk) 20:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be simply titled "Manning to Tyree." conman33 (. . .talk) 00:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Manning to Tyree" should be in the title, it's not specific enough to stand alone as a title. "Super Bowl XLII" should be in the title too. Torc2 (talk) 00:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another name choice was "The Great Escape", because of how Manning was able to avoid the sack, get the pass off, and complete the play. We should have a "name nomination" poll, then hold a vote. Either that or wait for NFL Films to name it in the SB XLII video. John cena123 (talk) 17:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia should not be naming the play at all. Eventually a name will be settled upon, then we should update the article title. We shouldn't be influencing the name at all, and we shouldn't be in a rush to figure out what to call it. Torc2 (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I agree there should not be a move of any sort until there's an "official" name. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 19:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, Torc2 said what I was coming over here to say if it hadn't. We need to be aware of a possible future need to move this page to a new title once it gets an established name. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 04:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Names of the catches

The fact that after nearly 5 months, theres is still no good name for this catch is good evidence that this play, though impressive, is not anywhere near the same echelon as other great moments in NFL history (e.g. "The Catch", "The Immaculate Redemption," "The Drive," and "The Music City Miracle.") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.47.35.39 (talk) 00:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the names of the catches are highly lacking in WP:NPOV and are only named the way they are, only by the media, to over-exaggerate the importance of the catch itself. It is obvious that a lot of them are not common names and may be one-off titles presented in the media. For example, ESPN uses three of the ten names, from what I see: "Slip and Grip", "Hail Manning" and "The Helmet Catch". Obviously these are not common names, they are only used once, and they are from the same source. Were it a common name, the same souce (in this case ESPN) would have refered to it each time as the same name. The same thing can be applied to New York Daily News, as they refered to it as "Catch 42" and "The Great Escape". Even the NFL themselves do not refer the catch as the same name, they call it "Flee to Tyree" and "Double Miracle". For those of you keeping count that is seven out of the ten names given in this article that are not notable. The other three are "The Desert Miracle" (WFAN interview, I'm guessing that is a radio network), "The Play" (Albany Times) and "David and Eliath" (The Jimmy Kimmel Show). What are the qualifications of notability for this section, that they have to be said on television/radio/film and somebody liked it? Absurd, we'll be having an exhaustive list here soon of names some talk show host or sports anaylist called it. Can anyone find a name for the play that was repeatedly refered to by the media? If you can, please add it to the article with references, preferable non-copyright violated references; links like the YouTube ones provided on the article are inappropriate. For the time being though, I am removing the section as there is no evidence that is shown to me that any of the names are substantially significant or that have shown to be a common name given to the catch. — Κaiba 11:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what WP:NPOV has to do with this. Some of the names are used often and some less. There's no reason to delete the whole section. The section has been heavily edited by a number of editors. Please see if you can gain a consensus before deleteing a whole entire section. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 16:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see this section is being watched really carefully [1]. Instead, why don't you show me how any of the names are a common name given to the catch or assert any significance, rather than inserting a bunch of cruft-like names given by the media? — Κaiba 11:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I see you reverted again. I understand that they are in fact reliable sources of information, but I challenge the significance of the names all together. Will you please, as I stated above, give me multiple sources that the names are commonly used or assert any significance? — Κaiba 00:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The naming of the play is part of the overall story surrounding of the play. This Wikipedia article isn't just supposed to give a blow-by-blow of the actual play, its supposed to tell the whole story, and the name of the paly is part of the story. If you think that some of the names are rarly mentioned and don't belong in the article then make a case for each specific name. But don't delete a whole entire sourced section that tells a major part of the story surrounding the catch. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 00:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doing a quick search on "Slip and Grip" proves no results on Google, but after adding the extra word "Super Bowl" after it pulled up some interesting results. [2] Most of hits are to some "Name the Play" blog or poll. And FYI, forums blogs or polls are not notable or reliable at all. And as I stated before, the media repeating one of these names a single time doesn't make the name notable. The catch being referred to by multiple names by the same source (ESPN calls the catch three different names and they only called it those names once). It's already widely established that there are forums debating what to call it and thats where the media is getting these, no doubt. Forums aren't reliable. — Κaiba 01:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helmet Catch

I've been in conversation via OTRS with someone who claims to have trademarked the phrase "The Helmet Catch." A search of the USPTO trademark database confirms that it is indeed a registered trademark, so I've added a note to that effect. howcheng {chat} 20:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but why do we need that in the article? I have removed it for the time being,Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could be useful. For example, imagine a scenario where a reader comes along and decides they like the name "Helmet Catch" the best and starts posting videos on YouTube or talking about it on their blog using the term. By noting here that it's trademarked, we could save them from getting nastygrams later. We don't need to identify the trademark holder, just note that it's been registered. howcheng {chat} 22:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A fair point. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle in the Desert?

Tyree himself refers to this play as the Miracle in the Desert, as it is the name of his official website. Is this enough to get the article moved to Miracle in the Desert? --Savethemooses (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, since Tyree does not, in himself alone, represent a widespread consensus on the issue. Since there is no single name which has jumped out from all of the sources, we are stuck with the generic name for now. We can find single sources for half a dozen other names, the problem is no single nickname for this play has been established, like has for other signature plays. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Listing

Should this play be listed at National Football League lore? RC-0722 ^361.0/1 20:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it time to end the nicknames?

It's been over a year, and still there is no consensus on a nickname for this page. It seems like every week someone else comes by with a nickname they heard somewhere, but as far as I can tell there is no universal nickname for this play. I'll bring it here for discussion, is it time to stop adding nicknames? If there isn't a solid name for it at this point, is there anything encyclopedic to be gained by keeping track of every single nickname spawned from the lack of universal consensus?

As an aside, I've reverted "The Giant Snatch" twice this week as unsourced, and a dubious one at best. Dayewalker (talk) 23:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, it hasn't been anywhere near a year yet... --70.180.90.29 (talk) 21:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Steve12992[reply]

My opinion is that this will all become moot once the NFL Films account of the game comes out. Other great moments that got nicknames often got them, if not created by NFL Films, then popularized by them. They have become something canonical on the matter of NFL lore and history, so perhaps we should wait to see what they say on the matter... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When is that slated to happen? rootology (C)(T) 14:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not under any time limit. I would guess at least before the next Super Bowl; the game film of the previous year usually makes a precursor to each years Super Bowl. However, there is no rush. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sack call

THIS PAGE MUST HAVE A CONTROVERSEY SECTION TOO BE PARTIAL BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT ATTENTION DRAWN TO MIKE CAREY'S PHANTOM SACK CALL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.222.119 (talk) 00:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've made this post a new section. If there are any reliable sources discussing it, please bring them up. Dayewalker (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, another stupid conspiracy theory... --Steve1299270.180.90.29 (talk) 21:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Found as winning name in Newsday Poll--Bulbakuki (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't seen the Newsday poll (a link would be nice), but that still doesn't necessarily make that the consensus name for the play. Dayewalker (talk) 07:30, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that this page should be merged with Super Bowl XLII. This is the greatest play of the most watched Super Bowl of all time, and is key to one of the biggest upsets of all time. Some of the plays which have made it into NFL Lore have not been this instrumental.

As for a suggestion for a name for this play, I personally suggest "The Clutch Catch." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.65.185.42 (talk) 12:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amazing that the name of the play is still in dispute. I remember how everyone at the bar where I was watching the game immediately refer to it as the "helmet catch." This name is clearly the most natural, whereas all the others had to be made up by sport journalists afterward. If you talk to any football fan today who had seen the game and say "helmet catch," they'd know immediately what you're talking about. Do a search for "helmet catch" on Google and almost every single match refers precisely to this play. People really do try too hard. The simplicity of "helmet catch" is what honors the uniqueness of this one play. There will be other great plays in a stadium in a desert. There will be other clutch catches. In our lifetime we will probably never again see a player making a critical catch against his helmet in the Superbowl. If this helmet catch is not "the helmet catch" then what is? I mean, it's like calling "The Play" the "Great Grizzly Train Robbery" or something tackier. In time, I trust "helmet catch" will become the term of choice. I'm really just commenting on this for the record. Chernyshevsky (talk) 02:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Play of the Decade (2000s)

The play was named "Play of the Decade (2000s)", called "The Double Miracle (at 4:24)" and "The greatest play in Superbowl history (at 5:04)" in this NFL Films video here.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-presents/09000d5d8163c627/Play-of-the-decade 60.242.169.170 (talk) 03:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda funny after the previous comments above about the play fading into obscurity. Bramton1 (talk) 22:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- So should we rename this article 'The Double Miracle' now? Not sure if NFL Films counts as a good consensus, but its better than nothing right? MethMan47 (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Play is called "76 Union Y Sail"

This ESPN article details it in depth.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/feature/flash/_/id/6034867/super-bowl-xlii-moment-time

as well as this one:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2010/news/story?id=6011037

Really? No one knows the play as that. Someone should really move this article back to where it was. Cdman882 (talk) 19:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just moved it back to the old title. If someone wants to move it, they should start a requested move discussion per WP:RM. I agree that this is not the most common name, per WP:COMMONNAME. --Jayron32 19:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is, or at least was at the time of the game, the name for it in the NY Giants playbook. That refers to any time the play in question is called, not just the famous pass from the Super Bowl. That particular instance is known primarily as "the Helmet Catch", and as such that's what the page ought to be moved to. — Red XIV ^(talk) 04:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Holding call/Controversy?

I have seen numerous rejections of an attempt to an include a reference to the holding activity of the Giants line (especially Shaun O'hara. The no-hold call is a common topic when discussing the history of the play, and to leave it out ignores a major line in the narrative history of the play and it's pivotal role in the game. I am happy to call it something other than "controversy" if that makes sense to people, but the automatic deletion of anything referencing the fact that the play was not received universally as fair seems to draw undue censorship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theungry (talk • contribs) 17:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved this discussion to the bottom of the page to follow chronological order. I have also reverted. You are engaging in original research and falsifying the source you have quoted.

The relevant part of your cited article says.

Eli first pushed forward and amazingly escaped the grasp of Seymour - who appeared to have his arms around the quarterback before he was yanked away by his neck by O'Hara - and Green, who grabbed Eli's shoulder pads with his left hand and leaped onto his back and hit him in the head with his right.

It does not say that O'Hara should have been penalized for holding, so you cannot use it as a source saying so.

The NFL rulebook is a primary source and by quoting from it in the way that you have, you have engaged in Original Research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia.

My suggestion to you is to try and find a reliable source that says what O'Hara did may have been holding, and then add that into the description of the play. However, you must not claim that New York should have been penalized based on a source that doesn't reflect your assertion and your own interpretation of a primary source. Mc JEFF ^(talk) 04:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

move to helmet catch?

I think that this needs a better name. Helmet catch has about 16 million hits, and they point to this play. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 23:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swordman97 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Moved page to Helmet Catch

As noted in my edit summary for the move, it's now been 7 years since Super Bowl 42 and after this amount of time, the general public/news media overwhelmingly refer to this play as the Helmet Catch; a fact backed up by the section above me from August 2014. I don't think this move will be controversial, but if you don't like it for some reason, please leave a message either here or on my talk page. I haven't been editing very much lately, but I do check my talk page at least once a week and I will be checking this page periodically for a month or two. Thanks. Thingg ^⊕^⊗ 13:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Subjects notable only for one event

Doesn't this page sort of fall under this because it is an entry that is about one play (a great one) of that Super Bowl. So the subjects aren't notable for one event (maybe Tyre) but the premise of literally 6 seconds of time for an entry that is longer than so many other notable figures?--MattyMetalFan (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]