If you're a Football Outsider you're a TRUE player and true players don't stick to one passion only, so here's something else to excite you while you're waiting for the game to start. How about a free $30 chip to play slot machine games for as long as you want?
Here's your thread for open discussion of all the Week 8 NFL games.
Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 30 Oct 2011
135 replies , Last at
04 Nov 2011, 2:58am by
Jerry
1
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
by Big-Hairy-Andy :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 11:21am
So here's a question...
Arizona @ Baltimore
AZ Pass Off DVOA: -16.1%
Baltimore Pass Def DVOA: -33.3%
What are the chances of Baltimore's defense actually outscoring - on the scoreboard, not just in DVOA - Arizona's offense in this game? How often does that happen? They've already done that to the Jets; any other recent (say last 5-10 years) examples of defenses doing that multiple times in one year?
Pretty big difference between Baltimore's pass offense and Arizona's pass defense too.
Miami vs Giants is on over here.
Giants offense beats the Miami Defense with an emphasis on passing (both MIA and NYG).
Miami offense is beat by the Giants defense... this might not be the most exiting game there could be on this week.
Man, what the heck happened to Flacco? Did the losses of Heap and Mason just nuke his comfort level? His stats are awful compared to the last couple seasons.
Apparently the scariest Halloween costume one could go as in the neighborhood of a Miami defensive back is as a wide receiver. They look positively terrified of the Giants this week.
Ed Hochuli's crew are having a terrible first half in the Vikings-Panthers game. I don't know if there are stats available for awful officiating but if there are then this lot must be near the bottom.
GAH! The Giants convert 3rd-and-11 when once again the MIA CB is still running down the field away from the line of scrimmage when Manningham breaks off his route 14 yards downfield and gets the easy first down. It's so obviously bad that Dan Dierdorf is able to accurately point out the horrendous excuse for coverage. I mean, it's one thing to not want to get beaten deep. That's valid. But you should at least be paying enough attention to the play to know when the receiver decides to take what you're giving them.
(And...just maybe the cushion allowed should be less than the first-down yardage?)
Busy moving stuff from one room to another so not posting here much... but noticed I can do the IRC on my phone and but its really difficult to do this thread on phone. Don't suppose a tapatalk plugin would be available? Its free for most message board formats...
Hoch and his band of fools actually get a tight call correct and Leslie Frazier wastes a challenge. I really don't like the 'I wish we hadn't done that' challenge, it suggests poor impulse control.
Newton looks so good for a rookie passer, he can make every throw, kill you with his legs and his footwork is sharp. Carolina's qb coach could be a hot commodity in a few years. The VIkings defensive backfield has helped though, they're a dismal group.
Ponder is having a decent day too, while he does struggle to drive the deep out he has a quick, clean release with good accuracy, ball placement and anticipation. This rookie qb class is looking like a strong one.
by joe football (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 2:33pm
In addition to keeping up with the revitalized, vibrant open thread, join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for IRC football chat! Point your favorite IRC client to bendenweyr.dyndns.org, channel #fo
Yeah, at this point I'm happy the Falcons have the week off and miss out on whatever nonsense virus is causing these games. "Any given Sunday" is one thing, this looks more like opposite day.
No, but that's only because the requirement for first ballot Hall of Famer at wide receiver right now is ridiculously high. (It appears to be below Jerry Rice, but above Owens/Moss.) However, if Steve Smith keeps himself healthy and active for another 5-6 years he'll be in the Hall of Fame.
As the announcer is making excuses for Chris Johnson, he says "they're not even getting him to the line of scrimmage." The footage they show in the background shows CJ dancing in the backfield for about 3 seconds.
I'd like to see a list of games with the biggest difference between a teams' single-game DVOA and their year-long average. If the Rams manage to keep this up, I imagine this game would have to be near the top...
I'm snakebitten by praising the refs, as they steal a great play by MIA with a phantom PI call... (admittedly, CBS utterly refused to show a replay from the MIA endzone, which would actually show what Marshall's hand was doing, so I can't swear there wasn't a push-off of some kind, but...yeah)
At this stage the Ravens have run 62 plays to 33 by Arizona. I know that the cards had a punt return but how have they not run more plays, they're getting more than four per carry on the ground and abour nine yards per pass. It seems a little odd.
by BSKazzy (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 3:52pm
Dolphins giving this game away, though a bogus offensive pass interference call on Marshall looms large. Unfortunate, since a road win against a 1st place team would have put to bed the rumors that Miami is throwing the season. No sport wants that.
by BSKazzy (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 4:18pm
I will also say that having to enter a recaptcha for every post is one thing that works against the success of these threads, to respond to the earlier inquiry.
I wonder how easy it is to implement something like having to put in a captcha once or twice a day per unregistered user for an IP. That would still slow/stop spammers and be less annoying.
Cundiff decides not to join Olindo Mare in the kicker dog house. I didn't get to see the game, though the early going made it sound like Bal was reliving Monday night. Did Ari fall apart, or did the Ravens remember they are supposed to be a rather good team?
by RichC (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 4:47pm
ARI started running on every first and 2nd down, and then Kolb kept getting destroyed on 3rd and 7, when either the pocket would collapse, or none of his WRs would run routes deeper than 3 yards.
From a Raven's fan perspective:
- Running the hurry-up to end the first half seemed to remind the offense that they're paid football players (anecdotally the Raven's always seem to do well in the hurry-up but almost never run it)
- Around that same time the refs decided that the thing that every CB on JAC and ARI was doing to Boldin for the last two games was pass interference. I don't care what side of it you're on (maybe its PI, maybe its not, as a Raven's fan I think it is), CB's literally did the same stuff for 2 whole games and suddenly in the second half of the second game refs start consistently calling it. Weird...
by BSKazzy (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 4:20pm
Pitt dinking and dunking down the field, compounded by some strong RAC and poor tackling. On edge of red zone. We might see the TEs combine for 300 yards today.
TD STEELERS! Strong drive. Lots of short crossing routes and using the middle of the field. Was wide open. Heath Miller had 3 or 4 grabs for sizable gains.
Washington catches a break from Buffalo when they recover a fumble at the start of the second quarter. They drive into the Redzone, then get a sequence of:
sack (Buffalo's 5th of the season)
incomplete
sack (Buffalo's 6th of the season)
blocked 50 yard FG
This reinforces my opinion that Washington is the only team in the NFC East that is in no danger of playing postseason football.
Watching Tebow screw up the most simplest of routes with lousy timing, crappy accuracy, inexplicablely wrong reads...it's just flat out amazing he's a starting NFL QB.
The Steelers are walking off the field but the officials call something, so the half is not over yet.
Now there's a cop telling them to come back on the field doing his directing traffic arm wave.
Hilarious.
Steelers pass VOA will be enormous for this game, DVOA not so much because NE D looks AWFUL (though a great INT to set up their only TD). Steelers running game looks average, mostly 3 yard gains with a few longer runs sprinkled in, but that's ok because they are passing 75% of the time. This may break Wallace's 40 yd reception streak to an end as NE is giving up the 5-12 yard range and stopping anything long. Ben has done an excellent job of taking what he was given and marching the Steelers down the field.
NE has looked good on offense, they just had a 3 and out to start each half and stalled 3 other times resulting in a punt and two FG attempts with one clanking off the upright.
by Jim Glass (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 9:23pm
Tebow has won me over to religion.
I am praying that he's still starting three weeks from now when the Broncs play the Jets.
The result of Tim's first 20 dropbacks today, thru the 3rd Q: 4 completions for 37 yards, 5 sacks for -44 yards, a net of -7 yards, plus two fumbles on sacks, one run back for a TD. Lions up 38-3.
But his *intangibles* were tremendous!
As the Lions (up 35) went into a consume-time prevent defense, Tim was able to run up his passing stats all the way to a 56 rating. Yet more clutch 4th-Q play by Tebow, saving his very best for last, striving against all odds for the comeback!
Four yards per attempt? And that's after a decent drive against a we're-up-by-40 defense? Tebow is getting debacled out there. How long before Denver admits that he is yet another hopeless Josh McDaniels reclamation project?
*Second year player.
*Best statistical resume to come out of college at his position in the last five years.
*Started 5 games: 3 good, 2 bad.
*"Now they just need to figure out a way to get the fans off his bandwagon, so they can replace him".
Naw, I was counting all three (73 DYAR, 41 DYAR, 81 DYAR) from last year. Miami and today were miserable, although I could easily have added the relief effort two weeks ago as good.
For his career, he's an under 50% passer, playing only in 2010-11, when anything under 60% makes you a candidate for a benching. He has started three games this year, against the non-intimidating Detroit and Miami secondaries. Despite garbage-time statistical improvement, his yars-per-attempt is nonetheless lower than two quarterbacks already benched this year (McNabb, Grossman).
And it isn't like he's doing a great job out there and his receivers are dropping passes. Watching him play, it's clear that he can't read a defense and even if he could, his accuracy makes Derek Anderson look like an armed Predator drone.
More to the point, while the front office may not like it, they have a perfectly serviceable quarterback who is also well paid on the roster. Kyle Orton may not be John Elway, but he's at least a competent NFL quarterback, a respectable caretaker for a team which would need Peyton Manning to make the playoffs anyway.
Denver will rue the McDaniels era a long time. That said, the Shanahan Redskins are making me wonder exactly why I thought firing him in Denver was a mistake.
by Jim Glass (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 9:30pm
They reviewed it to see if the ball was recovered in bounds (as if it made a difference at that point).
The commentary was that there should have been a penalty for kicking the ball (which might have made a little difference) but they couldn't review it for that.
Yeah, the cross-talk was confusing, but they weren't wrong.
I keep hoping Kyle Rudolph will catch a touchdown so I can break out my nickname for him "Rudolph the Red Zone TE". I tried to use it after a 2 yd completion at the 20, just not appropriate enough.
I hate how if a controversial goal line play is called a TD, it triggers automatic review. But if it does not, then no. Case in point, the patriots call at the goal line, he was in fact in, but because they called it incorrectly short, it did not trigger the automatic review, BB decided to not risk the challenge and the pats had to use more time to score. Yes, it probably didn't decide the game, but you never know. and it will some day.
I don't disagree, but on a pragmatic matter, you've got problems triggering an auto review of non-scoring plays. For example, on the Pats play the clock did not stop. (If he did not make the TD, then the clock should keep running.) If you review, the clock stops, in effect giving the Pats (or the team in that situation) a time out. And, outside of 2 minutes, the team can use a challenge, but they did not because they were in a hurry-up offense, and they decided the time and timeout were more important than the challenge. I agree that it would be nice if they could have an auto review to get it right, but if the clock is an issue, then auto review is a problem.
I agree that they should be able to challenge as long they have timeouts. But didn't they do the "booth review of whatever they thought they should" the first time they tried replay and it didn't work very well?
My concern with that rule was always that it would result in referees awarding more dubious touchdowns thinking it can always be overturned on review if it's wrong. Glad to see that's not the case; not so glad to see a wrong call go the other way.
A similar example: the Marshawn Lynch run on the last play of the first half. Shouldn't that have at least been reviewed? It looked pretty darn close to me.
They're looking at reviewing high leverage plays, and the easiest way is to auto-review scoring plays. Otherwise, you'd need a rather esoteric guideline like auto-review all plays with > 0.1 WPA or something.
Oh, I understand that. I simply think, as a referee, the knowledge that calling the play one way will get it reviewed to make sure I'm right whereas calling it the other way won't would make me err on the side of calling it the way that gets it reviewed. I also don't think there was any need for them to auto-review any more plays than they already did. I'm more in favour of a situation where coaches can challenge as many plays as they like, but they lose a time out every time the challenge fails. If it's successful, that means the referees made a mistake and the coach shouldn't ever lose anything from getting that corrected.
You could argue that it cost the Bears last year. Cutler was running a sneak and pushed the ball across the plane and then fumbled. Lovie didn't challenge because he had foolishly challenged the play before so the Bears end up losing to the Skins. If the same rules for a play that did score were applied to one that didn't they would have won.
I really enjoy these technique breakdowns with Rodney Harrison.
When Asomugha was talking about how he can use his width and doesn't have to react to little moves by receivers, it reminded me a lot of the Greg Cosell's quote from Farrar's article about how he isn't a great change of direction corner, but instead is smooth with his movements.
Don't think we'll have to be hearing about Brady and Welker breaking any single-season records anymore.
What the heck was up with the playcalls by Tomlin when the Steelers got the ball after the most pathetic onside kick attempt ever? Consecutive pass plays resulting in consecutive mega-sacks taking you out of range for the clinching FG?
I never knew you could onsides kick after a safety if you used a dropkick instead of a punt.
Why was that safety a safety and not a touchback? Brady was stripped, sure. But the ball didn't go in the endzone because the offense's impetus put it there. The ball went in the endzone because the DB punched it through the endzone while it was loose on the field of play.
While obviously PIT fans will like the win, it had to be excruciating for PIT to be outplaying NE by such a wide margin and yet have the game in doubt until rather late.
I didn't see the game live. On the NFL Network highlight show, they said
something about PIT doing this deliberately to take time off of the clock.
But if they were really in FG range, that doesn't make much sense to me.
It would be better to get the points, wouldn't it?
Re: the question about the safety. The Steelers never had possession, so it was a NE fumble through the end zone.
My question is about the Polamalu swat of the ball. The announcers indicated they thought it was illegal. A kick of the ball is illegal but not batting it with your hand, is it? They alluded to the "Holy Roller" as a comparison, but that was a fumble (or perhaps "fumble"), this was a loose ball. I think it's a distinction that matters, right?
If the officials judged it to be intentional, it would have been a penalty. Rule 12-1-8, A player may not bat or punch a loose ball (in field of play) toward opponent’s goal line; Rule 2-5 (g), A Bat or Punch is the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm.
Of course, I'm sure Polamalu would have claimed he was trying to recover the ball, but he made a bad grab at it and it rolled away from him. One thing I greatly dislike about many of the NFL rules is the need for the officials to make a decision about intent.
It's also funny because if intent is the deciding factor, he could just argue that he wasn't trying to hit it towards his opponent's goal line, just out of the grasp of their recovery - the fact that flew towards the goal line was incidental to his grasping at it to prevent their recovery, which isn't against the rule as it is written.
-It looked to me like the Steeler pass plays were designed as "If you don't have somebody wide open, eat the ball." They were a couple of cases of Ben willingly taking the sack. (Pittsburgh's running game was unlikely to succeed against a packed-in defense.)
-There has to be some way to onside kick after a safety.
-Not nearly as excruciating as watching Jacksonville stay in the game a couple weeks ago.
by CraigoMcl (not verified) :: Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:47am
The back to back sacks don't bother me so much that they were passing, but howe they were passing. Replays from behind the offense showed that a majority of the receivers were running deep routes and weren't even looking back when the protection broke down.
I get on Roethlisberger for holding the ball as much as anybody, but that was just awful playcalling that gave him no chance. Why throw deep 1) You've been having success throwing short all day, and 2) A first down ices the game?
I haven't seen anyone quoted about the routes they ran, but I'll guess that the deep routes were designed to clear out defenders for something short. From the (uncharacteristically willing) way Ben took the sacks, I'm guessing his instructions were to only throw if he was 100% sure he had the completion.
My theory is BRoeth knew that a) Suisham would miss, and b) Tomlin would call on Suisham even though Suisham isn't good, so by taking the sacks it prevented Tomlin from making a bad decision.
I never knew you could onsides kick after a safety if you used a dropkick instead of a punt.
Anyone can field the kick after it's gone 10 yards. In 1996 after Favre was sacked by the Rams for a safety, the Packers punted for their free kick. Craig Hentrich kicked it so high, Packers safety and special teams wiz Mike Prior caught it for the Packers ball. It was like a 60 yard free kick.
by Aaron Brooks' Good Twin (not verified) :: Mon, 10/31/2011 - 12:00pm
You can fair-catch a kickoff that hasn't landed, and thus prevent the kicking team from interfering with the catch. You cannot fair-catch a ball which has touched the ground, hence why the drop-kick works better.
(This is also why most onside kicks are bounced off the ground, rather that merely kicked upwards very short)
End of game play calls: Running had a low first down probability against that defense. Passing, but only throwing with very high probability attempts is probably better. Taking a sack is not a big deal since the clock runs and the punt will end up deep regardless. Sadly, they were not in Suisham's reliable range.
Onsides after safety: Yup, they can also placekick without a tee for an onsides kick, but they probably figured drop kick was a better option.
Safety: I think they got the rules wrong. The defense provided the "impetus" so it should have been a touchback. It's also possible Polamalu intentionally batted the ball which would be a foul.
Dominant squeaker: yeah that was excruciating, but in the good way that makes football fun.
"Safety: I think they got the rules wrong. The defense provided the "impetus" so it should have been a touchback. It's also possible Polamalu intentionally batted the ball which would be a foul."
------
Why? Impetus doesn't matter; possession does.
Had the ball simply gone out of bounds, NE would have retained possession, even if a Steeler had been the last to touch the ball.
If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone or in the field of play and goes out of bounds in the end zone, it is a safety, if that team provided the impetus that sent the ball into the end zone (See 11-5-1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided by the opponent, it is a touchback.
This is somewhat confusing, but I think the distinction that the officials made was that "impetus" hadn't changed from offense to defense on the play. A change in impetus is fairly strictly defined as the defense "muffing a ball at rest" or "illegally batting a loose ball" (Polamalu's punch was indeed illegal, but the officials didn't see/judge that), not just the simple matter of whether or not the defense had last touched/redirected the football. Definition of impetus:
IMPETUS
Article 3 Impetus is the action of a player that gives momentum to the ball and sends it in touch.
The Impetus is attributed to the offense except when the ball is sent in touch through a new momentum when the defense muffs a ball which is at rest, or nearly at rest, or illegally bats:
(a) a kick or fumble;
(b) a backward pass after it has struck the ground;
(c) or illegally kicks any ball (12-1-9).
Now, beats the hell out of me what a football "nearly at rest" means, but I'm fairly confident that a backwards-rolling football being pushed further backwards and into the endzone by a scrum of would-be recoverers does not constitute a "change in impetus" even if it was the defense that made the last contact with the football. And indeed I've never seen a touchback (instead of a safety) called on such a scramble for a fumble that ends up in the endzone. I think the requirement for such a touchback call is the "illegal bat", which certainly was the correct call here that the officials just missed.
I stand corrected. I did not realize that "almost at rest" was part of the definition of "impetus." I see now that either Polamalu made an illegal bat that was missed, or the calls on the field were entirely correct. As for the illegal batting, it's very hard to say. On the one hand it definitely looks like he swatted at the ball, doesn't it? On the other hand the illegal batting rules are written such that they require intent, given how quickly he was running when he dove, it's possible that Polamalu did just muff the ball, and there's really very little motive for batting in that situation since a recovery by either team on the ground ends the game. I guess I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the officials on that one. Thanks for the info, GlennW.
FWIW, Mike Pereira tweeted that it should have been called an illegal bat. No doubt it's on the video that officials will watch this week, and it'll probably be called correctly in the future.
by Candyman (not verified) :: Sun, 10/30/2011 - 11:10pm
This is one of the worst performances by the Dallas Cowboys in the last 10 years. Totally unprepared on both sides of the ball and unable to make adjustments in any way. Tonight is a very Wade Phillips-like performance. They should be ashamed from Jerry Jones down to the towel boy.
I agree - it was delightful. Seriously, though, normally in a blowout, one team has a bunch of mistakes, like fumbles or weird plays where something just breaks wrong for one team and the game gets out of hand. This is one of the few times I can recall the Eagles' having simply take Dallas out to the woodshed and beaten them up and down the field on almost every single play, just dominating them like I couldn't believe. DVOA says they just curb stomped the #2 rushing DVOA defense. I wonder what McCoy's DYAR/DVOA will be for the game...
Delightful. I'm still ok with 4-12, if they just give us fans another one like this when they are in Fort Worth...
Awful, awful overturn in the SD-KC game. Travis LaBoy hits Cassel's arm, and the ball travels several yards forward and is jumped on by SD. Call on the field is incomplete. Replay shows that LaBoy's arm is going the opposite way from the direction the ball comes out, so the only way the ball could have come out the way it did is if it was propelled forward by Cassel. You don't have to be Isaac Newton to conclude that Cassel's arm must, ipso facto, have been going forward. But instead the ref decides that the replay shows INCONTROVERTIBLE evidence the other way. Even if you don't buy my (physics-based and obviously correct) argument, there's no way the evidence was enough to overturn. Just terrible.
Oh, but a god-awful OPI on a Gates TD and a holding penalty results in a long FG attempt, which Novak honks.
RSS Feed
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
So here's a question...
Arizona @ Baltimore
AZ Pass Off DVOA: -16.1%
Baltimore Pass Def DVOA: -33.3%
What are the chances of Baltimore's defense actually outscoring - on the scoreboard, not just in DVOA - Arizona's offense in this game? How often does that happen? They've already done that to the Jets; any other recent (say last 5-10 years) examples of defenses doing that multiple times in one year?
Pretty big difference between Baltimore's pass offense and Arizona's pass defense too.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Well I guess that ain't happening...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Miami vs Giants is on over here.
Giants offense beats the Miami Defense with an emphasis on passing (both MIA and NYG).
Miami offense is beat by the Giants defense... this might not be the most exiting game there could be on this week.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Listening to Min @ Car here, as was hoping it might be competitive, but Carolina having real trouble holding onto the football so far.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
First offensive play if Miami is an inside run by Reggie Bush (no real gain).
There are some reasons why that's a bad thing.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Man, what the heck happened to Flacco? Did the losses of Heap and Mason just nuke his comfort level? His stats are awful compared to the last couple seasons.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
THE THREAD LIVES
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Apparently the scariest Halloween costume one could go as in the neighborhood of a Miami defensive back is as a wide receiver. They look positively terrified of the Giants this week.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Ed Hochuli's crew are having a terrible first half in the Vikings-Panthers game. I don't know if there are stats available for awful officiating but if there are then this lot must be near the bottom.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Whereas, strangely enough, everything Ron Winter's (!!!) crew has called in the NYG/MIA game has actually looked like a penalty...very odd.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
GAH! The Giants convert 3rd-and-11 when once again the MIA CB is still running down the field away from the line of scrimmage when Manningham breaks off his route 14 yards downfield and gets the easy first down. It's so obviously bad that Dan Dierdorf is able to accurately point out the horrendous excuse for coverage. I mean, it's one thing to not want to get beaten deep. That's valid. But you should at least be paying enough attention to the play to know when the receiver decides to take what you're giving them.
(And...just maybe the cushion allowed should be less than the first-down yardage?)
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Giants will throw that deep out another 10 times in this game.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
The Ravens are absolutely imploding at home against a very bad team.
How long until it's time to ditch Joe Flacco. I mean obviously not yet, but what if this continues the rest of the year and the Ravens end up 8-8?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
On consecutive plays Christian Ponder has carried out his playfake TO THE WRONG SIDE. Both times he panicks and takes off for 0 and -1 yards.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Busy moving stuff from one room to another so not posting here much... but noticed I can do the IRC on my phone and but its really difficult to do this thread on phone. Don't suppose a tapatalk plugin would be available? Its free for most message board formats...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Hoch and his band of fools actually get a tight call correct and Leslie Frazier wastes a challenge. I really don't like the 'I wish we hadn't done that' challenge, it suggests poor impulse control.
Newton looks so good for a rookie passer, he can make every throw, kill you with his legs and his footwork is sharp. Carolina's qb coach could be a hot commodity in a few years. The VIkings defensive backfield has helped though, they're a dismal group.
Ponder is having a decent day too, while he does struggle to drive the deep out he has a quick, clean release with good accuracy, ball placement and anticipation. This rookie qb class is looking like a strong one.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
The Raven O-line is just getting spanked in pass protection. Incredible when you adjust for opponent.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
In addition to keeping up with the revitalized, vibrant open thread, join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for IRC football chat! Point your favorite IRC client to bendenweyr.dyndns.org, channel #fo
Or for a web-based solution, just use this mibbit link: http://chat.mibbit.com/?channel=%23fo&server=bendenweyr.dyndns.org
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
So... Baltimore? New York? New Orleans? Anybody there?
Early scores very odd so far.
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Yeah, at this point I'm happy the Falcons have the week off and miss out on whatever nonsense virus is causing these games. "Any given Sunday" is one thing, this looks more like opposite day.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Manning is not hurt at all. He took a sabbatical year to allow the Colts drafting Luck.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Anyone else get the feeling that Steve Smith would be a first ballot hall of famer if he had decent QB play his whole career?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
No, but that's only because the requirement for first ballot Hall of Famer at wide receiver right now is ridiculously high. (It appears to be below Jerry Rice, but above Owens/Moss.) However, if Steve Smith keeps himself healthy and active for another 5-6 years he'll be in the Hall of Fame.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
As the announcer is making excuses for Chris Johnson, he says "they're not even getting him to the line of scrimmage." The footage they show in the background shows CJ dancing in the backfield for about 3 seconds.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I'd like to see a list of games with the biggest difference between a teams' single-game DVOA and their year-long average. If the Rams manage to keep this up, I imagine this game would have to be near the top...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Where are those guys who last week proudly expressed their disdain for baseball? Were they checking their football fantasy stats on Thursday night?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Why do you think we know where they are?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
They posted on this site. I thought they might self-identify.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Maybe they have.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I think the announcer said "funk it" two times.
I misheard him.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Just got back from church and looked at the scoreboard.
What is going on?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Doomsday.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Holy shit, the Baltimore offense is alive!
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Couple TERRIBLE PI calles in the Dolphins game and the Ravens game.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Want to expound on the Ravens game? I'm watching redzone and the calls I've seen have looked legit to me.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Offensive PI on Marshall was egregious. Really broke the little bit of rhythm that the Dolphins might have gotten going.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I'm snakebitten by praising the refs, as they steal a great play by MIA with a phantom PI call... (admittedly, CBS utterly refused to show a replay from the MIA endzone, which would actually show what Marshall's hand was doing, so I can't swear there wasn't a push-off of some kind, but...yeah)
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
At this stage the Ravens have run 62 plays to 33 by Arizona. I know that the cards had a punt return but how have they not run more plays, they're getting more than four per carry on the ground and abour nine yards per pass. It seems a little odd.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
They haven't done anything at all in the second half aside from the penalty-aided drive that just tied the game at 27.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Dolphins giving this game away, though a bogus offensive pass interference call on Marshall looms large. Unfortunate, since a road win against a 1st place team would have put to bed the rumors that Miami is throwing the season. No sport wants that.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Anyone got the Panthers/Vikings game? Does Cam have some late-game heroics up his sleeve?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Well, he had some decent heroics going. His idiot kicker, not so much.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Sometimes, the kicker is a QBs best friend.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Mare and Ponder?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
So, how about that Olindo Mare investment?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Olindo Mare. Ugh.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Steelers - Patriots kick off...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Big run back by Pitt to start the game. Ward inactive, as most probably know.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I will also say that having to enter a recaptcha for every post is one thing that works against the success of these threads, to respond to the earlier inquiry.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Could always register...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
but then he'd lose so much potential for creative one-liners! (not verified)
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
You could always sign in/sign up. It's really not that hard, and *boom!* no captcha.
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I wonder how easy it is to implement something like having to put in a captcha once or twice a day per unregistered user for an IP. That would still slow/stop spammers and be less annoying.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Cundiff decides not to join Olindo Mare in the kicker dog house. I didn't get to see the game, though the early going made it sound like Bal was reliving Monday night. Did Ari fall apart, or did the Ravens remember they are supposed to be a rather good team?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
ARI started running on every first and 2nd down, and then Kolb kept getting destroyed on 3rd and 7, when either the pocket would collapse, or none of his WRs would run routes deeper than 3 yards.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
From a Raven's fan perspective:
- Running the hurry-up to end the first half seemed to remind the offense that they're paid football players (anecdotally the Raven's always seem to do well in the hurry-up but almost never run it)
- Around that same time the refs decided that the thing that every CB on JAC and ARI was doing to Boldin for the last two games was pass interference. I don't care what side of it you're on (maybe its PI, maybe its not, as a Raven's fan I think it is), CB's literally did the same stuff for 2 whole games and suddenly in the second half of the second game refs start consistently calling it. Weird...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Pitt dinking and dunking down the field, compounded by some strong RAC and poor tackling. On edge of red zone. We might see the TEs combine for 300 yards today.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I had no idea registering made a difference. THANKS!
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Welcome to the forums.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
TD STEELERS! Strong drive. Lots of short crossing routes and using the middle of the field. Was wide open. Heath Miller had 3 or 4 grabs for sizable gains.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Redskins not offering much resistance so far to Fitzpatrick...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Washington catches a break from Buffalo when they recover a fumble at the start of the second quarter. They drive into the Redzone, then get a sequence of:
sack (Buffalo's 5th of the season)
incomplete
sack (Buffalo's 6th of the season)
blocked 50 yard FG
This reinforces my opinion that Washington is the only team in the NFC East that is in no danger of playing postseason football.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I'm doing 2 push ups for every point I see tonight.
After watching NYG - MIA, now PIT - NE is on.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
After the Lions stopped the Broncos on 3rd down, a replay shows Stephen Tulloch Tebowing. Hah!
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I don't think there are words that can describe how bad Brandon Spikes is in pass coverage.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I'm guessing Peterson will have more dyar from this 86 yard game than from his 175 yard game last week.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Watching Tebow play quarterback makes baby Jesus cry.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
LOL.
As I kept seeing the Lions' score pile up on the out-of-town board at Heinz Field, I'd joke about how awesome a comeback Tebow would lead.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Watching Tebow screw up the most simplest of routes with lousy timing, crappy accuracy, inexplicablely wrong reads...it's just flat out amazing he's a starting NFL QB.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
He's just Tebowing it.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
There's more than 5 minutes remaining. He's obviously going to score 30 something points at the end of the game to make it close.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
The Steelers are walking off the field but the officials call something, so the half is not over yet.
Now there's a cop telling them to come back on the field doing his directing traffic arm wave.
Hilarious.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
NE pass defense is just really, really bad. Brady better start scoring, cause I don't see them stopping PIT very often.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
330+ yards for Pitt <100 for NE. But not quite as lopsided on the score board (20-10)
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Whats with Bob Kraft getting credit for ending the lockout? I mean he only has one vote, right?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
A lot of people at the time spoke of Kraft in particular having a very significant impact on the two sides reaching an agreement.
PIT v NE
Steelers pass VOA will be enormous for this game, DVOA not so much because NE D looks AWFUL (though a great INT to set up their only TD). Steelers running game looks average, mostly 3 yard gains with a few longer runs sprinkled in, but that's ok because they are passing 75% of the time. This may break Wallace's 40 yd reception streak to an end as NE is giving up the 5-12 yard range and stopping anything long. Ben has done an excellent job of taking what he was given and marching the Steelers down the field.
NE has looked good on offense, they just had a 3 and out to start each half and stalled 3 other times resulting in a punt and two FG attempts with one clanking off the upright.
Re: PIT v NE
I assume you meant NE has NOT looked good? I think the Steelers defense DVOA will be incredible.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Anytime Wallace gets the ball on a screen/quick pass, he puts on the jets and I'm surprised by his speed every single time.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Can the Lions play against Tebow every week? Please?
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Lions DEF/ST is currently at 29 points O_O
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
One pick six, one fumble ret for TD, one FG...?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
and 6 sacks. Now Denver scored a TD, so down to only 26.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
How's about another fumble recovery?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
"only 26"
I like your sarcasm.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Tebow has won me over to religion.
I am praying that he's still starting three weeks from now when the Broncs play the Jets.
The result of Tim's first 20 dropbacks today, thru the 3rd Q: 4 completions for 37 yards, 5 sacks for -44 yards, a net of -7 yards, plus two fumbles on sacks, one run back for a TD. Lions up 38-3.
But his *intangibles* were tremendous!
As the Lions (up 35) went into a consume-time prevent defense, Tim was able to run up his passing stats all the way to a 56 rating. Yet more clutch 4th-Q play by Tebow, saving his very best for last, striving against all odds for the comeback!
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Four yards per attempt? And that's after a decent drive against a we're-up-by-40 defense? Tebow is getting debacled out there. How long before Denver admits that he is yet another hopeless Josh McDaniels reclamation project?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Oh I think they already know he's no good. Now they just need his born again fans to realize the same thing. Doing a good job of that so far.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
*Second year player.
*Best statistical resume to come out of college at his position in the last five years.
*Started 5 games: 3 good, 2 bad.
*"Now they just need to figure out a way to get the fans off his bandwagon, so they can replace him".
Really?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Let's see...counting last week's game as "good." Yeah, can't argue with you...in that it's going to take a LONG time to convince his fans.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Naw, I was counting all three (73 DYAR, 41 DYAR, 81 DYAR) from last year. Miami and today were miserable, although I could easily have added the relief effort two weeks ago as good.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
There's and there's bad......
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Ah, that follows, then. He did not, in fact, suck last year.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
For his career, he's an under 50% passer, playing only in 2010-11, when anything under 60% makes you a candidate for a benching. He has started three games this year, against the non-intimidating Detroit and Miami secondaries. Despite garbage-time statistical improvement, his yars-per-attempt is nonetheless lower than two quarterbacks already benched this year (McNabb, Grossman).
And it isn't like he's doing a great job out there and his receivers are dropping passes. Watching him play, it's clear that he can't read a defense and even if he could, his accuracy makes Derek Anderson look like an armed Predator drone.
More to the point, while the front office may not like it, they have a perfectly serviceable quarterback who is also well paid on the roster. Kyle Orton may not be John Elway, but he's at least a competent NFL quarterback, a respectable caretaker for a team which would need Peyton Manning to make the playoffs anyway.
Denver will rue the McDaniels era a long time. That said, the Shanahan Redskins are making me wonder exactly why I thought firing him in Denver was a mistake.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Steelers score a safety.
"they can't review it, it's a penalty"
"but it's a scoring play"
"yeah, but they can't review this"
ALL SCORING PLAYS ARE REVIEWED BY THE GUYS UPSTAIRS!!
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
You're missing what he was saying. I'm all for ragging on the commentators at times when they're being really dumb. This wasn't one of those times.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
They reviewed it to see if the ball was recovered in bounds (as if it made a difference at that point).
The commentary was that there should have been a penalty for kicking the ball (which might have made a little difference) but they couldn't review it for that.
Yeah, the cross-talk was confusing, but they weren't wrong.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I'm pretty certain that I just saw Jim Schwartz patting John Fox on the back, I thought he considered that to be disrepectful behaviour...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I keep hoping Kyle Rudolph will catch a touchdown so I can break out my nickname for him "Rudolph the Red Zone TE". I tried to use it after a 2 yd completion at the 20, just not appropriate enough.
scoring play review
I hate how if a controversial goal line play is called a TD, it triggers automatic review. But if it does not, then no. Case in point, the patriots call at the goal line, he was in fact in, but because they called it incorrectly short, it did not trigger the automatic review, BB decided to not risk the challenge and the pats had to use more time to score. Yes, it probably didn't decide the game, but you never know. and it will some day.
Re: scoring play review
I don't disagree, but on a pragmatic matter, you've got problems triggering an auto review of non-scoring plays. For example, on the Pats play the clock did not stop. (If he did not make the TD, then the clock should keep running.) If you review, the clock stops, in effect giving the Pats (or the team in that situation) a time out. And, outside of 2 minutes, the team can use a challenge, but they did not because they were in a hurry-up offense, and they decided the time and timeout were more important than the challenge. I agree that it would be nice if they could have an auto review to get it right, but if the clock is an issue, then auto review is a problem.
Re: scoring play review
Why not just let the booth review the plays they think are wrong. That seems like an ideal fix to me.
While we're at it, get rid of the "2 challenges, sometimes 3" thing, and just let coaches challenge as long as they have TOs left.
Re: scoring play review
I agree that they should be able to challenge as long they have timeouts. But didn't they do the "booth review of whatever they thought they should" the first time they tried replay and it didn't work very well?
Re: scoring play review
My concern with that rule was always that it would result in referees awarding more dubious touchdowns thinking it can always be overturned on review if it's wrong. Glad to see that's not the case; not so glad to see a wrong call go the other way.
A similar example: the Marshawn Lynch run on the last play of the first half. Shouldn't that have at least been reviewed? It looked pretty darn close to me.
Re: scoring play review
They're looking at reviewing high leverage plays, and the easiest way is to auto-review scoring plays. Otherwise, you'd need a rather esoteric guideline like auto-review all plays with > 0.1 WPA or something.
Re: scoring play review
Oh, I understand that. I simply think, as a referee, the knowledge that calling the play one way will get it reviewed to make sure I'm right whereas calling it the other way won't would make me err on the side of calling it the way that gets it reviewed. I also don't think there was any need for them to auto-review any more plays than they already did. I'm more in favour of a situation where coaches can challenge as many plays as they like, but they lose a time out every time the challenge fails. If it's successful, that means the referees made a mistake and the coach shouldn't ever lose anything from getting that corrected.
Re: scoring play review
You could argue that it cost the Bears last year. Cutler was running a sneak and pushed the ball across the plane and then fumbled. Lovie didn't challenge because he had foolishly challenged the play before so the Bears end up losing to the Skins. If the same rules for a play that did score were applied to one that didn't they would have won.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I really enjoy these technique breakdowns with Rodney Harrison.
When Asomugha was talking about how he can use his width and doesn't have to react to little moves by receivers, it reminded me a lot of the Greg Cosell's quote from Farrar's article about how he isn't a great change of direction corner, but instead is smooth with his movements.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Nnamdi gets a crazy pick.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Re: NE-PIT
Don't think we'll have to be hearing about Brady and Welker breaking any single-season records anymore.
What the heck was up with the playcalls by Tomlin when the Steelers got the ball after the most pathetic onside kick attempt ever? Consecutive pass plays resulting in consecutive mega-sacks taking you out of range for the clinching FG?
I never knew you could onsides kick after a safety if you used a dropkick instead of a punt.
Why was that safety a safety and not a touchback? Brady was stripped, sure. But the ball didn't go in the endzone because the offense's impetus put it there. The ball went in the endzone because the DB punched it through the endzone while it was loose on the field of play.
While obviously PIT fans will like the win, it had to be excruciating for PIT to be outplaying NE by such a wide margin and yet have the game in doubt until rather late.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I didn't see the game live. On the NFL Network highlight show, they said
something about PIT doing this deliberately to take time off of the clock.
But if they were really in FG range, that doesn't make much sense to me.
It would be better to get the points, wouldn't it?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I don't know about Welker, but since Brady was on pace to break Marino's record by something like 700 yards, I'm sure we'll still be hearing about it.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Re: the question about the safety. The Steelers never had possession, so it was a NE fumble through the end zone.
My question is about the Polamalu swat of the ball. The announcers indicated they thought it was illegal. A kick of the ball is illegal but not batting it with your hand, is it? They alluded to the "Holy Roller" as a comparison, but that was a fumble (or perhaps "fumble"), this was a loose ball. I think it's a distinction that matters, right?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
If the officials judged it to be intentional, it would have been a penalty. Rule 12-1-8, A player may not bat or punch a loose ball (in field of play) toward opponent’s goal line; Rule 2-5 (g), A Bat or Punch is the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm.
Of course, I'm sure Polamalu would have claimed he was trying to recover the ball, but he made a bad grab at it and it rolled away from him. One thing I greatly dislike about many of the NFL rules is the need for the officials to make a decision about intent.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
It's also funny because if intent is the deciding factor, he could just argue that he wasn't trying to hit it towards his opponent's goal line, just out of the grasp of their recovery - the fact that flew towards the goal line was incidental to his grasping at it to prevent their recovery, which isn't against the rule as it is written.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
-It looked to me like the Steeler pass plays were designed as "If you don't have somebody wide open, eat the ball." They were a couple of cases of Ben willingly taking the sack. (Pittsburgh's running game was unlikely to succeed against a packed-in defense.)
-There has to be some way to onside kick after a safety.
-Not nearly as excruciating as watching Jacksonville stay in the game a couple weeks ago.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
The back to back sacks don't bother me so much that they were passing, but howe they were passing. Replays from behind the offense showed that a majority of the receivers were running deep routes and weren't even looking back when the protection broke down.
I get on Roethlisberger for holding the ball as much as anybody, but that was just awful playcalling that gave him no chance. Why throw deep 1) You've been having success throwing short all day, and 2) A first down ices the game?
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I haven't seen anyone quoted about the routes they ran, but I'll guess that the deep routes were designed to clear out defenders for something short. From the (uncharacteristically willing) way Ben took the sacks, I'm guessing his instructions were to only throw if he was 100% sure he had the completion.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
My theory is BRoeth knew that a) Suisham would miss, and b) Tomlin would call on Suisham even though Suisham isn't good, so by taking the sacks it prevented Tomlin from making a bad decision.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I never knew you could onsides kick after a safety if you used a dropkick instead of a punt.
Anyone can field the kick after it's gone 10 yards. In 1996 after Favre was sacked by the Rams for a safety, the Packers punted for their free kick. Craig Hentrich kicked it so high, Packers safety and special teams wiz Mike Prior caught it for the Packers ball. It was like a 60 yard free kick.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
You can fair-catch a kickoff that hasn't landed, and thus prevent the kicking team from interfering with the catch. You cannot fair-catch a ball which has touched the ground, hence why the drop-kick works better.
(This is also why most onside kicks are bounced off the ground, rather that merely kicked upwards very short)
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
End of game play calls: Running had a low first down probability against that defense. Passing, but only throwing with very high probability attempts is probably better. Taking a sack is not a big deal since the clock runs and the punt will end up deep regardless. Sadly, they were not in Suisham's reliable range.
Onsides after safety: Yup, they can also placekick without a tee for an onsides kick, but they probably figured drop kick was a better option.
Safety: I think they got the rules wrong. The defense provided the "impetus" so it should have been a touchback. It's also possible Polamalu intentionally batted the ball which would be a foul.
Dominant squeaker: yeah that was excruciating, but in the good way that makes football fun.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
"Safety: I think they got the rules wrong. The defense provided the "impetus" so it should have been a touchback. It's also possible Polamalu intentionally batted the ball which would be a foul."
------
Why? Impetus doesn't matter; possession does.
Had the ball simply gone out of bounds, NE would have retained possession, even if a Steeler had been the last to touch the ball.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Section 7, Article 3, Item 4, b):
If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone or in the field of play and goes out of bounds in the end zone, it is a safety, if that team provided the impetus that sent the ball into the end zone (See 11-5-1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided by the opponent, it is a touchback.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
This is somewhat confusing, but I think the distinction that the officials made was that "impetus" hadn't changed from offense to defense on the play. A change in impetus is fairly strictly defined as the defense "muffing a ball at rest" or "illegally batting a loose ball" (Polamalu's punch was indeed illegal, but the officials didn't see/judge that), not just the simple matter of whether or not the defense had last touched/redirected the football. Definition of impetus:
IMPETUS
Article 3 Impetus is the action of a player that gives momentum to the ball and sends it in touch.
The Impetus is attributed to the offense except when the ball is sent in touch through a new momentum when the defense muffs a ball which is at rest, or nearly at rest, or illegally bats:
(a) a kick or fumble;
(b) a backward pass after it has struck the ground;
(c) or illegally kicks any ball (12-1-9).
Now, beats the hell out of me what a football "nearly at rest" means, but I'm fairly confident that a backwards-rolling football being pushed further backwards and into the endzone by a scrum of would-be recoverers does not constitute a "change in impetus" even if it was the defense that made the last contact with the football. And indeed I've never seen a touchback (instead of a safety) called on such a scramble for a fumble that ends up in the endzone. I think the requirement for such a touchback call is the "illegal bat", which certainly was the correct call here that the officials just missed.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I stand corrected. I did not realize that "almost at rest" was part of the definition of "impetus." I see now that either Polamalu made an illegal bat that was missed, or the calls on the field were entirely correct. As for the illegal batting, it's very hard to say. On the one hand it definitely looks like he swatted at the ball, doesn't it? On the other hand the illegal batting rules are written such that they require intent, given how quickly he was running when he dove, it's possible that Polamalu did just muff the ball, and there's really very little motive for batting in that situation since a recovery by either team on the ground ends the game. I guess I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the officials on that one. Thanks for the info, GlennW.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
FWIW, Mike Pereira tweeted that it should have been called an illegal bat. No doubt it's on the video that officials will watch this week, and it'll probably be called correctly in the future.
Statement
PFT: Jerry Jones Sees Tonight's Game as an Opportunity to Make a Statement
Dallas is certainly making a statement, but probably not the one Mr. Jones had
in mind.
Re: Statement
This is one of the worst performances by the Dallas Cowboys in the last 10 years. Totally unprepared on both sides of the ball and unable to make adjustments in any way. Tonight is a very Wade Phillips-like performance. They should be ashamed from Jerry Jones down to the towel boy.
And this comes from a lifelong Dallas fan.
Re: Statement
I agree - it was delightful. Seriously, though, normally in a blowout, one team has a bunch of mistakes, like fumbles or weird plays where something just breaks wrong for one team and the game gets out of hand. This is one of the few times I can recall the Eagles' having simply take Dallas out to the woodshed and beaten them up and down the field on almost every single play, just dominating them like I couldn't believe. DVOA says they just curb stomped the #2 rushing DVOA defense. I wonder what McCoy's DYAR/DVOA will be for the game...
Delightful. I'm still ok with 4-12, if they just give us fans another one like this when they are in Fort Worth...
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
A succession of awful, bogus calls by the refs in this one tonight.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
Awful, awful overturn in the SD-KC game. Travis LaBoy hits Cassel's arm, and the ball travels several yards forward and is jumped on by SD. Call on the field is incomplete. Replay shows that LaBoy's arm is going the opposite way from the direction the ball comes out, so the only way the ball could have come out the way it did is if it was propelled forward by Cassel. You don't have to be Isaac Newton to conclude that Cassel's arm must, ipso facto, have been going forward. But instead the ref decides that the replay shows INCONTROVERTIBLE evidence the other way. Even if you don't buy my (physics-based and obviously correct) argument, there's no way the evidence was enough to overturn. Just terrible.
Oh, but a god-awful OPI on a Gates TD and a holding penalty results in a long FG attempt, which Novak honks.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
I.e., I agree with BJR.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
San Diego once again seemingly out to prove the extent to which they can dominate an opponent and lose.
Re: Week 8 Game Discussion Thread
KC vs SD
Score is 13-12, KC scores a TD, now 19-12, beginning of 4th quarter.
Why didn't they go for the 2 point conversion to make it a two score game (or lead by 7)?????
Post new comment