70 replies to this topic

[xSICKxWITHxITx]

Related Blogs
Falcons explain stance on Gleason statue

By Pat Yasinskas | Jul 29, 2012 4:41 PM
FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. -- There are two sides to every story and we’ve only heard the New Orleans Saints’ version of what has sparked controversy about the “Rebirth’’ statue that was unveiled outside the Mercedes-Benz Superdome last week.


The statue depicts Steve Gleason’s legendary punt block against the Atlanta Falcons in the first game in the Superdome after Hurricane Katrina. The New Orleans Times-Picayune reported that the Falcons had refused to allow the Saints and the statue’s sculptor to use their logo in the statue. The other figure in the statue is former Atlanta punter Michael Koenen. But the statue contains none of the Falcons’ trademarks.

Falcons president Rich McKay just explained the Falcons’ side of things and said this was not a case of spiting a division rival. There were other issues involved, McKay said.

“The first thing that happens in a request for marks is that it has to go to the league because we don’t own the marks,’’ McKay told ESPN.com. “The league does for anything outside of our market. When they brought it to us, we discussed it with them and we came to the conclusion that, obviously the fact they're honoring the moment is fantastic. We were all there. It was an incredible moment for the city. It was not something that we wanted to memorialize the game. So we kind of looked at it as though we didn’t want necessarily a statue in front of the building that had our marks. Albeit, we all understand how important the moment was for the city and what they had gone through. We all lived in that moment and it was a pretty special thing. Even losing, it was still a pretty special thing. But it was just something that when we talked to the league about it, we said we didn’t think it was appropriate to put the marks on it. Everybody knew what the game was. Everybody knew what the moment was.’’

McKay said he received a letter from the league months ago and a decision was made quickly. The initial report said the Saints tried to appeal to Falcons owner Arthur Blank for permission to use the logo. McKay said Blank was not involved in the process. McKay said after the decision was made he never heard another word about the statue until the report came out last week.

“We never intended to offend the New Orleans fans and we certainly didn’t intend to make light of the moment, which was truly special,’’ McKay said.

[A Pimp Named Slickback™]

The FO don't have to explain a single thing. If they don't want our logos on the statue, then it is what it is...rivals or not. Even though it being a rival made it that much sweeter...

[Mega Flare]

What the heII did the Aints expect?

[Masbinacci]

Just saying....But I would not want one of our statues with a opposing player in the background.

this is very classLESS of the taints to want the falcons logo on it. They say this is just for the city rising....ummm if it was, you would not want it against anyone....you would just want to show the team who rised up (oh wait they cannot say that either...anyone who says rise, seems to only got this from the falcons. LOL)

LOL stupid taints seem to only care about the falcons. same reason they lost to the rams last year...they were trying to focus on us.

Go look at boxers when they rose up and brought a city, nation to rise. They did not go into designing the opposing fighter. you have to know Ali fights to know that one of the opposing boxers was Frasier. Like I said you have to know it, because it is not marked on there as a big note. it is lightly marked as ALI rising, not who Ali beat. it was how Ali got to the heavy weight belt to take on the george foreman grill.

Same thing goes for Soccer. only Olympics have the opposing team on there, so it can go down in history who got the silver medal.

again this to me is just the taints being classless.

[Dharma Initiative]

I can't believe they appealed the owner's decision.....what a classless, dumb franchise

[freebird310]

Yea screw the Taints and their hideous statue at the Toilet Dome .......

[Knight of God]

Something about that whole game was wrong. Why would we allow it?

[Dem Birds]

I like the version where we were jerks and said **** the Saints better.

[Dem Birds]

Knight of God, on 29 July 2012 - 07:28 PM, said:

Something about that whole game was wrong. Why would we allow it?

Yeah, that game was unwinnable. The ENTIRE world except for Falcons fans were rooting for them to beat us. No team could have went in there and won on that night. I hated that night more than just about any football related moment. That and the Saints winning the Super Bowl.

[freebird310]

That statue be covered in birdsh*t before it is over with ......

[Blank's Apprentice]

I think that the organization had a hidden agenda behind that statue. Rebirth? You won the SB. Was that not enough satisfaction? Last I checked, the Bucs did something sweet for that man LeGrand. What have they done for Gleason except attempt to use his name in a phony attempt to win a measuring contest with ATL? Take from that what you will, I don't care. Those are my thoughts on the matter. I think that it's funny that that bootyfaced franchise uses that double edged sword against us. They ain't pulling the wool over my eyes! Good way to use a form of culture and expect empathy just to promote that ****** Fleur de les

[Falconcheff]

To me, this reeks of unsportsmanlike conduct.  I would be okay if it were a statue of gleason and maybe a foot with the ball being blocked.  but it is downright taunting another team to try to have them memorialized in a losing game.

What happens when this regime is gone... Brees is gone, Payton is gone, and they suck again!?

This has payton's smug POS-ness all over it

Edited by Falconcheff, 29 July 2012 - 08:08 PM.

[Absolute]

Dem Birds, on 29 July 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

Yeah, that game was unwinnable. The ENTIRE world except for Falcons fans were rooting for them to beat us. No team could have went in there and won on that night. I hated that night more than just about any football related moment. That and the Saints winning the Super Bowl.

I agree.  A friend of mine came by the house in the middle of the 3rd just to rub it in my face.  I was not happy to have him over...

[DavyDmx]

Mr_Van, on 29 July 2012 - 06:17 PM, said:

The FO don't have to explain a single thing. If they don't want our logos on the statue, then it is what it is...rivals or not. Even though it being a rival made it that much sweeter...

My point exactly. Why should we be used as a visible symbol of futility in order to make their fans feel even more superior than they should be?

[DeadNut84]

Man **** the Saints! Only thing I want memorialized at their dome is a giant picture Tony Gonzalez holding OUR Lombardi up after we win it in their house this year!

[rubberneck]

Wow, the class of the falcon fans is truly on display.

[usmcdirtybird]

rubberneck, on 29 July 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

Wow, the class of the falcon fans is truly on display.

No, nothing to deal with class.  That is a memorial for your team's moment.  We do not need to be involved.  Every Saints fan knows you guys beat the Falcons in that game.  It is what it is.

[TheIdowu]

Go figure!

[falconsd56]

rubberneck, on 29 July 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

Wow, the class of the falcon fans is truly on display.

Really?? you are a fan of a team who wants to rub a win and you have the nerve to mention class??

there are DOZENS of ways to  memorialize  that moment with out involving the falcons... yet  the saints tried to pick a way to   embarrass  the falcons.
You and your organization can go **** yourselves.

[FA91]

rubberneck, on 29 July 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

Wow, the class of the falcon fans is truly on display.

It's the arrogance of the saints that's on display.