Talk amongst yourselves
7/29: Fixed broken macros; adjusted NYJ RB, SEA WR
7/26: CAR RB, IND RB, SF RB
7/24: SEA WR/TE
* * * * *
The 2014 KUBIAK fantasy football projection workbook updates all preseason for only $20 -- or get it absolutely free with a $10 deposit at DraftKings.com. Purchase it here!
21 Oct 2012
Discuss all of Week 7's football games and wacky hijinks in this thread.
Posted by: Rivers McCown on 21 Oct 2012
251 replies , Last at
10 Dec 2012, 4:33am by
Maybe not really a big deal to most but I was wondering about something. Why don't people use the subject headings?
I think it'd make following certain games and topics easier. I guess I could just remember the number of the comment I just read but often I'll check the comments and then come back 30 min or so later and then have to scroll and reread quite a bit to get to comments I haven't yet read.
from time to time. Depends on my mood.
But the trick I use is recent posts or my posts, then I use find -> match whole word for the last message number to find the tails of discussions, the gap number not found in a discussion becomes the new last message, and so on, until I'm done.
Has the bonus of working pretty well even when topics spill over into multiple pages.
for too little reward (the ease of navigation of the discussion)
Velvet Sky fan
You should register to have a verified account. When you have a verfied account, every time you come back to a thread or refresh your screen, the new comments are shown in a different color from old comments, making it easy to find them.
Except that you're hosed if the thread gets more than one page long. Accessing either page counts as an access. If you go to either page, all comments are set to read, so when you go to the other page you have no idea what is new and what isn't :(.
True that. I wish they had a way to fix this. Maybe they could have a function that allows you to mark all comments after a certain comment number as unread?
I registered about 4 years ago but when the Pats lost the SB in 07/08 I didn't read about football, toss a football around, or play madden for about 5 months. After that I forgot my user name and password, guess I could find it out somehow
Keep your head on a swivel...
where are they? look look...
LEGION OF BOOOOM!
Bt seriously, I'm looking forward to an old school, smash mouth, defensive battle tonight.
Haven't seen that Cee-Lo open before. was disappointed. Expected something more from the usually entertaining Cee-Lo.
How does the NFL feel about its commentator Mike Mayock continually referring on NFL network to the game as a 'street fight' or 'brawl'. He must have said them ten times already. I, personally, have never been involved in a safety focused street fight. Doesn't really seem to fit the "NFL is all about safety" narrative.
Someone print out a certificate from the Andy Reid school of Clock Management and send it to Harbaugh. I'm filled with too much worrying.
See Jennings?! That's how it's done.
Blurgh, the niners continue to let the Defense dictate the play calling.
Smith continues to throw every pass too high whether it's short or long. I think he has managed to regress mid season, though it could be related to the kill-kill-kill stuff getting found out.
Why does the NFL network show the bare minimum of replays?
That is usually a pretty good idea when your offense isn't that great.
The NFL's ad featuring Tom Brady and Ray Lewis touting the safety of the NFL just seems sad today.
Hmm. On those downfield replays NFL network just showed it sure looked like both Seattle DBs were committing holding/illegal contact beyond the 5 yards to me.
At least someone else is seeing it, the seattle defense is playing like it's 1975.
Plus what the he'll was that non call when Alex Smith was forced to try and spot his receiver through the ear hole of his helmet?
It's gonna be a "let'em play" game. All we can ask is that they call it consistantly.
But at the same time the refs have been very quick to get the flags out for the unsportsmanlike stuff after the play.
Why does it have to be a 'let em play game'?
That's a load of rubbish, call the game right, if that means lots of flags then so be it.
It doesn't have to be anything, but the last game I saw where I was totally satisfied with how it was officiated was in 2005. Make of that what you will.
What I make of that is that you must have watched your first ever game in 2005 and then read the rules and have been disgusted ever since.
I tend to prefer physical games but some if that stuff was pretty blatant, if I'm correct illegal contact is still supposed to be enforced after five yards at the very least.
"It behooves me why they won't throw the ball deep to Randy Moss." - Deion Sanders
I know, it's too easy.
Smith is playing like crap, again. I used to defend him on the basis that his coaches were rubbish and he had terrible receivers and linemen but this year he seems to be getting worse by the game. Kaepernick please, even if it is a bitch to type.
The niners aren't helping themselves again, the running backs have nine carries for 55 yards but they've thrown it 15 times for 59 and those runner numbers include some of that read option stuff that hasn't worked well for a few weeks.
I never thought I'd see the day Justin smith gets pancaked (even if it's on a double team)
-I'm not Billy Bad-Ass.
Wow killer penalty on 4th down. I've never even heard of that penalty.
I'm not Billy Bad-Ass.
I have seen that called a few times. I'm not sure of the exact rule, but the player it was called on (#83) was over the center. The question that I have is whether or not it's OK if you are not on the line of scrimmage. From rewinding my DVR, it looked like 83 was a yard or so behind the line of scrimmage. That may be what Harbaugh was trying to show the official on the photo. It's hard to know exactly where 83 was, though, because the camera was directly behind the punter.
How about you show us a goddamn replay to determine whether San Francisco lined up over the center? Because Harbaugh seems convinced he has photographic evidence to the contrary, and I'd kinda like to be informed.
Nfl network is the opposite of fox. Fox beats you over the head with excessive replays, but nfl network leaves it to the imagination.
I have never watched a game of football with excessive replays. There is always something new to see until you get to like 5 replays of the same play (even then if I knew what to look for, I'm sure I could see more stuff).
As soon as that penalty was called, I only wanted to know one thing: "What kind of route was the gunner taking to get down the field?"
Seconded, it's really bugging me too.
How do you spell relief? Hucklebuck sucker!
Daaa da da da da Daa da da da daa daaaaa
Wow, terrible play. So Pete Carroll's plan was for Braylon Edwards to outrun the 49ers secondary?
I hate the quick whistle that cancels a fumble.
Harbaugh has to stop throwing the damn challenge flag before anyone has a chance to look at the review, second week in a row he's done that. Bye bye time out in a close game.
Wasn't that a non-reviewable play? He's got his timeout in any case.
The comment was typed in anger before I found that out. Beer, it's good for you!
Every genius has a flaw... Harbaugh's is that he throws the challenge flag out of pure emotion.
9ers are just too much better than the hawks on the line.
Gore is running all over this defense!
Second tripping call on Anthony Davis this year.
Seeing the 49ers run over this Seahawk defense makes me wish the Pats had tried a little harder with the running game last week. They tend to give up if they don't have immediate success.
It may not have helped much - Seattle's playing on 4 days rest. It's the same reason they hung a lot more yards on SF than most teams tend to - both D-Lines are probably gassed.
Wow that's a conservative call. A TD woulda salted the game away.
And another bloody interception would have given the overgrown pigeons more of a chance. Smith has managed to be effective on the check down in the second half but you really, really don't want to put the game in his hands.
An Int would have left Seattle in worse field position, still needing to score a TD. But I can understand not trusting smith against this secondary.
Do u go for it on fourth if you don't make it here?
I think they should go underneath to get 6-8 yards and not worry about getting it all at once. But yeah, they cannot punt now.
Got it anyway. But Seattle has to realize they can't dink and dunk for a TD
Four down territory for the Seahawks here.
Wow, They punted. Asking a lot of your already tired defense.
Second half completions for Russell Wilson = 0
2:05 sets up perfectly for a pass.
Obviously correct to punt there. They've got two timeouts, the two minute warning, and Alex Smith under center.
Aaarrrghh! Too close!
If I read advancednflstats right, that punt was a -0.12 WPA call, dropping the Seahawks chances from 13% to 1%. How low does your 4th and 12 conversion rate have to be to make this breakeven? 10%
Hmmm, when I spot the qb sweep before it happens then it might be time to come up with a new play.
I guess they got it back with the stop though. Seems like if there ever was a time to go Brandon Jacobs or Kaepernick that would have been the time. I mean, they aren't going to pass.
I agree, why have Jacobs if you're not going to use him there?
Maybe worried about Kaepernick fumbles.
How is that a low block? Refs are f-ing crocked. Had Seattle +7.5.
So did Harbaugh??
He wouldn't want a safety because of the free kick can be kicked onside.
Ty Webb grammar.
Was that a low block on Aldon Smith? Hmmm, I'm not complaining.
Has Jim Harbaugh bet on the +7 here?
Harbaugh might have just won you your bet!
Mayock doesn't understand why the 49ers wouldn't want to take over the ball on downs from the 21 as opposed to let the Seahawks kick after a safety.
The Seahawks have no timeouts. If the 49ers get the ball, they take a knee and the game's over. If Seattle gets to kick off, they might try an onside kick, etc., etc. Very unlikely to be successful against a 9-point lead, but when possession of the ball gives you a guaranteed win, why not take it?
I thought you weren't allowed to do an onside kick after a safety. Pretty sure that's a rule.
It's a free kick. Pretty sure the ball is live.
Did a quick search, it looks like you're right. Not sure where I got that info then.
A quick look at the NFL rules suggest you're correct. The only thing they say about a free kick after a safety is that it cannot be used to score a FG (as can be done with a free kick after a fair catch). There's nothing about onside kicks mentioned.
I have seen an onside free kick after a safety. Can't remember when, but I know I've seen it.
No!!!!! Don't review it!
And that's the first declined safety I've ever seen.
And everybody who bet on the 49ers -8 is livid.
That was an intense game.
Why was Mayock talking about intentional grounding? That had nothing to do with the penalty that was called (personal foul/chop block).
Also, I really disagree with the decision not to take the safety. Those two points could be important in a tiebreaker. Yeah, I know that it's extremely rare that a tiebreaker comes down to point differential, but I remember when the Bears made the playoffs as a wildcard over the Redskins based on point differential. That was a long time ago (1979), and I don't think it's happened since, but you never know. I think the two points are worth the risk that the Seahawks could recover an onside free kick, go the length of the field, score, recover another onside kick, and score again, all with no timeouts and only 43 seconds left, and needing at least one of the scores to be a TD.
The odds that 2 points determine a tiebreaker are exceptionally slim. You have to get to at least the 7th tiebreaker for points to matter.
The Seahawks are, bizarrely, 0-3 against the NFC West and 4-0 against everybody else. They're unlikely to win a tiebreaker against the 49ers.
All true, but the points tiebreaker wouldn't have to just be SF vs. SEA. It could be SF vs. another NFC team (or teams).
When the Bears won the tiebreaker over the Redskins in 1979, the point differential was 3 points.
So you basically have to go all the way to 1979 to find an example of the point differential making a difference? :)
The risk of injury factors into the decision at least as much as the risk of giving up nine points. And Seattle would only need to score once to make the decision a loser as it pertains to point differential.
Yes, I agree that the injury factor on an onside free kick is worth considering. And the part about Seattle scoring is true, but still extremely unlikely. It's 100% of 2 points (if you so choose) vs. a very, very small percentage that Seattle scores 3 or more points.
Is there any reason to think the injury risk is higher on an onside kick than any other play?
Higher than on a kneel down, yes. Even if the other team goes full steam on a kneel down, it's hard to imagine an injury taking place. An onside kick is safer than a regular kickoff -the most dangerous plays in football-, but with bodies flying all over the place, it's not that hard to imagine one taking place.
FO posters are a peacock. You got to let us fly!
So I suppose you had a problem with Kaepernick sliding in front of the end zone at the end of the Jets game?
I think it's all about player safety. Why put your special teams (and maybe your defense in case of a successful onside kick) through more violence if not necessary?
I understand that player safety is a consideration. As for Kaepernick sliding, I'm not s 49ers fan and didn't see the game, so I don't know the facts.
Edit: As for player safety, what if the opponent was the Bucs? Aren't you just as likely to have someone injured in victory formation if Greg Schiano is the opposing coach?
What the hell is Russell Wilson's DYAR going to look like in the 2nd half?
Obviously he was playing to maximize his DYBR.
I'm usually not much of a fan of BS like this, but I think I'd taken the two points to pad my D on the back for pitching a second half shutout.
Seahawks fans, what's your take on Wilson v Flynn?
I can see that Wilson has some tools and he can make some plays, but there's a lack of consistency in his game, and I wonder if Flynn wouldn't provide it. Flynn doesn't have the Packer system or the Packer receivers, but he'd have a better OL and definitely a better running game to lean on. I suppose this is a Pete Carroll problem that I shouldn't worry about.
In the interests of fairness it should be said that Wilson was not helped last night by some poor play from his receivers. There were at least 4 balls that hit receivers square in the hands/chest and were dropped, and three or four other catchable balls where the receiver seemed to be outfought by the DB.
I wouldn't call for Smith to get the hook, but that interception to Browner was such a bad decision. Had Browner not been there at least one and possibly two other Seattle players still had a better shot at the ball than Moss. Can I have 'Alex Smith, Game Manager' back please?
Be sure join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for another season of football chat!
Instructions moved to pastebin due to overzealous spam filter: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=Qjf3ZzvE
The Packers' offensive line is terrible. That's two negative runs out of two, and seven Rodgers dropbacks have produced two sacks (one was negated by penalty) and a hit. The left side is worse, but the right side has been bad too.
The Rams' pass rush looks very good though. The Packers have certainly played the toughest defensive lines of any schedule so far.
Packers just pulled off an unusual on-side kick that the Rams were obviously not ready for. The Ram most likely to get the ball was injured on the play.
Texans had 4th and about a foot at mid-field. They've been moving the ball pretty well, and their special teams has been... questionable. Of course Kubiak opts to punt.
Zuerlein kicks another field goal for St Louis. McCarthy put undue faith in his defense and elected to punt on 4th-&-1 from about midfield. Steven Jackson promptly broke a few tackles and the Rams had some nice gains. At one point, Jackson and Richardson had a dozen rushes between them, and their worst carry — a 3-yard gain on 1st-&-10 — was equal to Alex Green's best carry. Green has six carries for seven yards and a 0% success rate.
Jermichael Finley has had a couple of gains in the two-minute drill but he's now an afterthought on the Packers' offense. In fact, the tight ends as a group are a weakness. None of them blocks well on the stretch runs McCarthy likes to call.
Alex Green runs for a first down on 2nd and 10. To continue Ammek's comment, this is probably his first successful carry by FO stat standards.
Green finished with 20 carries, of which three were successful: that 15-yard gain on 2nd-&-10, a 5-yard gain on first down, and a 3-yard pickup on 2nd-&-6. His best unsuccessful carries were a 5-yard run on 2nd-&-12 (which was actually a lateral on a pass play that had broken down) and a pair of 3-yard rushes on 1st-&-10.
Mostly it was his fault, too. He was jumpy behind the line, missed some openings, and didn't get yards after contact. He won't be the least valuable back in Quick Reads because he was effective as a receiver, but it's hard to imagine that James Starks would do worse (unless he still is fumble-prone).
He was jumpy behind the line, but on 4 of his negative yardarge plays he was hit within 1 step of taking the hand off. I'm not sure even Barry Sanders would have had the agility to avoid taking those losses. He took some of those early, and that will make you jumpy, but he doesn't have good vision, which was a concern coming from a spread offense where he took a lot of shotgun snaps. However, I haven't seen Rodger's trust a running back in the passing game as much as he did Green. He was dumping off to him on broken plays and Green was doing OK or good stuff with those. He didn't do that with Grant or Starks much, and he was with Benson some, but it's encouraging to me. I liked the Green pick and I had hopes he could be a feature back, but I figured his floor was as a good 3rd down back. That's fine for a 3rd round pick on a pass first team. I don't think he can be a feature back (though McCarthy might still keep using him as one) but I do think he can turn into a good 3rd back and spot relief.
Well thanks to the deal that got me ESPN the Mag (and hence Insider) for $5 a year, I was able to see the top and bottom performers in quick reads early, and I'm wrong. I forgot some of Greens fails were on 3rd downs so the negatives were bigger than I thought, and I will say he does show up, I'm not going to say where because as much as I don't like FO content behind pay walls I do understand it.
Texans have batted about half a dozen balls at the line against Flacco. Two of them have resulted in interceptions. One by Joseph (a pick 6), one by Quin.
Bernard Pollard gets a personal foul for hitting the head of a defenseless receiver.
He never hit the receiver in the head.
Packers' Dezman Moses just did the same thing against the Rams on 3rd and long. Not sure if he went for the head, but it was a launch against a defenseless receiver. I'm not really fond of this call, but it's the rule and so is a good call.
I don't see how Pollard was flagged on that. He didn't leave his feet, didn't hit the head.
He clearly hit the head.
What isn't clear is whether he hit the head with his helmet. Unfortunately for him, it doesn't matter. You don't have to use your helmet for it to be a penalty.
He didn't hit him in the head. He hit him on the upper back and it made his head snap back. Pollard was on his feet running and Daniels dove for the ball in front of him.
Gonna have to disagree. There was pretty clear contact to the head.
I disagree with you. The referees disagree with you. The commentators disagree with you. The video disagrees with you.
Does somebody need to post screenshots from NFL Replay?
Also, the fact that Pollard didn't leave his feet is irrelevant, so stop repeating it.
I'm watching the replay. He doesn't hit him in the helmet. He hits him on the back of the shoulders. It was a bad call by the refs.
I'd love to see a screenshot of the hit to the head, since he never hit him in the head.
I'm not sure what you didn't see. It was pretty clear contact to the head.
This just in: John Skelton is awful. The best thing he has done is keep the same drive alive twice by drawing the Vikings offside on third and less than five. But that drive ended with nothing as Skelton was upended well short of the first down as ran wide on a rollout on fourth and one. On the previous drive, he threw an awful pass that was intercepted and returned for a TD by Harrison Smith.
Vincent Jackson goes for a 90-something-yard reception, but is tackled at the one by Mike Jenkins. After three straight stuffed HB dive to LaGerette Blount, the Bucs go for it on 4th down. The playcall: A naked PA bootleg, but with no recievers running a route. Easily shut down by the Saints as they shove him out of bounds for a loss of two. That play had no chance of working. At all. Rediculous.
Yeah, I was going to post something similar about that sequence. Typical Bucs, especially while wearing their Creamsicle uniforms.
I'm not sure I understand a whole lot of the NFL rules at this point.
Last week, Tom Brady gets called for Intentional Grounding on a ball where the clock is running out, and he throws it out of the back of the endzone. He's still in the pocket, and no one is there.
The play before Baltimore scores to make it 29-10, Barwin is uncovered, and gets a free rush at Flacco. He's still in the tackle box, and whips the ball through the goalposts. Nobody is anywhere near the path of the ball at any point. No call.
When a meme reaches an NFL celebration, you know it's run its course. Mike Tolbert closes the drapes on Gangnam Style.
And now Pierre Paul too. Sheesh.
I guess Cris Kluwe could pull it off a couple of weeks ago because of his general awesomeness (Even if you don't like his Rule 1 banned opinions, you have to admit: He's pretty awesome.)
The Vikings offense is pretty unimpressive. The Vikes are winning this game primarily because Skelton is terrible. Christian Steele isn't doing very well, either, but the Cardinals haven't been abile to capitalize on his mistakes. LaRod Stephens-Howling has been very good for the Cardinals, but no one else on their offense is doing anything.
Yeah Ponder is a liability. And other than Peterson and Harvin they don't have a lot of above average players on offense.
Baltimore scores on their second drive of the second half to close it to a 19 pint deficit. Ensuing possession Houston takes the ball 80 yards for a TD killing like 8 minutes.
The Ravens are flagged for OPI on a pass tipped at the line by the Texans. Harbaugh has to toss the challenge flag to have the refs check whether it was a tipped pass.
Never seen this before.
Down four with 6:something remaining facing 4th-and-1 from Colts 41 yardline and Pat Shurmur SENDS OUT THE PUNT TEAM!! Holy shit thats a bad decision. Breakeven for conversion is probably in the mid twenties. This makes me more angry than it should.
(Result: a shanked punt to the 20-yard line).
It should honestly be a fireable offense. It shows you don't understand one of your core job duties.
Even if its only 10% of his job (in game decision making) it shows he is terrible at it.
Four one-score games right now. Trailing team with possesion i all four.
Giants were undisciplined there. The ends didn't keep contain, which is a very bad thing to do with against RGIII. He took off and easily gained about 25 yards around right end. Two plays later is a 30 yard TD pass to Santana Moss. Redskins now lead 23-20 with 1:32 remaining.
Edit: The Giants respond with an incomplete pass, followed by a 77 yard TD pass to a wide open Victor Cruz. Terrible coverage by the Redskins.
@ NYG: OMG.
Unbelievable ending to Bucs-Saints. Even more unbelievabls is that neither John Lynch nor Dick Stockton knew the rule that a receiver cannot go out of bounds and then be the first person to touch the ball. That's illegal touching, not exactly an obscure rule. Lynch thought it was OK since he reestablished position in the field. Uh, no, that's not the rule, John. So the apparent TD catch (which would have tied the game if they kicked the extra point) was instead a penalty for illegal touching. Game over. Stockton agreed with Lynch at first. How hard is it for announcers (including a long-time former player) to know the rules?
I'm pretty sure that if a reciever is pushed over the sideline, gets both feet back in, is again a eligable reciever. Dunno if back of endzone is special in that regard.
That's what I thought, too, but apparently the difference was that Freeman left the pocket.
if all you had to do to play defense was push the receiver out of bounds, that would be a tactic used in every game.
Lynch and Stockton were correct.
See below, too (and above). QB was outside the pocket.
Also, Lynch and Stockton never mentioned the potentially illegal contact. Lynch seemed to think the rule was merely that you could reestablish position on the field and be eligible.
Agree that they didn't mention illegal contact.
Surprising that Lynch of all people wouldn't know this rule.
Agreed that Lynch should know this rule.
Uh-oh. Mike Williams was pushed out of the back of the endzone, comes back in and catches an apparent game winner. Illegal touching since he went out of bounds and was the first to touch the ball. Announcer claiming that Williams was eligble since he "re-established" his feet. Anybody know the rules here?
Everyone knows the rule except the announcers here. That is textbook illegal touching. And it wouldn't have been a game-winner, as they were down by 7. It would have tied the game with the extra point.
Saints win a game by pushing a receiver out of bounds.
Refs blow the call:
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 6 Ineligible receivers
"An eligible receiver who has been out of bounds prior to or during a pass, even if he has reestablished himself inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands.
Exception: If an eligible receiver is forced out of bounds by a foul by a defender, including illegal contact,
defensive holding, or defensive pass interference, he will become eligible to legally touch the pass (without
prior touching by another eligible receiver or defender) as soon as he re-establishes himself inbounds with
both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands. See Article 8, Note 3. "
Pushing receiver out of bounds should have been called illegal contact.
Thank you for that. Saints season getting CPR there.
Freeman was outside the tackle box. Doesn't that make the contact not illegal? Although it's not clear whether he was outside the tackle box when the contact occurred. The replays didn't show which happened first.
According to Mike Pereira, it's different since the QB left the pocket. I don't know that part of the rule, just passing along what I heard.
Horrible ref's call at the end of the Tampa Bay game. The receiver is pushed out of the end zone (obvious illegal contact) comes back in to catch the TD, and is called for illegal touching.
The correct call was either illegal contact or DPI, depending on whether the ball was in the air. The just call would have been to award the TD.
Terrible throw by Brady. Lloyd is wide open, and the ball gets to him about 6 inches off the ground.
Llody should have probably caught it, but put it in the right place, and Lloyd is highstepping into the endzone.
Of course, the announcers think it was perfectly thrown, because Brady threw it.
It seems illegal contact is legal when the QB is out of the pocket. Who knew?
Wait, what?! I thought RickD had cleared it all up, but now I'm back to being confused.
Yes, this is apparently the rule once the QB leaves the pocket:
"Note: Once the quarterback hands off or pitches the ball to a back, or if the quarterback leaves the pocket area, the restrictions (illegal chuck, illegal cut) on the defensive team relative to the offensive receivers will end, provided the ball is not in the air."
Under "Use of hands, arms, and body" in the digest of rules.
so if the quarterback leaves the pocket, defenses should just push all the receivers out of bounds and the quarterback won't be able to throw
That sounds a whole lot easier than it actually is.
Yeah, why aren't defenders just mauling their recievers the moment the QB rolls out? Is it easier said than done, perhaps?
Because holding is still a penalty?
Once the ball is in the air, that becomes PI.
Well, Lynch and Stockton certainly didn't. I have seen that rule applied many times, although I can't remember seeing it on the last play of the game.
The officials certainly knew the rule. Also, a clue that they were on top of it is that the official in the back had his hat off and the flag didn't come out until Williams caught the ball. That means he threw his hat the instant Williams went out of bounds. If it had been illegal contact, he would have also thrown the flag then. He didn't throw it until later.
"If it had been illegal contact, he would have also thrown the flag then."
That's a generous interpretation of the quality level of officiating. Another thought was "he missed the push but did see the receiver out of bounds."
I don't think that's what happened, but it is certainly possible. Are you saying that you know the contact came before Freeman was out of the pocket? Or are you just speculating?
I was speculating. The network didn't synch the feeds.
I was just taking issue with your assertion of the form "Obviously no foul occurred, since no flag was thrown." There's also ref error to take into account.
I have seen refs miss a lot of contact fouls this season.
Agreed that officials are not perfect and can and do miss calls. I don't think they missed this one, though.
While we never saw a replay that synched everything, I think Freeman was outside the pocket by the time the contact occurred. As for my comment about no flag being thrown, I think the official was on top of the play and saw the contact but knew that Freeman was outside the pocket. It would have been pretty hard to see the receiver go out of bounds but miss the contact that caused it, as the official was right on top of the play.
The point about no flag being thrown (while a hat was on the ground) was really that it should have been a clue to everyone (incuding Lynch and Stockton) regarding what the officials called and didn't call, not whether that was the correct call (or no call).
All of this Tebow at RB nonsense must stop. What in the world is he supposed to better than Shonn Greene?
Theoretically the defense has to respect the threat of a Tebow HB pass option?
In the Pats game, Sanchez came under center on third down, and then motioned wide. The shotgun snap went to Tebow, who ran for a first. I thought once a player goes under center, HE has to take the snap?
McCourty runs back kickoff for TD. 65% of Boston-area sport bb participants still think he should be cut.
And then he fumbles a kickoff that results in a Jets score, justifying the fan sentiment.
You know that feeling you get when Jay Cutler drops back to pass that disaster is eminent? I get that feeling every time Jeff Triplette reaches for his mic.
I am +1'ing this as hard as I can.
Pats seem intent on going deep today. Three long passes so far in the vicinity of Lloyd.
That's probably a good idea to develop that pass. Brady's touch on long passes might improve if he tried it more often. The first of the three was catchable.
His touch might improve? Brady has been in this league over a dozen years and has never been as good a deep ball passer as his coaching staff seems to think he is. He isn't going to suddenly become a good long tosser. Burn that part of the playbook...
Sanchez really wants to throw a pick. Pats' defense isn't obliging.
...and with that throw (five yards short of a wide-open receiver), even the Pats couldn't miss the easy pick.
There we go.
I swear, if Brandon Spikes could catch, he'd have about 10 INTs a year. Seems like someone deflects a ball into his hands every game.
Sanchez almost looks as bad as Ponder. The INT was just a very poorly thrown ball, and the safety was on him as well.
That's really unfair to Ponder. Unlike Ponder, we know that Sanchez peaked as a QB 4 years ago.
Somehow Mayo was just called for holding while sitting on the bench.
Being on the Bench never stopped the Jets from commiting fouls...
It was probably Spikes. A "4" looks like a "1" from the side, if you don't look carefully...
Main reason why the Pats aren't further ahead of the Jets: Kerley can catch well and poorly thrown deep balls when he's open. Lloyd apparently can't.
Secondary reason: Pats coaching is pretty bad today. Even leaving the 4th and short punt at the Jets 42 yard line aside, they're calling plays offensively that just don't look like they have a chance of working. The Jets have answered their "chess moves" and they look out of further ideas.
Third, but by far smallest reason: Bad luck. Jets have recovered on of their two fumbles, and kicked the other one out the back of the end zone for a safety (question: Why is it a penalty for kicking the ball to take an intentional safety, if all you end up getting penalized with is...a safety?) At least two, maybe three catchable (depending on your definition of "catchable") INT's have bounced off of our just out of reach of Patriots hands. And Dan Connoly, the Pats starting right guard, is in and out (mostly out) with a random illness. (Mankins is already inactive due to injury).
Luckily for the Pats, they're facing Mark Sanchez.
Kicking a loose ball in play is always a penalty. And any penalty by the offense in the end zone is a safety.
The Jets look like they could run on the Pats. So, for some reason, when they get a 3rd and 1.9 (which Simms calls a "3rd and 1" as if it were identical to the previous "3rd and 1", which was really "3rd and 1 foot"), the Jets pass, even though every ruch on the drive got at least two yards.
Sometimes I think the Pats overscheme on offense.
Not just that, but the offense (Sanchez) provided the impetus to knock the ball out of the endzone, so it would be a safety even without a penalty. Same as if Sanchez had picked up that loose ball and walked out of the back of the endzone.
"And any penalty by the offense in the end zone is a safety."
As we saw on Thursday night, in certain situations the defense can decline the penalty, in which case the penalty does not result in a aafety. Here, there was no choice needed; it was a safety even if the defense wanted for some reason to decline the penalty.
Incidentally, the announcers for the Jets-Pats game must play fantasy. They keep talking about how impressive Shonn Greene is today. While he's not terrible, he's averaging under 4 ypc, has a few receptions and a few yards, and his main contribution was scoring a TD from the 1/2 yard line. No offense, but I could probably score a TD from the half yard line about 50% of the time. It's really Kerley and the Jets defense that have done anything for them this game.
No offense, but I could probably score a TD from the half yard line about 50% of the time.
I would take the under on this.
Boy that 3rd and one call by the Jets there was just mystifying, at least to me.
lol, no one wants this win in NE
Announcers are terrible. They're talking about how they don't think the Jets lineman got a hand on the Patriots defender, while on screen the guy's jersey is pulled about 2 feet off his body.
Terrible play calling/execution on 2nd and 3rd down. This is what fans are talking about when they say the Pats get too cute at times. After running successfully for half a drive, why are they suddenly throwing -1 yard passes?
Shonn Green clearly unconscious after hit by Spikes.
Curious to see if Ryan does the dumb thing and brings him back in later.
5:44 left, NYJ just scores to make it a 3pt game.
Prediction: In typical, current Patriot fashion, NE goes 3-and-out or 6-and-out, and Jets win at the gun or at least force OT.
Looking forward to this playcalling.
Patriots offense with the ball and a small lead, 5 minutes left in the game. 3 and out?
Bad throw that should have been a pick.
Short run (by itself not bad)
Bad overthrow on 3rd and long.
I'm really wondering what the first down play was supposed to be. Whatever it was supposed to be, the pass blocking was horrible.
Hilarious to see the Pats fan booing Brady and co. On every level.
Why is it hilarious? The offense has been abysmal in close and late situations for about a year and a half. And Brady is clearly a large part of the problem.
The extent to which Pats fans have been spoiled?
Brady expressing his desire to see fans boo the home team (though not Pats fans)?
Granted, maybe it's not as funny to Pats fans.
Because Pats fans are the only fans that boo when their team plays terribly?
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
I don't think you know what sour grapes are.
Its the sour grapes of someone bitching because their franchise has been terrible for years. With a bit of shaudenfreud mixed in.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
:D Oh my grapes are good. Don't worry about me!
Is this the place they're giving grapes away for free?
As opposed to Eagles, NY (doesn't matter which team) and Bronco fans, who boo their teams even when they have winning records?
Seriously, how can 81 be that wide open?
This defense is truly awful.
They're not good, but its tough to play cornerback when you've been running backwards for the last 30 minutes.
This offense can't seem to get their shit together in the second half.
You're really blaming the offense for the fact that the defense just gave up a 94-yard TD drive?
I'm curious - are there any criteria under which the defense would be held responsible for its own failings?
Like I said, the defense isn't good.
The problem is the defense plays drastically worse following 3 and outs. Defense and offense are related in football, nothing is independent.
So yeah, the defense is a big part of the problem, but people who think that an offense going 3 and out most of the 2nd half doesn't hurt the defense is an idiot.
I often feel that people throw around the word "drop" much too frequent;y, but boy was that a costly drop. It was the archetype of a costly drop.
LOL fumble on the KO return.
I don't know whats wrong with this team. Its like the later in the game it gets, the more they look like they have no idea whats going on.
Lots of teams do it, it is called "being average". The Patriots had about a decade of being excellent, and when you are excellent things go your way. Now they are just average, and things only go average. Sometimes they win late and close, sometimes they don't.
Using McCourty as a returner is a new twist. He's not used to carrying the ball in traffic.
Coming into the game McCourty had returned more kick-offs than anybody else on the team this year
This was the 8th kickoff return of his career.
Yes, but he's been their primary KO returner this year.
Sorry, for me "the past seven games" constitutes a "new twist."
You really want to be argumentative about this?
Comment 177 was prescient.
Odd official (The one 5 yrds away didn't throw, but the one 20 yrds away did) throws a PI flag and then they don't show a replay?
Did anyone else notice that there are less replays of crushing blocks and other hard hits?
Yeah and I think that is a good thing.
Credit to the Jets for wanting to lose more!
Oh man, what a terrible play by Sanchez to try and throw that ball at the end. If he eats it, at least they'd have two more chances to convert the first.
Wasn't it totally idiotic? Who thinks of throwing the ball in those circumstances: no receiver, no angle, no footing, nothing. Fumble, game over.
Brady made some pretty bad throws, too, but man. I only saw the last few minutes of the 4th and OT, but I thought that was the good Sanchez out there today. I guess there's no such thing.
To be fair, there were about 5 times during the game where Sanchez managed to throw the ball away while going down. If he wasn't doing that, there would have been a lot more sacks, and the game probably would have looked a bit different.
If being able to throw the ball away while being tackled was the most important skill for a QB, my 5'6" 200# 56 year old body could play in the NFL. Until Sanchez can throw the ball accurately, read defenses, and go through his progressions effectively, he won't even become an average NFL starter.
One good thing about the Pats' win. Maybe people will shut up about how Brady "never performs in the clutch anymore," at least for a while.
Brady's a punk and he's finally getting his comeuppance. 9-7 this year and miss the playoffs. He's the best when up 30. Game gets close and his collar gets tight. Just look at the last two weeks. Not all his fault of course, when I and others say "Brady" we mean the entire offense.
Who scored the last six points of the game?
A golem made of scrabble letters, liquor, and kicking tees?
Are you really responding to that obvious of a troll?
Clutch to me would have been getting a first down when they had the ball with 5 minutes left.
Did anyone tell these two teams that "suck for Luck" was last year?
You thankless bastards cannot be pleased. Everyone loves football follies, but two teams go out of their way to produce a whole game of them, taking it to overtime!, and it's 'complain complain complain.' You people don't deserve to watch this kind of football!
You people don't deserve to watch this kind of football!
Truer words have ne'er been spoken.
Not a crisp game by any stretch but it was entertaining.
Barron Batch dropped an easy TD on a flea-flicker from Antonio Brown. Roethlisberger picked off in the end zone two plays later. Going to be a long night.
Batch's drop was bad, but he's not used to getting those kind of throws. Wallace has much less excuse for his drops tonight.
Not even the third* one?
I'll cut him slack on the third. It was tipped at the last moment. But the other two left me shaking my head. Both times he was wide open with no traffic to deal with.
Roethlisberger tries to call timeout immediately after a timeout, figures out he can't do that, rushes off a play and gets the conversion.
Sloppy, but given how many other mistakes they've made tonight, I'll take it.
Jonathan Dwyer is running really tough. On that last run for the first down, Peka had a clean shot at him in the hole and Dwyer just ran right through him.
Still stunned over Ryan's (and Schottenheimer's) inability to go for the jugular on the first series of the 2nd half. Why is Tebow on this team if not to take the ball on two successive goal line plays when the defense must at least respect the possibility of a pass?? Instead we get Sanchez in a 50-50 (at best) 3rd and short pass followed by the obligatory Chicken SH*T field goal. Leaving Brady still ahead. Do these coaches not understand the odds in those situations near the other team's goal line??
More cosmic thought: The weakness of the AFC is stunning. Baltimore could very well be falling apart. New England has some serious flaws. Ditto an old Steeler team. It's basically the Texans if they stay healthy, and I maintain that on a neutral field they would be underdogs to NYG, GB, CHI and SF-- and probably no better than Pick 'em vs. the Falcons.
Before the Ravens lost Lewis and Webb, I thought either the Ravens or the Texans would make the Super Bowl. Now I'm hard-pressed to see who could beat the Texans in Houston (I mean, aside from a 2-3 team from the NFC!)
I would favor the Texans against the Falcons but agree with the rest of what you say. But let's not forget how much things can change in 3 months. The Broncos could put together a respectable run. Or the Pats could figure out what ails their defense. The Dolphins could surprise everybody!
Nothing to do with Schottenheimer now. His train wreck's in St. Louis.
One curiousity about the Steeler-Bengal game. On Wallace' catch, after the challenge was deemed unsuccessful, why didn't the clock start?? Didn't Lewis in effect get a timeout even as he lost one for losing the challenge? Wallace was inbounds. Isn't the rule to start up the clock again in that situation??
I wondered about that, too. But I guess since the team loses a timeout, then it makes sense that way?
Reading elsewhere, I heard a timeout was called, and then the challenge flag thrown. So the clock wouldn't start because of the TO.
Anyone else sick of the horsecollar rule? The Dallas/Carolina game at the end swung on a huge miscall of the horsecollar, and it doesn't seem like the refs really enforce it correctly.
Anyways, were horsecollar tackles really that dangerous? I only remember Roy Williams breaking Terrell Owens leg once, but other than that I can't think of any examples of when it injured someone.
Plenty of ways to tackle that don't involve hooking hand inside shoulder pad, so no it doesn't bother me at all.
Harrison's (iirc) horse collar tackle of Shaun Alexander broke a bone in his foot, which along with his new contract contributed to ending his career earlier than it otherwise might have.
Wondering what the record for red zone turnovers is.
Exceptional Hosting Guidance For Everyone To Utilize
You may have issues choosing a support that may be reliable while offering the features that you need. Choosing the right number is hard due to many different available options. The tips integrated in this article gives you the main advantage of the knowledge of your own friends who definitely have been throughout the worst and developed an online host that worked in the long run.
After you have selecting your internet web hosting service company, you should decide to make payments every month, instead of investing in a lengthier time frame. You can't forecast what your organization will be or what your host can do inside the upcoming several weeks. Should your organization develops too big to the variety or maybe your enterprise closes, you could possibly get rid of the money you paid for, unless of course the variety says otherwise.
Website hosting service providers worth their reputations, because you can discover a whole lot from what consumers statement. Research website hosts to find out which possess a trustworthy track record plus a long record of good service. This will likely also allow you to type out the ones that don't have a great track record.
Specific website hosts will enable you to receive a return proportional to the level of down time your web site endures. This will never be a great deal of reimbursement when compared with a loss in product sales in the downtime. You should select a web hosting option that gives reputable uptime in contrast to refunds as being offline.
Should your hosting services offers on the internet talks, discussion boards or posting panels, then utilize them for immediate access to information regarding them. When you can inquire about your concerns, you are able to exclude professional services that won't meet your needs. Discovering the right host company will be less difficult when you affirmed by good reviews. If you can talk with a existing customer of your organization, they will most likely be the ideal individual to learn details about a firm you are looking at.
Should you be a amateur in web design, get a web host that provides excellent customer service instead of a large amount of special features. When you begin there are plenty of concerns that turn up in your head about internet hosting, so you're going to desire a hold that has great customer service accessible and able to solution your questions. The technical support that you simply will receive from a firm with excellent customer care will be much more beneficial to you than a bundle of capabilities you may never use.
Are you presently considering hosting your web site using a cost-free host company? It is advisable to make your very own backups of all your significant info, because free of charge hosting providers usually have little back-up professional services, if any. Because of this, if anything vanishes, you're at a complete loss.
Choose your variety depending on a variety of conditions rather than producing your selection based upon cost alone. Leave your alternatives available to help you determine what works best for you. Examine all variables prior to selecting your hold and then choose a strategy that is affordable. Make sure that the variety can supply every little thing required.
When picking a web internet hosting firm, it is a good idea to decide on the one that has brought several awards. If your organization has numerous web hosting service honours, by way of example, this can present you with a good experience of the help and service they give. Owning an honor is a great sign that this hosting company is reputable and possesses numerous content customers. Seek out hosts that have earned awards which were accorded based on consumer votes these are your best option.
Be sure you know any down occasions your web internet hosting support may have planned. It is the best for the constant maintenance to become appointed no more than monthly. If it's more frequently than that, it may result in a lot of downward time for your personal internet site.
If transferring your internet site to another variety can be something you are looking for, be sure you investigation into whether or not you may be permitted to shift your website address. Some hosts can keep your blog label whenever you keep. Then you will need to make positive changes to title, confusing your while visitors.
Plenty of internet hosts will give you several accessories who go in what their service, but these functions differ from number to hold. Stick to the firms that supply the assistance you will need. As an example, some features may only be available on increased-valued programs, so be on the lookout for related terms and conditions.
When looking for an online variety, do some additional study online aside from merely studying the host's web site and advertising resources. Check out sites that happen to be self-sufficient and also have no link to your company, then read through user evaluations there. These evaluations can help you acknowledge a quality service from other hosts.
Some online hosts use the services of a bigger variety to deliver their choices for your needs. These businesses buy a prohibit of room around the hosting server at a discount, and transform revenue by renting place to small internet sites. You can even examine out distinct web hosts under the identical organization, as you might find a much better bargain by doing this!
Read your contract carefully, and get the internet hosting provider to spell out any unclear terminology for you. Service fees and clauses is definitely not conveniently evident in the principal text message of the commitment. No sales hype is going to position them over to you. Take into account the complete price of the service, which includes setup service fees and charges for early cancellation, before you sign about the dotted series.
An online host must have several back up links in case their main one should go traditional. Be sure the online hosts you are considering have this. Should your web host just has one particular connection to the web, this can be high-risk simply because that when it is going offline, your internet site may also go off-line. Ensure that the business has redundant relationships and therefore every one of individuals links can do supporting your web site.
In summary, it might be hard to find the best web host. Due to multitude of factors that need to be evaluated, it can be difficult to find out which web host will likely be suitable. Follow this advice when selecting an online hold to fit your company.
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties