NFL Week 5

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Can everyone try deep throating those uniforms just a LITTLE bit more? cmon, you cant ake another inch or two! I have faith...


Sheesh, yeah they're great, wtf is the repetition for?

We are hoping if we keep saying it enough the Chargers will grow some brains and make them the standard uniform again.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Yeah, I know that's the rule. Hence the reason I call it a "dumb rule". It's one thing to bobble the ball a bit and it's another to have it hit off your hands and go flying away from your body. The rules should reflect that. Once the ball hits off his hands, it should be considered live. The rule book doesn't state that, so I call it a "dumb rule".

And you are entitled to cling to an "dumb" opinion of an established rule. The Fair catch rule doesn't end simply because the guy bobbles a ball. Watch the replay, the Pitt player was going to hit him even if he had caught it cleanly, they would STILL have had an interference penalty. The steelers were using the bobble as en excuse to negate a valid flag.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by RendeR

And you are entitled to cling to an "dumb" opinion of an established rule.

Heh. Nice, start throwing insults at people because they don't agree with you. I think we're done here.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by TroyF

OK, so the Patriots smack the Steelers in Pittsburgh. (with Pitt looking like a junior high team for a majority of the second half)

SD just destroys NE. Dominates them and makes them look like a junior high team.

Now Pitt is dominating the Chargers in SD. Even with the score close, the Chargers are getting destroyed in TOP and Tomlinson can't get loose on the ground for anything. (and the reffing has been poor on both sides of the ball)

So if this were to continue for another quarter, who is better than who?

My vote:

NE are the champs, they get the benefit of the doubt until they get beat.
Pittsburgh would have beaten the Chargers on the road, they'd have to get the nod IMO.

And SD, despite lighting up NE, would be 2-3 and two games back in their own division. (really 2 1/2 as they lost to the team they are behind)

And if the Chargers come back and win this one, the Steelers will be the team 2 games back in their own division.

Funny how quickly things can change in the NFL, even at this early stage of the year.

How do you figure the Patriots "smacked Pittsburgh" and made them look like "a junior high team in the second half?" You obviously did not watch the game.

The Patriots won on a great individual performance by Brady and another FG by Vinatieri. The score was 23-20. The dominating second half amounted to the Pats outscoring the Steelers 16-10.

[Solecismic]

Given the situation in New Orleans, don't you think it would be nice if the rest of the teams in the NFL banded together and provided a replacement for McAllister? We're not doing enough to compensate the people of the Crescent City for their loss.

I think San Diego should send them LT. It's not like he did all that much against Pittsburgh.

[TazFTW]

Eli and Tiki. Tiki for the loss of Deuce. Eli because he's from the area so it would be a story that warms the cockles of your heart. It'll also even up the 9th home game the Giants got.

[stevew]

Figures that a Roider would take out the steelers QB. Day gum.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

How do you figure the Patriots "smacked Pittsburgh" and made them look like "a junior high team in the second half?" You obviously did not watch the game.

The Patriots won on a great individual performance by Brady and another FG by Vinatieri. The score was 23-20. The dominating second half amounted to the Pats outscoring the Steelers 16-10.

I watched the entire game. Outside of one drive in the second half, the Steelers couldn't do crap. (their FG in the second half was set up when the Pats fumbled the ball on their own 25 or so)

The Steelers led in total yards 181-175 at halftime. In the second half they were outgained 250-88.

The Steelers fought hard. They kept the Patriots out of the end zone and held them to FG's and FG attempts and they came up with one hell of a final drive after a great kickoff return. But there was NO question who the better football team was on the field that day. None at all.

And I was cheering for the Steelers in that game. I wanted them to look like the better team and I wanted them to win.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by RendeR

And you are entitled to cling to an "dumb" opinion of an established rule. The Fair catch rule doesn't end simply because the guy bobbles a ball. Watch the replay, the Pitt player was going to hit him even if he had caught it cleanly, they would STILL have had an interference penalty. The steelers were using the bobble as en excuse to negate a valid flag.

Take off the Bengals glasses. It's a dumb rule. Insulting people's opinions won't change that. Just because a rule is 'established' doesn't mean that it's good or that it makes sense. If he muffs the catch, he should become a live player. It's questionable whether or not there would have been a collision without the muffed catch. To claim otherwise is allowing your bias to bleed into your analysis.

I edited for clarification. I originally said if he bobbled the catch, he should be a live player. I changed it to muffed. There was no way he was going to bring that ball back to his body. It bounced two yards forward off his chest. The rule is designed to prevent players from getting creamed when they slightly bobble the catch. Not to keep a ball that has bounced totally off a player from being plucked out the air by the defense. What if it had bounced off his helmet and gone ten yards upfield? Can the defense not recover it until it hits the ground?

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Given the situation in New Orleans, don't you think it would be nice if the rest of the teams in the NFL banded together and provided a replacement for McAllister? We're not doing enough to compensate the people of the Crescent City for their loss.

I think San Diego should send them LT. It's not like he did all that much against Pittsburgh.

Maybe make playing for the Saints a punishment for violating league rules. That would deter me more than a four game suspension.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

assinine BS edited for clarity....

What if it had bounced off his helmet and gone ten yards upfield? Can the defense not recover it until it hits the ground?

YES, because the definition of a FAIR catch means they can't do ANYTHING to the ball or the player until it hits the ground, hitting the ground determines wether he catches the ball or not. Period. Why is this a fucking issue? Can the Steeler homers not accept that their player fucked up? How am *I* the one with a bias here? I already stated this call went against us before and I stand by the call then TOO. WTF dude? Read the posts!

What is more rediculous? My statement that the rule is acceptable and valid or the crying at the wind because "its a dumb rule"?? You guys sound like 5 yr olds who got tackled a yard short of the endzone "No way man DO OVER! Thats a dumb rule, you can't call that!"

Sheesh, give it a fucking rest.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

Take off the Bengals glasses. It's a dumb rule. Insulting people's opinions won't change that. Just because a rule is 'established' doesn't mean that it's good or that it makes sense. If he muffs the catch, he should become a live player. It's questionable whether or not there would have been a collision without the muffed catch. To claim otherwise is allowing your bias to bleed into your analysis.

I edited for clarification. I originally said if he bobbled the catch, he should be a live player. I changed it to muffed. There was no way he was going to bring that ball back to his body. It bounced two yards forward off his chest. The rule is designed to prevent players from getting creamed when they slightly bobble the catch. Not to keep a ball that has bounced totally off a player from being plucked out the air by the defense. What if it had bounced off his helmet and gone ten yards upfield? Can the defense not recover it until it hits the ground?

Isn't a bright line rule better than leaving yet one more thing up to the discretion of the refs? Right now, it is very clear: you cannot interfere with a player who calls for a fair catch unless the ball hits the ground.

The replacement rule would be: you cannot interfere with a player who calls for a fair catch unless the ball hits the ground, or--in the view of the official, the ball contacts the returner and bounces in the air in such a way that the returner would not have been able to obtain possession of the ball before it hit the ground.

For players on the kick coverage team who have to make a split second decision while running at 4.4 speed and who see the ball bounce--I think that the bright line rule makes more sense than something that the official will have to adjudicate post hoc.

Remember, this isn't like the force out rule where the defender will be doing the same thing regardless of what the ref decides. This is a situation where a player has to decide what the ref will say after the fact--and what hangs in the balance is the difference between possibly losing a turnover or getting a 15 yard penalty.

The rule makes sense as it is written and is a lot better than the alternative. Even if the ball bounces 100 yards away from the returner.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by RendeR

YES, because the definition of a FAIR catch means they can't do ANYTHING to the ball or the player until it hits the ground, hitting the ground determines wether he catches the ball or not. Period. Why is this a fucking issue? Can the Steeler homers not accept that their player fucked up? How am *I* the one with a bias here? I already stated this call went against us before and I stand by the call then TOO. WTF dude? Read the posts!

What is more rediculous? My statement that the rule is acceptable and valid or the crying at the wind because "its a dumb rule"?? You guys sound like 5 yr olds who got tackled a yard short of the endzone "No way man DO OVER! Thats a dumb rule, you can't call that!"

Sheesh, give it a fucking rest.

It's fun to debate people who just dismiss points arbitrarily because they don't agree, isn't it?

I did read it. Saying "It went against my Bengals and I agreed with it" doesn't make a bit of difference in the discussion of this particular instance. Was the call against the Bengals the exact same circumstance? You state that Chidi would have run into the guy anyway. I disagree. Apparently, though, I'm not allowed to do that. Apparently, your interpretation is the only valid one that exists. Ironic stance for a guy who feels the way you do about religion.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Isn't a bright line rule better than leaving yet one more thing up to the discretion of the refs? Right now, it is very clear: you cannot interfere with a player who calls for a fair catch unless the ball hits the ground.

The replacement rule would be: you cannot interfere with a player who calls for a fair catch unless the ball hits the ground, or--in the view of the official, the ball contacts the returner and bounces in the air in such a way that the returner would not have been able to obtain possession of the ball before it hit the ground.

For players on the kick coverage team who have to make a split second decision while running at 4.4 speed and who see the ball bounce--I think that the bright line rule makes more sense than something that the official will have to adjudicate post hoc.

Remember, this isn't like the force out rule where the defender will be doing the same thing regardless of what the ref decides. This is a situation where a player has to decide what the ref will say after the fact--and what hangs in the balance is the difference between possibly losing a turnover or getting a 15 yard penalty.

The rule makes sense as it is written and is a lot better than the alternative. Even if the ball bounces 100 yards away from the returner.

Now this is an argument that actually attempts to discuss the point. Bravo.

I think the split second decision is a good point, but to me, there is a clear difference between muffing a catch and bobbling it a bit. As soon as the ball hit him last night, didn't you know that it was a muffed catch? That he wouldn't catch it again. It's totally unlike a ball that say...turns a bit in the retuner's hands and then settles or bounces up a little bit. That ball wasn't going to be brought in by the returner. No chance. Everyone watching it knew that was the case, including the defender.

From the other side, that ball bounced right at Iwouma. I don't think he could have avoided it if he tried. Despite what others have said, Chidi actually threw off the Charger block and hesitated in front of the guy. Looked like a million other fair catch routines until the ball popped up into the air. So, if you're the defender, what do you do in that case? Try not to catch it? You're a coach trying to teach someone how to play within the confines of the rules. What is your instruction to the gunner in that case? Wait it out?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Why is this a fucking issue?

Because it's a dumb ass rule.

[Aylmar]

Just for reference, I think the fair catch should be eliminated. Catch the ball in play. If it's not safe to do that, let it bounce and take it where it is downed.

[Butter]

You know what Bill Cowher needs? A chin extension.

[RendeR]

Perhaps Steeler fans should take after their coach:

Bill Cowher after the game : "It was the right call."

As for what I would teach my players: If its a fair catch signal stop, stand near him and be ready for a fumble. He can't advance the ball in any way and youu can't touch HIM OR THE BALL until it hits the ground. Be ready for that.

and yes, they are professionals, they can handle that, even at 4.4 speeds. its what they are paid to do.

[Aylmar]

Of course Cowher will agree with the call. To do otherwise is to be fined by the NFL. Unless it's a heat of battle thing after a very tough loss, Cowher never criticizes the officials. Stuffs pictures in their pockets at halftime, yes. Criticizes, almost never (almost forgot about that Tenn loss in the 2002 divisional playoff).

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Perhaps Steeler fans should take after their coach:

Bill Cowher after the game : "It was the right call."

As for what I would teach my players: If its a fair catch signal stop, stand near him and be ready for a fumble. He can't advance the ball in any way and youu can't touch HIM OR THE BALL until it hits the ground. Be ready for that.

and yes, they are professionals, they can handle that, even at 4.4 speeds. its what they are paid to do.

This thing happens so rarely, I doubt it's something that coaches spend a lot of time on or a rule many players know about. In fact, you didn't see a SINGLE Charger player arguing the call when it went Pitt's way to start.

They all walked off the field with their heads down and the defense started to trot onto the field.

It was a fluke play, period. The Steelers guy reacted to a loose ball the way almost all of us would. He jumped on it.

The refs got the call RIGHT. Again, I'll say that. NOBODY here is arguing that the officials missed that call. Not a single person. We are arguing that the rule is idiotic. Just like I doubt many Redskin fans will complain about the Plummer "incomplete" pass. That's what the rule is and life sucks sometimes.

But we don't have to like it. The ball bounced 2 yards in front of him. This wasn't a "bobble", this was a pure miss. He wasn't getting it back. To me, that ball is live. (I guess I should add one more time that I understand what the rule says and that I know the refs got the call right, as some people here seem to think the arguement against the rule means we think the official blew the call in someway or that we are all Pittsburgh homers. .. I guess Madden and Michaels are Pitt homers as well because they both called the rule dumb too)

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by TroyF

The ball bounced 2 yards in front of him. This wasn't a "bobble", this was a pure miss. He wasn't getting it back. To me, that ball is live.

But doesn't the rule you are proposing put a lot of burden on the gunners. As it stands now, they can know the rule. Don't interfere with the player or the ball until it hits the ground.

Under the changed rule, they would have to make a decision (do I risk a 15 yard penalty or do I risk missing a chance to get a turnover)--the correct result of which will depend on what the official says after the play is over.

The rules should, to the extent possible, be clear and allow the players to play all-out. Every time you interject rules that leave things to post-hoc analysis, you have players playing more tentatively.

Sometimes, rules like that are just necessary, but I don't think that this is one of those cases. The bright line rule works well enough.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Bill Cowher after the game : "It was the right call."

He may have said that after the game, but given one camera shot they had on him after the particular play in question, he didn't think so at the time. He looked to be about thisclose to snapping and ripping the linesman's head off. Either that or his head just exploding spontaneously. Yeah, it's true, he generally looks like that but that was a particularly intense look even for him.

[rkmsuf]

Cowher is the king of face time on those broadcasts. They love to show him on the sidelines. He by far gets the most camera shots out there.

[albionmoonlight]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ek5/index.html

Looks like the rule may not be what we thought. See the San Diego writeup.

[stevew]

Triplett's team is incapable of making a judgement call. How these guys still have their jobs is beyond me.

[Kozure]

What the league should allow is replays of certain penalties, especially penalties that require a judgement call from an official. But they won't becuase they want to save the face of officials. When it gets down to it, the league would rather protect the integrity of its officiating crews rather than the actual outcomes of games.

I know that someone can say that all penalties are judgement calls, but I think certain penalties could be categorized easily as reviewable, such as a muffed punt.

[rkmsuf]

Way too many penalties in the NFL as it is. The last thing we need is more replay.

Every single kickoff and punt has a penalty. Every time there is a big play you have to pray there is no flag.

I think it's a big problem the way they call the games now. Hopefully they address this in the offseason but I doubt it. NFL is as big as ever.