Sunday Night Football: Vikings @ Packers

[Palo20]

Quote: Originally Posted by GreenReign86

Am I the only one that thinks that shouldn't have been a penalty on Claymaker for taking his helmet off? It was half way off his head to bginwith, all he did was give it some assistance. You can't really run around with your helmet flapping in the wind, with your facemask around your forehead. You don't really expect him to stop mid-play to tighten it up, do you? That is probably what the refs saw, and why there wasn't a flag. Link to the Randy Moss article? I need a good laugh.

I don't really think it should have been a penalty, I think a hands to the face caused his helmet to come loose. He only took it off because the chin strap was undone.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...onday-10-pack/

#10 is about Moss.

[ProfessaPackMan]

.

10 Char

Quote:

It's a preposterous possibility on the surface, especially in light of the fact that he secured a contract extension last year. But there's a belief that Vikings coach Brad Childress could be in danger of getting fired. Mike Silver of Yahoo! Sports recently reported that some in the organization believed that, if the Vikings had lost to the Cowboys in Week Six, Childress would have been replaced by defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier. After Sunday's loss to the Packers, for which Childress is far more responsible than referee Scott Green's crew, Silver wonders whether Childress could be dumped if the Vikings lose to the Patriots. Childress definitely is behaving like a guy who is feeling the heat, what with his tirade against the officiating, his public criticism of Brett Favre, and the ill-advised barbs thrown at Pats coach Bill Belichick. Still, Childress has no business complaining about Favre. As we all learned after last year's ugly loss to the Panthers, Favre likes to freelance too much, and that approach doesn't fit with Childress' obsession with his "system". But despite the friction, Childress begged Favre to come back, sending a trio of players to Mississippi to hog tie the new grandpa and haul him back to Minnesota. So Childress can't now credibly gripe about a guy who's doing exactly what he did last year. Sure, the results are worse. But is that really a surprise, either? The schedule is much tougher this season, and the bull's-eye on the Vikings' backs is much larger. We're not sure that Frazier would fare any better than Childress, but with the season on the verge of imploding and the Vikings hopeful to muster support for a new stadium, firing Childress would be no less desperate than giving Favre a multi-million-dollar raise simply to get him to play ot trading a third-round pick for Randy "I Jump When I Wanna Jump" Moss.

[chicubsfan20]

I think Childress is an idiot at head coaching. At one point (I think it was the last interception Favre threw) the Vikings were running up the field with Peterson and we couldn't stop him. And then out of no where Childress goes to the pass? The run was working just fine, and if I remember correctly they weren't in a desperate pass situation.

I rate Childress up there with McCarthy as some of the worst play callers.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by chicubsfan20

I think Childress is an idiot at head coaching. At one point (I think it was the last interception Favre threw) the Vikings were running up the field with Peterson and we couldn't stop him. And then out of no where Childress goes to the pass? The run was working just fine, and if I remember correctly they weren't in a desperate pass situation. I rate Childress up there with McCarthy as some of the worst play callers.

History shows that Childress is an idiot, but (and I know this is piling on) with Favre under center, you have no idea who to really put the blame on. We all know Favre changes plays so would you be shocked if he changed some runs to passes? I think Thomas Jones hinted at that happening when he was on the Jets.

Last year, Favre seemed to go along early in the season... and he was more successful playing within the system. Now, he's comfortable doing whatever he wants, which Childress just publically complained about. All signs point to Childress making the statements to cover his ***, and to me that says "I didn't call this game bc the QB changed the plays".

[Hooe]

So the NFL and a referee who called the game both have stated that a catch made by Visanthe Shiancoe late in the first half for an apparent touchdown should have remained a touchdown rather than overturned to an incomplete pass by a replay review.

My question is, how? Every time I see the replay, the ball moves when it hits the ground, and Shiancoe's hands aren't under the ball, they are on the sides. My understanding is that, because the ball moves, it's considered not in control, and is an incompletion. Kinda like how trapped balls are ruled when the player goes low to catch a low-thrown ball on a button hook; the player can use the ground to help the catch, but the ball has to not move.

What gives? Is my understanding of the rule wrong?

[Candyman5]

Quote: Originally Posted by Krioniq

So the NFL and a referee who called the game both have stated that a catch made by Visanthe Shiancoe late in the first half for an apparent touchdown should have remained a touchdown rather than overturned to an incomplete pass by a replay review. My question is, how? Every time I see the replay, the ball moves when it hits the ground, and Shiancoe's hands aren't under the ball, they are on the sides. My understanding is that, because the ball moves, it's considered not in control, and is an incompletion. Kinda like how trapped balls are ruled when the player goes low to catch a low-thrown ball on a button hook; the player can use the ground to help the catch, but the ball has to not move. What gives? Is my understanding of the rule wrong?

The rule basically says you cannot use the ground to help catch the ball, shancoe never used the ground to make the catch, he had the ball in his hands the whole way down until he hit the ground and the ball never moved around, it just went up into his chest with the ball in the same position as it was during the catch.

[Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Candyman5

The rule basically says you cannot use the ground to help catch the ball, shancoe never used the ground to make the catch, he had the ball in his hands the whole way down until he hit the ground and the ball never moved around, it just went up into his chest with the ball in the same position as it was during the catch.

I've now watched this play about 10 times, and maybe I'm blind but from my vantage point the ball definitely does move when Shiancoe hits the ground (it goes from being pointed downward to positioned sideways), and it moves because the ball hits the ground as Shiancoe's hands are on the side of it.

Maybe I'm blind though.

[chicubsfan20]

Quote: Originally Posted by Krioniq

So the NFL and a referee who called the game both have stated that a catch made by Visanthe Shiancoe late in the first half for an apparent touchdown should have remained a touchdown rather than overturned to an incomplete pass by a replay review. My question is, how? Every time I see the replay, the ball moves when it hits the ground, and Shiancoe's hands aren't under the ball, they are on the sides. My understanding is that, because the ball moves, it's considered not in control, and is an incompletion. Kinda like how trapped balls are ruled when the player goes low to catch a low-thrown ball on a button hook; the player can use the ground to help the catch, but the ball has to not move. What gives? Is my understanding of the rule wrong?

If anything I think this would go along with the Calvin Johnson no catch. Maybe that's where they are coming from? They both are similar but the ball does move, but it's not like he didn't have his hands on it the whole time. He had his hands on it and it moved because they were on the side, but it's not like it was a bobble-type move.