NFL Regular Season Thread (Or Duck, Duck, Grey Duck and other Children's Games)

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

You are crazy.

Actually, no, the ref says exactly that.

(Basically, the ball coming loose=fumble, and to be judged in possession, he has to have it all the way through the ground, and on the replay, the ball clearly moved when he went down, so he didn't (officially) regain possession until he was OOB)

If true,, (if).. another case of Right Ref, Stupid Rule:

Referee on controversial overturned Jets TD: Call 'was pretty obvious' - New England Patriots Blog- ESPN

edit: Non-Dola Dola!

If you ever want to have your eyes cross while reading an explanation, here you go (from that article)


If Seferian-Jenkins as a runner touched the pylon first, it would be a touchdown?

"No. You've got to keep in mind, he doesn't have possession of the football yet. When he lost the ball short of the goal line, when he lost the ball, he re-gained control but that doesn't mean he possesses the ball. He doesn't possess the ball until he's completed going to the ground now and re-controlling the ball, which he did not survive the ground, which is why it wasn't a touchdown. Had he never lost control of the ball in the first place, you would have a touchdown. But because he lost the ball and now has to re-establish control of the ball, that was the period of time."

so apparently, we are back to the catch rules about what constitutes a catch going to ground.

[bhlloy]

Paxton Lynch time? Siemian has been awful

[bhlloy]

DOLA - forgot they had big bird. Looks like Siemian is hurt

[Edward64]

Ravens Alex Collins 15 for 74 yards and more importantly, no fumbles.
Chargers Hunter Henry 5 for 90 yards. Couple young offensive Hogs doing well in the NFL.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Surprised it took him this long:

Report: Kaepernick files grievance against NFL owners for collusion

I think he has a weak case unless some owner was dumb enough to keep an email chain proving collusion.

Supposedly not being looked at by the Titans was the last straw for him.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I think he has a weak case unless some owner was dumb enough to keep an email chain proving collusion.

Supposedly not being looked at by the Titans was the last straw for him.

I do too, but this is America after all, we love to sue. I wonder if he might end up in GB now that Rodgers is hurt/out for the season?

[EagleFan]

That looked painful. Why was he "diving at the ball"? It hit the ground 10 feet in front of him.

[EagleFan]

dola: Not saying it was dirty by any means, just kind of stupid.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I do too, but this is America after all, we love to sue. I wonder if he might end up in GB now that Rodgers is hurt/out for the season?

I'm going to start suing if I don't find a better job soon.

[EagleFan]

WTF is wrong with the Broncos tonight? Did they swap uniforms with the Giants before the game?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

WTF is wrong with the Broncos tonight? Did they swap uniforms with the Giants before the game?

Been wondering that too. I've been working on homework so the game is only background noise. But whenever I glance the game it seem the Broncos are committing a turnover.

[EagleFan]

dola: But I have to laugh at "just when you thought their season was over"...

[EagleFan]

What did Al Michaels say that he had to apologize for? I missed it.

[cuervo72]

The Weinstein joke.

("The Giants are coming off a worse week than Harvey Weinstein")

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

The Weinstein joke.

Figured it was something related to Weinstein based on his apology but didn't hear it.

[NobodyHere]

That's pretty funny IMO

ETA: A link to the joke

Al Michaels made a horrible Harvey Weinstein joke during 'Sunday Night Football' - SBNation.com

Also I like the spit take by the other announcer.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

The Weinstein joke.

("The Giants are coming off a worse week than Harvey Weinstein")

So is he apologizing to the Giants or to Weinstein...

[EagleFan]

Thought he got in, not by much, but just barely in the middle there. Almost sucks that they don't error on the side of touchdown there. Once they call it a touchdown it can freely be reviewed. When they call it a stop it penalizes a team and makes them use a challenge, if they have any available.

[Galaril]

Well the Broncos flaws have been exposed. I thought they would be lucky to go 8-8. They have one side of the Oline that total crap, inside linebackers are weak and struggle both in coverage and run D, no fly zone not that anymore, zero tight ends of any caliber, and wide receivers are overrated. QB is borderline journey quality. New coach is also looking so-so.

[EagleFan]

Could be more interesting now if they had kicked a field goal on 4th down earlier.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Could be more interesting now if they had kicked a field goal on 4th down earlier.

Or not missed the field goals they missed.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Or not missed the field goals they missed.

Haven't been paying much attention; but yes, if they made ones they missed.

[Suicane75]

Vegas breathes a sigh of relief as thousands of teasers go kaput.

[stevew]

Rams once again wear one of the worst jersey combos in sports history. Seriously why can't they just allow them to replace the crappy gold on the jerseys with white so the helmets actually match. Even if you aren't going to allow a full redesign. I mean the helmet logo and the Jersey logo aren't even the same FFS.

[bbgunn]

Originally Posted by stevew

Rams once again wear one of the worst jersey combos in sports history. Seriously why can't they just allow them to replace the crappy gold on the jerseys with white so the helmets actually match. Even if you aren't going to allow a full redesign. I mean the helmet logo and the Jersey logo aren't even the same FFS.

Yeah, that is ridiculous. And I know they're trying to differentiate themselves from the Chargers' similar color scheme, but I don't see why they need to go back to the old 1940s-1960s Rams look (blue and white). I personally prefer the blue and gold myself; I think the uniforms from the 1970s-1990s were iconic.

Someone mentioned several posts ago about Adrian Peterson and running backs these days having shortened careers due to the abuse. Is that a more recent phenomenon (meaning the last 20 years or so)? Did running backs in, say, the 1960s have shortened careers overall as well compared to other positions, or does it have to do with defenders basically being faster, stronger and more powerful, causing more damage?

[Chief Rum]

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Rams are doing that because the NFL has stupid rules about changing uniforms within a certain time period. There was a lot of talk last year of the Rams going back to the original unis of the LA Rams from 20-30 years, but the NFL wouldn't let them do it for a year or two.

So it's possible this uniform mismatch thing relates to that.

As a Rams fan, I agree with you. It just looks stupid.

[Logan]

Besides "it's just different", is there a legitimate reason why the offensive team fumbling at/near/past the goalline is treated differently than everywhere else on the field? What's the problem I'm missing in just giving the ball back to the offense at the point they lost control but without also giving the benefit of forward progress?

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Logan

Besides "it's just different", is there a legitimate reason why the offensive team fumbling at/near/past the goalline is treated differently than everywhere else on the field? What's the problem I'm missing in just giving the ball back to the offense at the point they lost control but without also giving the benefit of forward progress?

Was it in the last two minutes of a half? Those rules are complicated. Thanks Stabler

[Logan]

Originally Posted by stevew

Was it in the last two minutes of a half? Those rules are complicated. Thanks Stabler

About 8:30 left in the 4th.

[Logan]

Just crazy to me that if the ball came out of his hand with different spin and went out on the one-inch line, they'd keep possession. But if it moved forward another inch and hit the pylon, they lose possession.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Logan

Just crazy to me that if the ball came out of his hand with different spin and went out on the one-inch line, they'd keep possession. But if it moved forward another inch and hit the pylon, they lose possession.

Yeah that play is essentially a death penalty if it becomes a Touchback

[Kodos]

FWIW, I thought that Jets play was a TD.

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by Logan

Besides "it's just different", is there a legitimate reason why the offensive team fumbling at/near/past the goalline is treated differently than everywhere else on the field? What's the problem I'm missing in just giving the ball back to the offense at the point they lost control but without also giving the benefit of forward progress?

That's always been my thought too. I don't understand the thinking behind them losing possession if it goes out of the endzone.

And I am very sad today...can't really put much of that loss on Hundley, but he is going to have his work cut out for him. I have faith in him being able to at least be manageable - but if we can't overcome the other injuries, especially to the o-line, he might not be alive long enough for us to find out.

[Arles]

That Minnesota game was one of the worst injury situations I've seen. First, GB was without 3 of their starting 4 defensive backs (King, House and Burnett). Then, throughout the game, they had this happen:

1. Lost both starting tackles.
2. Moved their left guard to left tackle and then he had a serious knee injury.
3. Lost 3rd string CB (Rollins) - who was their #1 for the game and starting safety (who was their 4th safety normally).
4. Lost two LBs and had to play a safety at LB.
5. Oh, and they lost Rodgers.

In the fourth quarter, they were without 3/5 OL starters, 5 of their top 8 DBs, 3 of their top 6 LBs and their QB. At this point, they just need to survive New Orleans and limp into the BYE. And let's hope we never see this starting 5 OL again:
LT: Justin McRae, LG: Lucas Patrick, C: Lindsley, RG: Evans, RT: Some guy named John that they signed off the AZ practice squad

[BishopMVP]

I guess someone was bound to have this Taek in 2017, but nobody's seriously considering this, right?
Aaron Rodgers injury may usher in a radical rules change, and other Week 6 thoughts

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Surprised it took him this long:

Report: Kaepernick files grievance against NFL owners for collusion

Is he suing all 32? How dare the 49ers allow him to opt out of his multi million dollar contract!

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

That's always been my thought too. I don't understand the thinking behind them losing possession if it goes out of the endzone.

And I am very sad today...can't really put much of that loss on Hundley, but he is going to have his work cut out for him. I have faith in him being able to at least be manageable - but if we can't overcome the other injuries, especially to the o-line, he might not be alive long enough for us to find out.

I get having some penalty against it so players don't start doing weirder things need the goal line, but maybe the fumbling team should just get the ball 5 yards behind where it was fumbled if it goes out of bounds without possession. It'd actually make sense to me if they did that regardless of field position.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I guess someone was bound to have this Taek in 2017, but nobody's seriously considering this, right?
[url="https://sports.yahoo.com/aaron-rodgers-injury-may-usher-093810887.html"]
Is he suing all 32? How dare the 49ers allow him to opt out of his multi million dollar contract!

From what i read he only needs to show 2 teams in collusion, not all 32.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Logan

Just crazy to me that if the ball came out of his hand with different spin and went out on the one-inch line, they'd keep possession. But if it moved forward another inch and hit the pylon, they lose possession.

I agree. I've been complaining about this for years. It makes no sense.

[thesloppy]

There was a similar call a couple years ago years ago when Seattle purposely batted a loose ball out of the end zone to gain possession against the Lions. It's a stupid rule.

[Thomkal]

Injuries: Week 6:

No major ones for the Cards for a change-woohoo!

Golden Tate (shoulder) dealing with AC joint sprain - NFL.com

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

There was a similar call a couple years ago years ago when Seattle purposely batted a loose ball out of the end zone to gain possession against the Lions. It's a stupid rule.

Isn't an intentional bat illegal? Because sure, why not put intent into the analysis of a situation.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

Isn't an intentional bat illegal? Because sure, why not put intent into the analysis of a situation.

Isn't that what happened at half time of the Bears - Steelers game a couple weeks ago? Bears fumbled, Steelers player batted it out of the endzone and the ball was given to Chicago on the 1 yard line.

[mckerney]

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

Isn't an intentional bat illegal? Because sure, why not put intent into the analysis of a situation.

Yup. And that one was ruled unintentional, which was DOUBLY ridiculous:

Seahawks LB K.J. Wright's Batted Ball Legal or Not? | NFL - YouTube

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Injuries: Week 6:

No major ones for the Cards for a change-woohoo!

Golden Tate (shoulder) dealing with AC joint sprain - NFL.com

Not serious, but I can tell you from experience, that it's a painful one.

[EagleFan]

That was a great pick 6 right there.

[NobodyHere]

Just remember everyone, the winner of this game will be tied for first in the AFC South

[Suicane75]

Any Titans fans/followers on the board? What's the deal with this team? Every time I see them play it feels like something is missing. They never seem like they're using their talent to its maximum.

[Suicane75]

Isn't the play still alive till he or the ball lands? I've always thought that was the rule?

[Suicane75]

Fucking coaches not understanding shit baffles the fuck out of me. Play ends at 2:10, you have 2 timeouts, use them BEFORE the two minute warning you idiot.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Fucking coaches not understanding shit baffles the fuck out of me. Play ends at 2:10, you have 2 timeouts, use them BEFORE the two minute warning you idiot.

Am I missing something? Even in a perfect world scenario where a play takes 4 seconds and the refs call the timeout immediately you save like 6 seconds, but also give them the option to run or throw on 3rd down since the clock will stop anyway. (We'll presume the opposing coach is your standard conservative playcaller with a late lead, and not someone like Belichick willing to throw on 1st down here).

TIMEOUTS BEFORE
1st down 2:10 - 2:06 offense runs, timeout
2nd down 2:06 - 2:02 offense runs, timeout
3rd down 2:02 - 1:58 clock will stop automatically and any play will take more than two seconds, so the team has the option of running or passing
1:58 Punt

TIMEOUTS AFTER
1st down 2:10 - 2:00 offense runs, 2 minute warning
2nd down 2:00 - 1:56 offense runs, timeout
3rd down 1:56 - 1:52 offense runs, timeout
1:52 Punt

So there's the marginal benefit of getting the ball punted to you with no timeouts & 118 vs 112 seconds, but you also probably increase the chance the other team makes an aggressive 3rd down call and converts the game ending first down.