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?
312 replies , Last at
09 Nov 2010, 10:13am by
FireOmarTomlin
1
Mankins to play
by PatsFan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:20am
That was fast. Despite being granted a 2-week roster exemption, the Pats activated Mankins yesterday and the reports up here are not only will he play but that he'll probably start.
3
Re: Mankins to play
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:35am
I thought he and Vincent Jackson would have to sit out for three weeks? Or am I talking crazy?
11
Re: Mankins to play
by Grant (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 1:40pm
I think that's because of Jackson's suspension.
12
Re: Mankins to play
by Athelas :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 1:43pm
The Chargers imposed an extra suspension on Jackson, but the Patriots didn't.
282
Re: Mankins to play
by JammaJamma (not verified) :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:37am
Jackson has a three game suspension for violating the league substance abuse policy.
298
Re: Mankins to play
by Scott C :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 3:40pm
That was already served. The current 3 games is on the roster-exempt list. He has to sign a contract and practice for 3 weeks before being allowed to go on the 53 man roster.
The team threatened to put him on the list if he did not sign the tender and practice back in the pre-season. He didn't, and so had to sign the tender with 9 games left in order to be eligible for the roster for 6 games, in order to get an accrued season.
Mankins can wait until the last minute, out of game shape and without practice. This move means that VJ will be actually ready to go for those 6 games.
2
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by evenchunkiermonkey (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:47am
in b4 cutler gets sacked.
4
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Raiderjoe :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:40am
Goinh to be greta day. Got box of Sierra Nevada Tumbler. Will look at Buc vs Falcs, jets vs Lons and Dolphuns vs Ravens. Should be good fum games to watch Then in afternoon going to watch Raiders scalp chiefs wwhile drinking Sierra Nevada
Woudl liek to see Teaxns beat chargers today but dont think will happen. Doesn't matter greatrly becuuase Chargers not goign to ever catch Raiders in standings anyway but would still be fun to see cahregsr lose
10
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Athelas :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 1:39pm
Maybe this indicates my mind is going, but I think I'm going to take Raiderjoe's suggestion--looks very good.
14
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:04pm
If there's one thing other than football that Raiderjoe would know, it's got to be beer.
Note 1: I am assuming that it's beer from the web address.
Note 2: Anyone who wants to argue, go right ahead but I'm not responding.
25
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by 0tarin :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:29pm
Tumbler is actually an excellent beer; probably one of the better releases from Sierra Nevada (outside of their 30th anniversary series, anyway). Enjoy it quick too, because I believe they've shifted its production to their annual celebration ale at this point :)
6
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dean :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:48am
Tomorrow's Audibles will either be the most commented thread in a long time or the most eye-glazed-over thread in a long time. Possibly both.
Between all the Eagles fans and all the Colts fans on this site, it'll have to be a pretty boring game for nobody to have anything to say about it.
7
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 12:25pm
Apropos of nothing, I just hope that someday, somehow, Les Miles and Jeff Fisher have an opportunity to coach against each other.
8
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by FireOmarTomlin :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 12:43pm
Well, hopefully "surprise crowd noise" isn't an issue for Omar this week. Definitely need to make sure the replay squad is tuned into the right "channel" though.
*rolls eyes*
What a clueless tard.
---------------------------------
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit because gratitude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
9
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dales :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 1:11pm
For some good discussion about today's games, see the first comment here.
I am looking forward to seeing if the Giants can beat up on Whitehurst. I have this bad feeling, however, that this will be one of those games where some untested player comes in and goes off, like used to happen all the time against the Braves in baseball.
13
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:03pm
Chargers blow the kickoff! I'm shocked.
15
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:05pm
Chargers three-and-out and blow the punt! I'm less shocked.
37
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by troycapitated p... :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:35pm
Chris Gardocki went a whole career, 1,177 punts, without having one blocked. How in the world have the Chargers allowed 5 blocks in a season?
299
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Scott C :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 3:43pm
In the prior 7 seasons, only one Chargers punt has been blocked.
Punt blocks aren't generally the punter's fault. So no props for Gardocki. Its the line's job to not let a guy come running free up the middle at the punter...
311
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by bengt (not verified) :: Tue, 11/09/2010 - 4:11am
Or rather, anti-props. His punts in his last season with the 2005 Steelers always seemed to have a very steep angle, maybe because he was so anxious to not have them blocked, making them rather short.
16
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by FireOmarTomlin :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:06pm
scifres !!!!!!!!!!1
-----------
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit because gratitude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
17
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:07pm
Sometimes I wonder if Martz doesn't intentionally call running plays he doesn't expect to work just to prove that he needs to pass more.
18
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:09pm
Houston scores. Another Chargers special teams play coming up. Cue Yakkity Sax.
21
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:16pm
Good return only marred by a ten yard hands to the face penalty. Things are looking up.
19
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by TimK :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:14pm
How did the Chargers manage a 1 yard punt? (It must say something that I no longer doubt they _did_ manage it, just wonder how this time...)
26
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:30pm
4-2-SD 12(13:20) M.Scifres punts 1 yard to SD 13, Center-M.Windt. A.Okoye to SD 8 for 5 yards (S.Gregory). SD-M.Scifres was injured during the play. (The punt was deflected by Hst #53Keglar)
So (partially) blocked then?
27
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Atul (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:33pm
yeah, still dont understand how they didnt call running into the kicker there?
29
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:44pm
I think it's like soccer, if you get the ball first, no penalty.
31
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Atul (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:48pm
well, they usually call it if you block the ball and the kicker steps on you on his way down, so...
229
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:08pm
They only call that if the defender DID NOT deflect the ball.
32
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:48pm
That is correct. There's no roughing/running call if get a piece of the ball.
28
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by TimK :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:33pm
Thanks, looks like it. Does Scifres being injured mean they will finally start going for it on 4th downs now?
20
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:15pm
Favre threw a pick, but Greg Camarillo chased the interceptor (couldn't see who it was) down and stripped the ball, so the Vikings have the ball back.
23
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevic (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:18pm
Clearly the Vikings had their receivers run through tackling drills this week.
22
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:17pm
Cardinals can't stop the run. The Vikings have one of the best RBs in the league. Favre has already thrown one INT. Chilly calls four passes in six plays. Le sigh.
Hail Hydra!
24
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:27pm
Two interceptions in the first eight minutes of Ari@Min. Could we have a record-setting day here between Anderson and Favre?
Edit: Arizona is challenging this one, and it looks like they should win the challenge.
Another week, another ridiculous late hit out of bounds call. This one against the Jets on a Stafford scramble.
36
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:27pm
Even that late hit out of bounds penalty on Tillman shouldn't have been flagged. It's not physically possible to avoid that contact if you're playing all out until the whistle - if Fitzpatrick had been passing and Tillman bumped him like that after he released the ball they wouldn't have called a penalty, if Fitzpatrick's step out of bounds had been a step into the end zone for a TD they wouldn't have thrown the flag, but when the ballcarrier crosses the sideline they expect defenders to stop instantaneously.
33
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by 0tarin :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:49pm
Anyone else catch that debacle that was the Ravens' drive from Miami's 5 yard line after an interception return? Absolutely mind-boggling. Four plays for ~-20 yards and a grand total of 0 points.
34
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 2:50pm
Just had an odd experience. Clicked on the Game Center on NFL.com for the Ari@Min game that I'm watching on TV and just before Longwell kicked the ball, it popped up and said Stephens-Howling had a kick return TD. Then it happened.
I know it's because the game is broadcast on a delay, but it was still weird to see.
35
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:21pm
Two times this year, I've seen very marginal fair catch interference, and the refs have held onto their flags. I like this development.
38
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by montanapanthersfan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:36pm
Why are the Panthers down 17-3 to the Saints? Obvious running plays given away either by formation, motion, or down, ludicrous decisions to blitz or use two defensive linemen on third and long while having the defensive backs play way too far back (Hi, Richard Marshall and Charles Godfrey), and the Saints' offensive line performing like the Titanic's architect thought she would. You then consider that this game is not a shut-out because Brees badly threw a slant route that bobbled off the receiver's hands into Richard Marshall's hands early, and you hear a familiar refrain in Panther Land: Bring On The Draft.
39
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by montanapanthersfan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:47pm
Oh, and we had a legendary 9 yards passing, considering sacks and so forth. This is 9 yards passing between Matt Moore and Jimmy Clausen combined.
40
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:53pm
The Bears actually convert a goalline play!
41
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:55pm
Patriots @ Browns.
1. Browns have had unreal luck.
2. A power running game and refs who don't know what holding is go together like peanut butter and chocolate.
43
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevic (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:59pm
Speaking of luck, the Patriots TD catch sure was lucky too!
44
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:00pm
I see it differently. The Browns have used some creative plays on offense and should we really be surprised that the Browns power running offense is ripping through a weak Patriots defense?
Colt McCoy hasn't really done else than avoid turning the ball over and having a low completion percentage, kinda of like what Cassel is doing for KC.
46
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:07pm
> should we really be surprised that the Browns power running offense is ripping through a weak Patriots defense?
Not really, given the officiating today.
49
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:13pm
not really because the Patriots were 21st in the league (-3.5%) in Rush Defense DVOA and 27th in the league (21.8%) in Pass Defense DVOA. Tell me again how one would expect the Patriots to do well against the Browns with this type of production through 8 weeks in the season?
51
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:17pm
A rookie ref who along with his crew doesn't know what holding is will help any running game.
53
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:19pm
So will a defense that is terrible against the run. Your move sir.
65
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:27pm
Okay, let me spell this out. If your offense is predicated on getting small, consistent gains, you are going to benefit a lot from not getting "random" 10 yard penalties called on you.
68
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:30pm
If your offense is predicated on getting small, consistent gains, you are going to benefit a lot from playing against a defense that his terrible against the run. I fail to see the point of this exercise, though I do enjoy it continuing for some masochistic reason...
73
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:37pm
The point is that differing refereeing styles were one of the ways in which Juventus got caught cheating in Serie A. I'm not saying that's what going on here, and I'm happy for the long-suffering fans on Cleveland, but the NFL needs to put a stop to this.
77
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:40pm
So you brought up the Juventus thing for what reason again?
50
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:14pm
To wit: we're done with three quarters, and there's been one holding or block in the back call all game, where a Pats TE tackled a blitzing linebacker. There's no way that's an accident by two "well-coached teams".
61
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Still Alive (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:24pm
Welcome to the NFL, is this your first week watching? I am surprised holding is even still in the rulebook.
63
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:26pm
That's demonstrably untrue, making you an idiot. *plonk*
60
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by King_ghidra (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:24pm
This seems an ungenerous assessment of McCoy's contribution. There have been at least two atypical rookie plays - the roll out following the busted hand-off followed by an on-the-move completion, and his rushing TD which was a nice piece of athleticism and effort.
And how is 14/19 a low completion %? Brady's 14/25 is low.
66
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:30pm
Written before he made those plays. I think the Pats should be losing, but not by 3 TDs.
42
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 3:57pm
Rather than go for 2 after Hanson gets hurt on an awful roughing penalty (perhaps the first I've ever seen on a FG), the Lions let SUH attempt the extra point.
Kicked hard, but off the post.
45
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by buzzorhowl (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:03pm
I'm at work watching stat-trackers on the internet, and I saw "N. Suh missed PAT" and bugged out. I knew there was a story there.
I don't get why they didn't go for 2. Maybe Suh has some history of kicking that I don't know about?
47
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:12pm
You mean like being a former soccer player?
52
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:18pm
It was a decent kick. He just misplaced his plant foot.
67
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by buzzorhowl (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:30pm
Exactly like that. Did not know that, though I knew his family played. Should I have?
235
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:15pm
Yes, he has an African-sounding name. Duh.
48
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:12pm
That's pretty awesome that Suh tried it.
56
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BucNasty :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:19pm
Bucs surprise onside kick and it works!
ETA: Pending review.
Boo!
57
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:19pm
Illegal touch. Boo.
54
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Still Alive (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:19pm
N.Rackers kicks 67 yards from HST 30 to SD 3. J.Hester ran ob at SD 4 for 1 yard.
M.Scifres punts 1 yard to SD 13, Center-M.Windt. A.Okoye to SD 8 for 5 yards (S.Gregory). SD-M.Scifres was injured during the play. (The punt was deflected by Hst #53Keglar)
N.Rackers kicks 72 yards from HST 30 to SD -2. D.Sproles to SD 32 for 34 yards (D.Sharpton). PENALTY on SD-E.Weddle, Illegal Block Above the Waist, 10 yards, enforced at SD 32.
First three SD ST plays of the game...
This is bordering on the statistically impossible...everyone associated with coaching and evaluating the ST on that team needs to go at the end of the year.
300
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Scott C :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 3:52pm
Problem is, the ST coach has been in SD for ... 9 ish years now and never had issues like this before.
Some of it has to do with the fact that they are on the 5th long snapper (3 on IR, one cut). There has been chaos in the linebackers on STs, with tons of injuries forcing lots of unproven players to line up on coverage teams. I think they have used 10 outside linebackers so far this year. Two kickoff gunners have been cut, and a couple on IR. Its been a continuous churn of players on ST units.
More than a coaching change they just need some semblance of stability on who lines up play to play, week to week.
55
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:19pm
The Jets and Lions seem to be trying to set a record for the most stupid penalties in one game.
58
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Just another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:21pm
Atlanta defense and kickoff coverage give up 3 big plays, otherwise this game would be over, no excuse for giving up a TD on a bobbled kickoff return,
59
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:21pm
Assistant coaches: "OK guys, if we don't win this one, the owner's going to fire the coach. Let's go out there and play this one for Chilly!"
Players: (getting stomped at home by a miserable Cardinals team)
64
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BucNasty :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:27pm
14:08 left in the game, and I'm pretty sure this is Atlanta's first punt.
ETA: Maybe the second. I remember the D stiffening at the end of the half when running wasn't an option.
62
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BucNasty :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:25pm
14:08 left in the game, and I'm pretty sure this is Atlanta's first punt.
69
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:32pm
Most blatant faked injury to stall a drive ever after the 3rd down completeion (to a makeable 4th down) in Cleveland. The Browns guy wasn't near the play, jumped over the downed receiver, looked and gestured at the sideline, then slowly "fell" down and pretended to be hurt.
I'm on RZC so they cut away. Someone please tell me they flagged that shit. That was McGinest times a hundred.
75
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:37pm
No flag. It's been playoff rules today.
78
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:41pm
DPI and free first and goal at the one on the very next play. Perhaps you should stop complaining now.
81
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AGS preview (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:43pm
Obvious call. Meanwhile, they just missed a hold on the edge for a Hillis TD.
238
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:19pm
FO Week 9 Discussion board: your home for angry and emotional analysis!
70
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by montanapanthersfan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:32pm
And Clausen gets sacked to set us up at 4th and 34, at our own 2. Sigh.
71
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by hans :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:36pm
Wes Welker...Extra point kicker.
72
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by DEW (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:36pm
And Welker kicks the point for NE with Gostokowski injured...wild day for backup kickers!
239
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:20pm
Wes Welker > Ndamakong Suh
74
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:37pm
What happens if the defense returns an interception for a touchdown on a two-point conversion? Does the offense still kick off?
76
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:39pm
I feel pretty certain that it's just a failed 2-point conversion, just the same as if the offense had been stopped.
80
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by King_ghidra (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:43pm
play gets whistled dead once the int is made, from what i've seen
231
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by leviramsey (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:08pm
Yeah, by rule in the NFL the play is dead once the defense establishes possession.
NFL Europe awarded 2 points for returning a conversion attempt (incl. a return of a blocked kick) over the opposite goal line. College and CFL have the same rule.
79
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by DEW (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:42pm
I'm loving the football sense of Hillis for CLE. Twice now on this drive, while desperately trying to run out the clock to keep Brady from pulling a miracle, he's cut back away from the sidelines to keep the clock running.
82
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BucNasty :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:48pm
Pretty greedy attempting to challenging the spot of like a 40 yard PI call.
83
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevic (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:49pm
Favre could've run the ball in for a TD on a bootleg. Instead he throws it incomplete on 4th and goal. Time for him to retire if he is not going to be aggressive enough on 4th and goal to run it in.
84
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BucNasty :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:53pm
Why go outside when you can just dive over the pile?
85
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:54pm
Three 3rd and 10s on the this drive, and the only one the Bills don't convert is because Parish is just barely out of bounds. The Bears secondary needs some work. DJ Moore specifically has been completely abused this game.
86
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:55pm
Stupid challenge by Gailey there.
87
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:57pm
Indeed, that TO would have been important too.
Now on 4th down, one of the Bear's big blitzes actually works!
88
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Just another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:58pm
Falcons hold on 4th and a foot at the 1. Now at the 2 minute warning, no TOs left for TB.
89
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:59pm
I know Favre can't move well, but his pocket awareness is abysmal this year.
90
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Just another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 4:59pm
First down, game over in ATL
92
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:02pm
Backfooted throw into tight coverage and somehow Shiancoe makes the catch and scores to tie it.
That's frustrating.
Adrian Wilson turned the wrong way.
91
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:01pm
And the Vikings just scored. The extra point will tie the game with 27 seconds to go.
93
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:04pm
Interesting use of timeouts by the Bears, and by interesting I mean confusing.
Then Maynerd gets a punt downed at the 1. Can the Bills go 99 yards in a minute with no TOs?
94
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:06pm
In past years, I'd say no way Ryan Fitzpatrick manages a first down. This year...
95
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:06pm
Derek Anderson is terrible. Just awful.
96
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by montanapanthersfan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:10pm
With three qbs used, the Carolina Panthers have managed to net a total -5 yards passing.
97
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:13pm
Ugh. I commented earlier on Favre's poor pocket awareness. He's Peyton Manning compared to Derek Anderson.
98
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:13pm
The Bills got really lucky with Peppers's injury. Stopped the clock for them after a completion in bounds.
Two plays later it doesn't matter as Fitzpatrick throws a pick.
Also, come on Cardinals, can't you just finish off this Minnesota team?
99
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:14pm
Major mistake by the Lions just now. Called for a screen on 3rd and 6, but Stanton hesitated, faked it, threw poorly, and they failed AND stopped the clock. Jets have no timeouts. That cost them a lot of clock.
100
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Ivarsson.se :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:16pm
Wasn't the announcers dead wrong on the Bucs (Blount) last play? Where there ever a point in challenging that, they seemed clearly short to me without that last lunge by the RB.
My point is, if the runner isn't already down when he stretches his arm forward, that's a fumble, right? And if he's down, there's no way he got the first?
101
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:19pm
Vikings win. Childress gets a reprieve for another week.
102
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Ben :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:21pm
And Suh's doinked extra point comes back to haunt the Lions.
103
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:31pm
What are the uniforms the Colts are wearing today- throwbacks?
104
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:36pm
1955 Colts I think they said
105
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:39pm
They look sweet.
106
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:41pm
For a second I thought the Giants were playing but without logos.
107
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by B :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:41pm
I love the Colts throwback Uniformas. They should play in these every week.
108
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:43pm
I like the Colts throwbacks, but why wear them on the road?
SI.com headline says Falcons are in 1st in AFC South.
110
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:44pm
That can't be right, Coach Morris told me the Bucs were the best team in the conference.
111
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:45pm
Maybe he if he used stats he would know they aren't that good.
286
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by spenczar :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 1:31am
Only because using stats would make him a loser, though.
109
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:43pm
What's going on in the Colts-Eagles game? All the Eagles fans told me their defense would get shredded.
112
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:47pm
Have patience. There's still plenty of time for Manning to make all the necessary adjustments and Sean McDermott to make none of them.
113
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 5:48pm
It will, in time.
The Colts defense is getting shredded worse.
Reid bailed them out by kicking that last FG. Kept it a 2 score game, it could've been over.
114
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:05pm
Referees completely cocked up the downs in the Chiefs-Raiders game. Raiders challenged a TD on 3rd and 2 and got it reversed and placed at the 1. Play picked up the first down, but they announced it as 4th and goal from the 1 after the reversal instead of 1st and goal from the 1.
Just horrible.
117
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:22pm
Are you sure?
I don't mean to doubt you, I just have a hard time believing that level of mistake is possible.
118
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:29pm
Yes. They got it sort of right eventually. The Chiefs ran a play on 1st/4th down and were called for a holding penalty. They announced it was 4th down before that play, and they announced after the penalty that it was "still 4th down".
Then they retroactively announced that the previous play was 1st down, not 4th, and the Chiefs wound up scoring a TD.
124
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by IAmJoe (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:35pm
It was worse than that, actually-
The refs rule 4th down and goal from the 1 yard line, when it should be 1st down. Chiefs run a bootleg that comes up short (or maybe scores, it's besides the point) but there's a holding penalty. The ref calls for 4th down from the 11. So they go an entire play, saying its 4th down - at this point, you've run a play since the mistake, so you're supposed to be stuck with it (to my understanding).
After this, Todd Haley finally gets the ref's attention, and explains what happened, that it should be 1st down and goal from the 11 yard line. The refs confer, and agree, and go tell Tom Cable. Cable looks pretty unhappy about the whole development, and the refs announce that the previous play had actually been a 1st down, despite their call of 4th down.
To my understanding, just like any other mistake, if you move on and run another play, you're supposed to be stuck with the mistake. The refs made things turn out the way they should've initially, but OAK has a good case to be upset with the events here.
115
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:08pm
Samuel's tackle attempt on that TD was just pathetic.
116
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:09pm
The eagles backfield cant tackle to save their lives.
119
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:30pm
What was that penalty for? How can a receiver with the ball be defenseless?
125
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Lvess :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:35pm
If Reid decides to challenge that play it looked like possession and a fumble to my untrained eyes.
137
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:51pm
Man, that was a bogus call. Still steamed about it.
120
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:30pm
Austin Collie knocked unconscious from a Curt Coleman helmet to helmet.
250
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Smose (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:03pm
While the hits don't appear to be of "dirty" intent, notice that neither defender attempts to use their arms for anything other than hitting. They aren't trying to wrap up for a tackle, and they aren't trying to strip the football. The arms are crossed in front of their bodies, and their only purpose is to add to the force of the hit.
The NFL won't get anywhere with fines or technology (e.g. new helmets) as long as "body as missile" is allowed by rule.
The rule for this is "unnecessary roughness", and it needs to be called *every* time a player makes a hit without using his arms appropriately. This is not restricted to defensive players -- for example, this should apply to cut blockers who throw their bodies at defensive players' knees, as well.
121
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:30pm
It pains me to defend the Eagles, but Collie lowers his helmet, gets hit in the head, and somehow it's a penalty on the Eagles.
129
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:42pm
Exactly. What exactly was Coleman supposed to do there?
133
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:45pm
I guess stand there and watch Collie make the catch.
138
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:51pm
How about not make solid helmet to helmet contact?
Some people talk like this is rocket science. It's not. Don't hit someone in the head with your helmet. So, don't lead with your head.
Once in a while, the target will move unpredictably like when hit by someone else--and that might cause occasional unavoidable contact. But mostly, if you don't lead with your head you won't hit opponents with your helmet.
Will it lead to less hard hits? Good. Will it give offenses an advantage? Maybe (often tackles are missed because a defender tried to light someone up instead of making a good tackle).
Will it lead to fewer retired football players having major or minor health issues. Absolutely. And that is the point. And it's really not arguable.
141
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:54pm
Great. It was still a bad call.
He came down and was hit by one player, and that hit carried him into Coleman's helmet, which was in a perfectly ordinary and unavoidable place for his head to be.
That was momentum and accidental. Scary, but not illegal.
(I'm a Colts fan.)
144
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tbwhite :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:59pm
Why didn't the Eagles challenge, he took about 3 steps before he was hit, it was clearly a catch and fumble ?
148
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:04pm
I'd guess Reid didn't want to use his last challenge since he already blew one earlier.
157
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:18pm
They didn't have any challenges. Reid blew on time out on that awful challenge, they burned a time out on defense because McDermott doesn't know that the Colts run the hurry up and Vick used one because of the play clock.
Hail Hydra!
151
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:07pm
You can't challenge penalties that are called on the field. I guess they technically could have challenged the ruling that it was incomplete, but it would have been moot because of the (incorrect) unnecessary roughness call.
Arguably, the penalty should get overturned if the challenge shows that he had possession and was running with the ball (as he's then not a "defenseless receiver"), but in practice, I don't believe the penalty call can be overturned.
262
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Intropy (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:49pm
If you need a review to determine whether a player caught fumbled, caught and failed to gain control, or dropped the pass, then it's crazy to expect the defender to be able to tell the difference in the split second available to him. He must be given the benefit of the doubt and not be flagged for hitting a defenseless receiver.
145
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:00pm
Thanks Dave! My point exactly. It was a completed pass, Collie started running, and then he was hit, but the hits were clean. They were not personal fouls. The Eagles were robbed of a big turnover there, and instead the Colts walk away with a free TD.
167
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:32pm
Well, not entirely. They still had to gain a lot of yards on several other plays to earn the TD. It wasn't as bad as the 50+ yard DPIs that hand undeserving QBs balls on the one for free points...
146
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:02pm
Did you actually watch the play? Coleman didn't lead with his head; Collie did. It's not the defender's job to get out of the way. In fact, that's the exact opposite of the defender's job. Collie's position when he was hit was about as far as you can get from "defenseless"
I'm all for trying to reduce injuries, but clean plays also cause injuries sometimes. That's unfortunately the nature of the game. Neither of the Eagles' defenders did anything wrong there.
152
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Steve1 (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:08pm
Uh, what?!
It was totally incidental contact. Unless you expected Coleman to be able to change his positioning in half of a second.
The hit that Merriweather had on Heap? Yeah, that was illegal. Things like this hit? While scary and unfortunate for Collie (like others, I hope he's okay), it's just part of the game.
163
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by MurphyZero :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:25pm
Then flag every offensive player who lowers his helmet (leading with his head, like you said). Then if there is a helmet to helmet when the offensive player's helmet is upright, flag the defender. If a player is getting tackled and his head goes down to about chest height, whistle him down at that point. That will clear up all the helmet hits and make the game safer (and also neuter the game.)
149
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by K (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:05pm
Can't hit him in the head. Do you want someone to die on the field?
150
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:07pm
Absolutely not. But if a player puts his own head in the line of fire, sometimes it's unavoidable.
154
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Steve1 (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:12pm
How is the defender supposed to change his positioning that quickly? Ridiculous.
290
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 7:27am
only when he's defenseless
122
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:32pm
Wow. Austin just got creamed. Hope he's okay.
123
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:33pm
Its going to be impossible to play defense soon. What exactly are you allowed to do? Its getting insane! Hope Collies alright.
126
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:39pm
Manning just called the same play that wiped out Collie again. That's cold blooded.
130
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:43pm
I thought the same exact thing! Lol. Mannings thinning out the recieving core.
127
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:41pm
Jacob Tamme, Javaris James and Blair White are the skill position players Manning has to work with besides Reggie Wayne after Collie was carted off the field in ugly fasion.
127
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BSK (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:41pm
Paul R-
Because he knew the Eagles players would be reticent to hit. These calls ultimately make the situation more dangerous (safety failure) and eliminate the point of defense (entertainment failure).
140
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:53pm
I'm not sure if I follow your reasoning. I agree, though, that he called it because he knew that was one play the Eagles secondary didn't want to see.
131
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:44pm
The Chiefs line up for a 51-yard FG. Direct snap to Ryan Succop who pooches it. I LOVE the call, but the punt (barely) rolled into the endzone for a touchback.
Campbell is picked on the very next play.
132
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Botswana Meat Commission FC (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:45pm
Catching the ball, putting your head down, lowering your shoulders and taking a step and a half upfield are the new "defenseless."
Ridiculous call. That said, I hope Collie's injury isn't serious.
by Anon (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:54pm
You would already have known that qualified as defenseless if you had seen the Harrison on Massaquoi hit that yielded a $75,000 fine. Same scenario.
134
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:48pm
Shankapottomus! 19 yards ugggg
136
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:50pm
The announcer of the Raider game just made a fascinating point: This is probably the most important game for the Raiders since their Super Bowl appearance. Boy that's a lot of lean years in Oakland.
139
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Danish Denver-Fan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:53pm
I would like to know this once and for all - isn't ANY helmet-to-helmet contact illegal? Or does the "defenseless" part apply to recievers and backs?
147
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by DEW (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:03pm
You can be penalized for hitting a defenseless receiver even if it isn't helmet to helmet. So if you go Tatum-on-Stingley it's a penalty. Basically, you're only allowed to light up the receiver when the receiver actually has the ball.
(Since I was watching Giants/Seahawks, I won't comment on whether any of the Coleman-Collie hit actually qualifies for the penalty in question.)
182
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by jmhinfl (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:01pm
Based on what the announcers said, I believe (but I can't answer once and for all)that head to head hits are legal on players running with the ball - that would include a runner on a running play but also a receiver who caught the ball and was then running with it.
That makes it doubly difficult on the defender, having to decide if the receiver has put both feet down and made a football move (or whatever the current rule is) in the split second that they are closing on the player
186
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:07pm
Helmet to helmet is illegal on defenseless receivers.
A QB in the pocket can't be hit on the head by any body or uniform part.
293
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by DavidL :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 8:29am
I believe you mean "or", not "by".
294
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 8:47am
He means to say that defenders can't hit the QB on the head, regardless of the body part they hit with.
They can however, hit him somewhere else, but there's also the rule that they can't hit him low.
So, the shoulders to the hip is the strike zone.
295
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by DavidL :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 9:57am
Yes, it was a joke.
142
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:55pm
How much do you think Coleman will be fined for the hit on Collie?
143
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 6:58pm
At the rate we're going? $100,000.
287
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 6:40am
4 games in the Flag Football League.
153
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by classic3283 :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:08pm
If Brett Favre does retire he will be only the third NFL QB since 1960 to throw for over 400 yards in a single game, in the last season of their career. The other two were John Elway (400) and Brian Griese (407).
155
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jimmy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:12pm
I just went back and watched the Collie play again. He caught the ball five full yards before he got hit. The Eagles defender didn't even make contact with his helmet, he put his shoulder into the place where the ball would have been if Collie hadn't been hit by another defender. There is no way that is a penalty. the Eagles just got jipped.
I hate to see guys get hurt like that but why aren't folk calling out Manning for leading his receiver into traffic and then doing exactly the same thing next play (very cynical for my mind)?
158
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:18pm
Penalty or not, Coleman's helmet hit him in the head.
Aaaaaand another Colts WR is hurt. Blair White walks off on his own.
185
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:04pm
Watch it again. Helmet to helmet, clear as day. Certainly not worth a fine but a clear flag.
Blind and can't even spell your racist epithets correctly.
192
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:16pm
Not every play where one player's helmet hits another player's is a penalty on the defender. Not only did Coleman not lead with his helmet, he didn't even initiate the contact. If a receiver lowers his helmet and hits a defender in the head, that's not a penalty on the defender. Yes, their helmets made contact, but that does not, in and of itself, mean that Coleman made an illegal hit. He didn't.
194
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:17pm
I love epithets but didn't see one...who is blind?
241
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by t.d. :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:23pm
"jipped" is an epitaph, s/b gypped, a slur against gypsies
242
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:26pm
I have never heard this in my life, I just thought it was a verb meaning to rip off.
251
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:04pm
Maybe the word "folk" was racist in some weirdo's scrambled brain.
216
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jimmy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:55pm
If what you consider to be a racist epithet isn't spelled correctly then there is every chance it wasn't a racist epithet at all. And I have watched it plenty of times and still can't see a penalty.
233
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Big-Hairy-Andy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:11pm
Assuming he means the word jipped (meaning tipped sparingly, given a lower than expected gratuity), it's considered racist (meaning "Jew-tipped") - but it also seems to be pretty clearly not what you meant. You appear to have meant gypped (meaning ripped off), which isn't racist (but could be considered offensive in its own right if one wished to do so).
237
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jimmy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:16pm
I have never in my life heard that jipped means 'jew-tipped'. Maybe it is very commonly used in places far away from where I have lived but it is new to me. Also if that was the inferred racism, haven't I spelled it correctly? Very confused, some people will take offense at the oddest things.
It still wasn't a penalty though.
225
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:03pm
Racist epithet?
That's quite the accusation, what do you think is racist? I assume 'jipped' which could probably be spelt 'gipped'. Is that racist, maybe to gypsies or 'traveling folk as they're known in the UK, a bit, if that's the basis of the phrase, I have no idea. You're probably being oversensitive/making stuff up.
There was nothing illegal about that play. How are the defenders supposed to account for the receiver bouncing off another defender?
If ad hominem attacks weren't disallowed I'd call you an idiot.
230
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:08pm
I also don't believe that's an epithet.
I believe an epithet is by definition a noun or adjective.
257
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:25pm
For what it's worth, the term "gypped" (also spelled "gipped") did indeed originate as a derogatory reference to gypsies. See here. Still, the term has been in use for over a century, and most people have no idea what its origins are, as can be seen from the comments in this thread.
260
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:31pm
And for those of us who did know it's origins, how can there be a derogatory reference to gypsies if nobody's ever met a gypsy?
264
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:54pm
A gypsie woman (she looked like a holywood-style stereotypical gypsie, all hunched over with one boogly eye, not kidding) once tried to sell me some lucky heather when I was at university and I refused, not knowing that the point of this transaction is that to refuse is to invite bad luck. I was actually very, very unlucky for quite some time after that (awful car accident, health problems and other stuff), I'm still not sure that it's gone away. As a scientist I refuse to beleive in such things but there is still a small part of me that thinks that the b*tch screwed me. So I'm not sure about gypsies, I think that they should pay their taxes and stop inhabiting other people's land, both of which are issues in the UK, but if any weird crones offer me lucky heather again then I'll damn well buy it just to be sure. Life can be odd.
280
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Whatev :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:04am
Even if it were true that she could give you bad luck because you refused to buy her "lucky" heather, that makes her an extortionist so screw her.
281
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:11am
Thus the term "gypped."
283
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:41am
Dude, that's totally a racist epithet.
284
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 1:22am
HA!
288
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 6:55am
You'd better convert to every religion ever invented then... just to be sure.
156
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:18pm
update on Collie - CBS reporting he is moving around in the locker room and appears to have a concussion. Not great, but a much better result than first appeared when he was just lying motionless on the field. I am glad it looks like he will be all right.
164
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:30pm
Right, because we were all so concerned about someone who is paid obscene amounts of money but must undertake the risk of a daylong headache.
/apologizes for venom but is on day 3 of quitting smoking and the new bs focus and hyperenforcement aren't helping
/has collie on fantasy team in tight matchup and is still fuming
170
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:43pm
Ad hominem attack totally unwarranted, IMO. But good for you for quitting smoking.
178
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:00pm
Who told their wife about this site?
I'm sorry darling, I just don't get the personal concern some fans have for what are essentially objects of entertainment while on the field.
187
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:09pm
Wow, really.
196
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:26pm
You don't have to admit that you cracked a smile at least..we know the truth.
Aand no, not really, but I do think that getting all maternal (regardless of gender) regarding proofessional athletes is not what gets me jacked up for Sunday and read endless hours of X and O analysis on great sites like this.
223
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jimmy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:01pm
You are coming close to having made some of the most offensive comments I have ever read on this site (which is saying something).
Totally uncalled for.
310
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Tue, 11/09/2010 - 2:08am
I'm sincerely sorry if anyone was offended...albeit I never called anyone a name or anything of the sort.
I did present an exagerrated (and I thought) humorous view reflective of a consideration that I thought many shared.
Would hate to watch a game with some of y'all as the entertainment (and often enlightening) value of ribbings and hyperbole seem lost on you. I truly do feel sorry for you and hope some day you come to realize that you don't have to perceive reality in these ways...as my father used to say, "find the humor."
197
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:29pm
Sexism and sociopathy in one package. Lovely.
181
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:01pm
My pedantic side forces me to point out that this isn't actually an ad hominem attack, which refers to the fallacy of attacking an argument by attacking the person making it. For example, "CathyW is a stupid jerk, so who cares what she thinks about head injuries?" is an ad hominem attack (disclaimer: I don't think you're a stupid jerk).
Still, the long-term effects of concussions, particularly repeated ones, are a lot greater than a day of headaches, so the argument is stupid and mean-spirited, just not ad hominem.
247
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:54pm
BywaterBrat: the risk of a daylong headache.
I don't think you understand what a concussion is.
159
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by thuglightning (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:18pm
I respect this site immensely and hope they have the courage and journalistic integrity to be very vocal (perhaps even on their more widely-read channel) about the absurdity of high priest goodell's most recent crackdown. These penalties are affecting the outcomes of games. As y'all have tangentially noted...concussions and big hits over the the middle are not the cause of long-term damage to players' health.
Fines are one thing but I don't see why our grand inquisitor can't make his fiines but let the game be played as intended on the field. The collie/mikell incident was the most blatant and impactful that I've seen live so far (granted I'm not a raven's fan), if collie doesn't go horrifically limp then the flag is never thrown and we may have a pick_six on our hands. The ref obviously feared repercussions and threw the flag to defend himself.
I applaud the announcer, halftime analysts and any others who point out the unintended and misguided consequences of this stance.
/apologizesz for numerous errors and lack of punctuation as I am a recent adopter of the smartphone.
166
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:32pm
Concussions are indeed a cause of long-term damage to players' health (not the only cause, but certainly one of them).
That said, I agree it was a bad call that greatly impacted the game. The rule needs to be enforced consistently and correctly, and it wasn't here.
172
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:51pm
"The" is not the logical equivalent of "A"...duly noted all the same but my unprofessional opinion is that the subsequent and daily H2H hits are far more damaging in the long-term.
180
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:00pm
You are clearly not a medical researcher. Concussions are indeed of major long-term consequence.
160
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:21pm
Jesus, and now the Eagles commit a roughing the kicker call. Self-destruction, here we come!!
ETA: On replay, that looked ticky-tacky. Defender was carried by momentum into the kicker, who landed on top of him. These refs are horrible today.
168
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by MurphyZero :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:34pm
It was called running into the kicker not roughing, 5 yards and no automatic first. Led to a 4th and 2, redo of the punt, which also sucked.
171
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by CathyW :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:45pm
Thanks for the correction, you are right, it was running into the kicker.
161
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BJR :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:21pm
Why are the Giants starters still on the field?
162
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Botswana Meat Commission FC (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:21pm
Is Arjen Robben punting for Indianapolis now? That was a blatant dive. Wow. They are REALLY working the refs now.
289
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 7:04am
lol at the robben comment
165
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:31pm
Heh, Jim Nantz actually called Phil Simms out on one of his my reality is different than yours calls.
169
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:41pm
Angerer is a great name for a defensive player in football.
173
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:52pm
Eagles come out in the T-Formation to counter the Colt's throwbacks.
174
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:56pm
Reid challenges on 1st-and-goal. Inside the one. He's already used one timeout already.
Headdesk.
ETA: And loses, predictably, thus leaving the team with one timeout and no challenges for almost the entire 4th quarter.
Hail Hydra!
175
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:57pm
One timeout and one challenge had been used already, and he lost so now the Eagles have no challenges and one timeout.
Sorry Harris but I'm predicting your jam supply is safe for another week.
184
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:04pm
I'm not licked yet!
Hail Hydra!
176
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:58pm
I wonder if Tanier will make snarky comments about the Eagles getting a TD even though Vick didn't cross the line. Probably not.
177
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 7:59pm
I gotta say, as a Colts fan who watched the first half and is listening to the radio for the second, it doesn't sound remotely like the Colts deserve to win this game. Sloppy play, and I hope that's to the Eagles' credit.
189
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Dave :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:11pm
My thoughts too. All that work (and luck) to take a lead at the half, and now they're down 2 scores again. Totally shut down in the 2nd half. Where was this Eagles D against the Titans?
Very frustrating.
190
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:14pm
This Eagles D was on the field vs the Titans right up til Kenny Britt woke up and Ellis Hobbs decided he would rather play injured than tell anyone about it. 14pt lead in the 4th quarter, at one point, for the Eagles vs the Titans.
178
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:00pm
The refs are going to need a security detail to get out of philly tonight.
188
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Lvess :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:10pm
Certainly wouldn't be the first time.
191
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Southern Philly :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:15pm
You're thinking of Cleveland.
183
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:03pm
Love the back-to-back QB sneak calls by the Eagles. I really think teams should do this more often in that type of situation. It's a very difficult play to stop, even if you're expecting it.
193
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:17pm
At what point do the Colts just forfeit for lack of warm bodies?
217
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Shattenjager :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:57pm
When Manning's power supply is disrupted.
195
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:19pm
What did Cable and the Raiders use their challenges on earlier in the game?
The Raiders just lost the ball on a muffed punt where the returner was clearly down by contact, but it was called wrong and they didn't have a challenge left! Chiefs score a short touchdown and take the lead.
248
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Whatev :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:58pm
Two consecutive challenges relating to a goal-line stand by the Chiefs, I think in the second quarter. They won the first challenge but lost the second, since I only have stat tracker I didn't actually see what happened.
198
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:29pm
There's going to be a riot
199
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:32pm
Game over. The refs aren't going to let the Colts lose.
Hail Hydra!
200
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:32pm
If I were the Colts I would have used my timeouts in that goalline sequence.
202
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:36pm
Perhaps saving them for the possibility the onside kick doesn't work.
201
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jonadan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:34pm
Opinions on the "penalty"? I know you're not allowed to take shots at the head, but I don't know the exact wording of the rule and whatever the legalisms that looked like a "Well, it's Peyton Manning" flag.
203
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:36pm
Radio announcers were talking about a facemask.
205
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:40pm
On the back of his head? Manning's head is big but it's not THAT big.
Hail Hydra!
207
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by John (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:42pm
Beats me. It's possible I misheard/misinterpreted, I can't see anything.
206
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:41pm
By the letter of the law, it was a penalty since he did touch Peyton's helmet. I doubt that the flag comes out if Matt Cassel is the QB.
208
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:42pm
I cant believe its a penalty if you just brush a qb's helmet. That seems a bit absurd. I know its manning and all but really?
204
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:37pm
Anybody seriously believe that Peyton Manning's safety was at risk because Trent Cole's hand brushed against the back of his helmet as he reached to the other side to go for the arm with the ball? I don't buy for a moment that making calls like that in some way makes players safer.
As an aside, there was no reason to go for a strip on 4th and 18.
221
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Anonymous Coward (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:59pm
The problem is that the NFL insists upon crafting rules that do not allow the officials to make judgments about the intent of the players' actions in any way whatsoever.
226
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:03pm
Intent is a quagmire. Judging the action is a much better policy.
245
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:33pm
Intent is built into numerous NFL rules. There's the rather obvious example of intentional grounding, which has it built into the name, as well as pass interference (incidental contact), roughing vs. running into the kicker, and various unnecessary roughness/unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. It's not really something you can get away from, and taking extreme positions about things like brushing a QB's helmet really doesn't help anyone except the occasional offense that benefits from the call.
254
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:11pm
There should never be a call made based on intent. Calls should be made based on WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.
By judging intent, you can say, "well Brett Favre did not intend to throw the ball 2 yards into the back of his center, he intended to throw a touchdown pass, so instead of a intentional grounding penalty, the ruling on the field is a touchdown!"
265
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:55pm
I'm pretty sure intent is necessarily built into the concept of intentional grounding. Otherwise, we'd penalize every incomplete pass. All of the specifics about whether there was a receiver in the area, etc. are designed as ways of determining intent.
Intent's built into a lot of rules because the whole idea is to discourage various forms of intentional activity like mugging the receiver before the ball gets there (PI), throwing the ball away any time you'd be sacked (grounding), or trying to take out the other team's kicker/punter (running into/roughing the kicker). Penalizing unintentional activity in the course of normal play isn't helpful.
222
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Tracing plan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:01pm
I expect the reasoning is that by outlawing ALL contact with the QB's helmet, you take away all interpretation, all ambiguity, and for defenders, all temptation. No guessing about intent or judging how hard it was.
Why WOULD you want to all hitting the QB's head? Linemen can't headslap each other either.
You guys really are just totally off your rockers about safety. It's just not that hard and won't change that much to keep players' heads safe.
228
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Anonymous Coward (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:07pm
Because (1) accidents happen, (2) accidents are often distinguishable from intentional actions, (3) it's unjust to punish accidents as harshly as intentional actions, and (4) forcing players to adapt their game to avoid such accidents is making the game borderline unplayable for them?
246
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spoilt Victoria... :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:36pm
No no it's a total quagmire. This absurd solution is clearly the best we can do.
267
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Intropy (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:06pm
I'm patenting a new full body helmet that will make it illegal to be tackled. It's going to revolutionize the game.
240
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Semigruntled Eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:23pm
Peyton Manning had stepped forward in the pocket, and Cole was being pushed too deep to have any real chance at tackling him. Going for the strip was probably the highest percentage play for Cole in that situation.
I'd say the NFL is lucky that the Colts didn't manage to win after that play - it would likely lead to an increase in the backlash against the deeper focus on player safety.
209
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nathan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:45pm
refs working the eagles tonight
210
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BywaterBrat :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:45pm
Oh jesus, they are going to win.
That last Vick scramble would have been flagged late hit were it Manning. Perhaps in the only defensible case, Vick doesnKt get that treatment.
211
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:49pm
OH, IT'S A JAM NIGHT TONIGHT, MOTHERFUCKERS. BLUEBERRY? BLACKBERRY? NAH. I'm making my own combination tonight. Mapleboysenberrykumkatbaconplatinum Motherfucking Jam.
Hail Hydra!
218
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:57pm
Platinum jam huh? I like your style, Harris. Enjoy!
227
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:07pm
It's his wife who'll enjoy it or not, she hasn't let on whether or not she's a fan.
232
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Harris :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:10pm
She is, which makes these things fun for both of us. Clean up is Hell, though. Jam gets into just everything.
Hail Hydra!
243
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:30pm
Gross, but funny.
212
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Paul R :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:50pm
CBS just switched me to OAK vs KC after the Colts game. Same scenario as Manning's last play, same time on the clock, same pass down the middle, Oakland completes the pass.
213
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by buzzorhowl (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:50pm
Last Play 2nd-47, Oakland 22
Jason Campbell passed to Jacoby Ford down the middle for 27 yard loss
WTF just happened?
214
96 yard field goal?
by Big-Hairy-Andy :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:51pm
From the NFL GameCenter: 3-47-OAK 22 (:07) S.Janikowski 96 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-J.Condo, Holder-S.Lechler.
I'm guessing - just guessing - that's NOT what happened.
219
Re: 96 yard field goal?
by buzzorhowl (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:57pm
Stat tracker just fixed the glitch--the Campbell pass was to the KC 22, but they listed it as the Oakland 22, which made a bunch of stuff look really weird.
215
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jonadan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:51pm
I'd like to see better replay of that last catch in the Oakland-KC game. On what they showed, it didn't look like Ford had the ball under control when he hit the ground.
220
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Spielman :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 8:59pm
Have you seen the yellow flag?
224
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:02pm
Jacoby Ford > Brandon Flowers
234
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Human Spider :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:13pm
Party @ Raiderjoe's. Right on the money, love...
236
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by MainerRaider (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:16pm
Think DVOA will give us some love after beating #1? Me neither.
244
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by MisterSnrub :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 9:30pm
Will someone please explain to me: does the Cleveland Browns' recent success with Peyton Hillis (especially in the 1st quarter) these past couple games fly in the face of Football Outsiders' long-standing belief of the uselessness of "establishing the run" and "teams run when they win, not win when they run"?
249
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AlanSP :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:01pm
No, it doesn't. I don't believe that anyone at FO has argued that having an effective running game doesn't help you win. The argument is against the idea of running early solely for the sake of running early (i.e. not because you have a good running game).
To make it a bit more explicit: football announcers and commentators commonly say that running early is beneficial even if you aren't gaining many yards because it "establishes the run," which will lead to greater offensive success later in the game a)because defenses will get worn out from defending those runs and thus be susceptible to the run later and/or b) because it will make play action passes more effective. In support of these arguments, they will often point to the fact that teams with more rushing attempts usually win (which confuses correlation and causation).
This is basically the argument that FO has argued against. For example, there's no evidence that running more early makes running more effective late. None of that means that you shouldn't run the ball early if you're gashing your opponent's defense. Everybody's pretty much in agreement on that one.
252
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:09pm
No; the official FO stance is teams win when they play effectively, regardless of whether they are running or passing. Their complaint is when announcers claim that running the ball just for the sake of running the ball somehow leads to winning. You don't run to "establish the run," you run to effectively move the ball toward a first down.
253
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by BJR :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:09pm
Seriously, how the hell can Matt Cassel have 35 pass attempts, Thomas Jones have 19 rushes, whilst Jamaal Charles only has 10 rushing attempts? Charles is so obviously the most talented offensive player on that team.
255
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:17pm
From a fantasy football perspective, Haley looks stupid. But if you actually watch a Chiefs game, you get the sense that Haley actually does understand the strengths of his running backs and utilizes them accordingly. I think he also understands that he's going to need Charles in the playoffs, and he uses Jones to take much of the regular-season beating.
259
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Lvess :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:26pm
All well and good but they have to get to the playoffs first for that strategy to pay off. The way they've played the last two weeks doesn't inspire confidence.
256
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Lvess :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:23pm
I believe he missed a series or so with some malady. However, at one point close to halftime Jones was averaging 26" per carry on 11 totes.
That's real impressive.
258
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:25pm
Clay Matthews > Jason Witten + Marion Barber
261
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jonadan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 10:41pm
Ladies and gentlemen, the Dallas Cowboys, featuring Wade Phillips, are brought to you this week by the Andrew Reid School of Clock Management.
266
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevic (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:01pm
Who is this "Master Pass Rusher" on the Vikings that NBC speaks of? Are they even watching this season?
268
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:13pm
OK, I've missed something. What happened to Romo?
270
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:16pm
Broken Collarbone a few weeks ago.
271
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:17pm
I remembered that as soon as I posted. Poster is on his way to getting drunk. Pretty bored with awful game.
272
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Crus :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:19pm
I'm an Eagles fan, with the GB defence in fantasy, so this is a fun game for me.
269
News Flash - NFL Rule Change
by tbwhite :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:15pm
Apparently, you need to have possession of the ball and run more than 5 yards with it, for a pass to be complete. Stock up on RB's for your fantasy teams, the era of the forward pass is over:
Referee Carl Cheffers issued a statement after the game to explain the ruling on the penalty on Kurt Coleman, although it was announced as being on Quintin Mikell.
“The fact of the matter is that the ball was incomplete,” Cheffers said. “So he has protection throughout that entire process on that play because we don’t have a completion. At no time did he have possession and become a runner to where he would have transitioned out of being a defenseless receiver.”
292
Re: News Flash - NFL Rule Change
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 8:18am
The announcer kept saying that 'collie is now a runner', while it should be ruled a fumble if that was the case.
The 'defenseless player' as described by the rule is (also) 'a receiver in the act of catching the ball'. Well. Every flag for illegal hit is by definition an incomplete pass.
"Apparently, you need to have possession of the ball, run more than 5 yards with it, order a cup of tea and wave to your mom in the stands for a pass to be complete"
273
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Cloqwerq :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:23pm
It must pain Jerry Jones to have to sit there and watch this.
------------------------------------------------------------
Always looking to learn more about the game. Always.
274
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevic (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:30pm
Yes, but we get the enjoyment of watching Jerry Jones watch this.
278
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by The Ninjalectual :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:58pm
+1
275
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jonadan :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:32pm
Nick Collins demonstrating the textbook blatant head-to-head shot that does really need to be taken care of. Late hit, lowering the helmet, leading with the helmet, no attempt to tackle.
On the plus side, the TV crew called him on it.
276
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AnonymousD (not verified) :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:36pm
And Collins' punishment will be a large fine that will surely prevent him and others from ever attempting such a hit ever again.
Glad to see that Collinsworth agrees with me.
279
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Jonadan :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:01am
As a soccer referee, I'll admit I'd love to see more players thrown out when the question is safety/unnecessary violence. As a normal person, I don't like the (apparently randomly determined) fines that much either.
277
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Rocco :: Sun, 11/07/2010 - 11:43pm
So who thought the FO Almanac's prediction on the Cowboys would end up being optimistic?
285
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by AnonymousD (not verified) :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 1:23am
Hard to predict a team quitting on its head coach..
Especially by late October. Ouch.
291
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Mon, 11/08/2010 - 7:57am
Why are Suh and Welker kicking footballs?
Are you really telling me they are better than the punter? or is it because the punter is the holder... which begs the question if there aren't other holders on the team.
RSS Feed
Mankins to play
That was fast. Despite being granted a 2-week roster exemption, the Pats activated Mankins yesterday and the reports up here are not only will he play but that he'll probably start.
Re: Mankins to play
I thought he and Vincent Jackson would have to sit out for three weeks? Or am I talking crazy?
Re: Mankins to play
I think that's because of Jackson's suspension.
Re: Mankins to play
The Chargers imposed an extra suspension on Jackson, but the Patriots didn't.
Re: Mankins to play
Jackson has a three game suspension for violating the league substance abuse policy.
Re: Mankins to play
That was already served. The current 3 games is on the roster-exempt list. He has to sign a contract and practice for 3 weeks before being allowed to go on the 53 man roster.
The team threatened to put him on the list if he did not sign the tender and practice back in the pre-season. He didn't, and so had to sign the tender with 9 games left in order to be eligible for the roster for 6 games, in order to get an accrued season.
Mankins can wait until the last minute, out of game shape and without practice. This move means that VJ will be actually ready to go for those 6 games.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
in b4 cutler gets sacked.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Goinh to be greta day. Got box of Sierra Nevada Tumbler. Will look at Buc vs Falcs, jets vs Lons and Dolphuns vs Ravens. Should be good fum games to watch Then in afternoon going to watch Raiders scalp chiefs wwhile drinking Sierra Nevada
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
link for Tumbler
if interested
http://www.sierranevada.com/beers/tumbler.html
Woudl liek to see Teaxns beat chargers today but dont think will happen. Doesn't matter greatrly becuuase Chargers not goign to ever catch Raiders in standings anyway but would still be fun to see cahregsr lose
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Maybe this indicates my mind is going, but I think I'm going to take Raiderjoe's suggestion--looks very good.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If there's one thing other than football that Raiderjoe would know, it's got to be beer.
Note 1: I am assuming that it's beer from the web address.
Note 2: Anyone who wants to argue, go right ahead but I'm not responding.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Tumbler is actually an excellent beer; probably one of the better releases from Sierra Nevada (outside of their 30th anniversary series, anyway). Enjoy it quick too, because I believe they've shifted its production to their annual celebration ale at this point :)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Tomorrow's Audibles will either be the most commented thread in a long time or the most eye-glazed-over thread in a long time. Possibly both.
Between all the Eagles fans and all the Colts fans on this site, it'll have to be a pretty boring game for nobody to have anything to say about it.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Apropos of nothing, I just hope that someday, somehow, Les Miles and Jeff Fisher have an opportunity to coach against each other.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Well, hopefully "surprise crowd noise" isn't an issue for Omar this week. Definitely need to make sure the replay squad is tuned into the right "channel" though.
*rolls eyes*
What a clueless tard.
---------------------------------
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit because gratitude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
For some good discussion about today's games, see the first comment here.
I am looking forward to seeing if the Giants can beat up on Whitehurst. I have this bad feeling, however, that this will be one of those games where some untested player comes in and goes off, like used to happen all the time against the Braves in baseball.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Chargers blow the kickoff! I'm shocked.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Chargers three-and-out and blow the punt! I'm less shocked.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Chris Gardocki went a whole career, 1,177 punts, without having one blocked. How in the world have the Chargers allowed 5 blocks in a season?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
In the prior 7 seasons, only one Chargers punt has been blocked.
Punt blocks aren't generally the punter's fault. So no props for Gardocki. Its the line's job to not let a guy come running free up the middle at the punter...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Or rather, anti-props. His punts in his last season with the 2005 Steelers always seemed to have a very steep angle, maybe because he was so anxious to not have them blocked, making them rather short.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
scifres !!!!!!!!!!1
-----------
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit because gratitude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Sometimes I wonder if Martz doesn't intentionally call running plays he doesn't expect to work just to prove that he needs to pass more.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Houston scores. Another Chargers special teams play coming up. Cue Yakkity Sax.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Good return only marred by a ten yard hands to the face penalty. Things are looking up.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
How did the Chargers manage a 1 yard punt? (It must say something that I no longer doubt they _did_ manage it, just wonder how this time...)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
4-2-SD 12(13:20) M.Scifres punts 1 yard to SD 13, Center-M.Windt. A.Okoye to SD 8 for 5 yards (S.Gregory). SD-M.Scifres was injured during the play. (The punt was deflected by Hst #53Keglar)
So (partially) blocked then?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
yeah, still dont understand how they didnt call running into the kicker there?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I think it's like soccer, if you get the ball first, no penalty.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
well, they usually call it if you block the ball and the kicker steps on you on his way down, so...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
They only call that if the defender DID NOT deflect the ball.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
That is correct. There's no roughing/running call if get a piece of the ball.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Thanks, looks like it. Does Scifres being injured mean they will finally start going for it on 4th downs now?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Favre threw a pick, but Greg Camarillo chased the interceptor (couldn't see who it was) down and stripped the ball, so the Vikings have the ball back.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Clearly the Vikings had their receivers run through tackling drills this week.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Cardinals can't stop the run. The Vikings have one of the best RBs in the league. Favre has already thrown one INT. Chilly calls four passes in six plays. Le sigh.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Two interceptions in the first eight minutes of Ari@Min. Could we have a record-setting day here between Anderson and Favre?
Edit: Arizona is challenging this one, and it looks like they should win the challenge.
Edit 2: Call overturned. Only one interception now. Also should have checked first to see just how insane the record (since 1940) for interceptions in a game is: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/OQjTV
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Another week, another ridiculous late hit out of bounds call. This one against the Jets on a Stafford scramble.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Even that late hit out of bounds penalty on Tillman shouldn't have been flagged. It's not physically possible to avoid that contact if you're playing all out until the whistle - if Fitzpatrick had been passing and Tillman bumped him like that after he released the ball they wouldn't have called a penalty, if Fitzpatrick's step out of bounds had been a step into the end zone for a TD they wouldn't have thrown the flag, but when the ballcarrier crosses the sideline they expect defenders to stop instantaneously.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Anyone else catch that debacle that was the Ravens' drive from Miami's 5 yard line after an interception return? Absolutely mind-boggling. Four plays for ~-20 yards and a grand total of 0 points.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Just had an odd experience. Clicked on the Game Center on NFL.com for the Ari@Min game that I'm watching on TV and just before Longwell kicked the ball, it popped up and said Stephens-Howling had a kick return TD. Then it happened.
I know it's because the game is broadcast on a delay, but it was still weird to see.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Two times this year, I've seen very marginal fair catch interference, and the refs have held onto their flags. I like this development.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Why are the Panthers down 17-3 to the Saints? Obvious running plays given away either by formation, motion, or down, ludicrous decisions to blitz or use two defensive linemen on third and long while having the defensive backs play way too far back (Hi, Richard Marshall and Charles Godfrey), and the Saints' offensive line performing like the Titanic's architect thought she would. You then consider that this game is not a shut-out because Brees badly threw a slant route that bobbled off the receiver's hands into Richard Marshall's hands early, and you hear a familiar refrain in Panther Land: Bring On The Draft.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Oh, and we had a legendary 9 yards passing, considering sacks and so forth. This is 9 yards passing between Matt Moore and Jimmy Clausen combined.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The Bears actually convert a goalline play!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Patriots @ Browns.
1. Browns have had unreal luck.
2. A power running game and refs who don't know what holding is go together like peanut butter and chocolate.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Speaking of luck, the Patriots TD catch sure was lucky too!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I see it differently. The Browns have used some creative plays on offense and should we really be surprised that the Browns power running offense is ripping through a weak Patriots defense?
Colt McCoy hasn't really done else than avoid turning the ball over and having a low completion percentage, kinda of like what Cassel is doing for KC.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
> should we really be surprised that the Browns power running offense is ripping through a weak Patriots defense?
Not really, given the officiating today.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
not really because the Patriots were 21st in the league (-3.5%) in Rush Defense DVOA and 27th in the league (21.8%) in Pass Defense DVOA. Tell me again how one would expect the Patriots to do well against the Browns with this type of production through 8 weeks in the season?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
A rookie ref who along with his crew doesn't know what holding is will help any running game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
So will a defense that is terrible against the run. Your move sir.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Okay, let me spell this out. If your offense is predicated on getting small, consistent gains, you are going to benefit a lot from not getting "random" 10 yard penalties called on you.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If your offense is predicated on getting small, consistent gains, you are going to benefit a lot from playing against a defense that his terrible against the run. I fail to see the point of this exercise, though I do enjoy it continuing for some masochistic reason...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The point is that differing refereeing styles were one of the ways in which Juventus got caught cheating in Serie A. I'm not saying that's what going on here, and I'm happy for the long-suffering fans on Cleveland, but the NFL needs to put a stop to this.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
So you brought up the Juventus thing for what reason again?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
To wit: we're done with three quarters, and there's been one holding or block in the back call all game, where a Pats TE tackled a blitzing linebacker. There's no way that's an accident by two "well-coached teams".
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Welcome to the NFL, is this your first week watching? I am surprised holding is even still in the rulebook.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
That's demonstrably untrue, making you an idiot. *plonk*
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
This seems an ungenerous assessment of McCoy's contribution. There have been at least two atypical rookie plays - the roll out following the busted hand-off followed by an on-the-move completion, and his rushing TD which was a nice piece of athleticism and effort.
And how is 14/19 a low completion %? Brady's 14/25 is low.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Written before he made those plays. I think the Pats should be losing, but not by 3 TDs.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Rather than go for 2 after Hanson gets hurt on an awful roughing penalty (perhaps the first I've ever seen on a FG), the Lions let SUH attempt the extra point.
Kicked hard, but off the post.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm at work watching stat-trackers on the internet, and I saw "N. Suh missed PAT" and bugged out. I knew there was a story there.
I don't get why they didn't go for 2. Maybe Suh has some history of kicking that I don't know about?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You mean like being a former soccer player?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It was a decent kick. He just misplaced his plant foot.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Exactly like that. Did not know that, though I knew his family played. Should I have?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Yes, he has an African-sounding name. Duh.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
That's pretty awesome that Suh tried it.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Bucs surprise onside kick and it works!
ETA: Pending review.
Boo!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Illegal touch. Boo.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
N.Rackers kicks 67 yards from HST 30 to SD 3. J.Hester ran ob at SD 4 for 1 yard.
M.Scifres punts 1 yard to SD 13, Center-M.Windt. A.Okoye to SD 8 for 5 yards (S.Gregory). SD-M.Scifres was injured during the play. (The punt was deflected by Hst #53Keglar)
N.Rackers kicks 72 yards from HST 30 to SD -2. D.Sproles to SD 32 for 34 yards (D.Sharpton). PENALTY on SD-E.Weddle, Illegal Block Above the Waist, 10 yards, enforced at SD 32.
First three SD ST plays of the game...
This is bordering on the statistically impossible...everyone associated with coaching and evaluating the ST on that team needs to go at the end of the year.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Problem is, the ST coach has been in SD for ... 9 ish years now and never had issues like this before.
Some of it has to do with the fact that they are on the 5th long snapper (3 on IR, one cut). There has been chaos in the linebackers on STs, with tons of injuries forcing lots of unproven players to line up on coverage teams. I think they have used 10 outside linebackers so far this year. Two kickoff gunners have been cut, and a couple on IR. Its been a continuous churn of players on ST units.
More than a coaching change they just need some semblance of stability on who lines up play to play, week to week.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The Jets and Lions seem to be trying to set a record for the most stupid penalties in one game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Atlanta defense and kickoff coverage give up 3 big plays, otherwise this game would be over, no excuse for giving up a TD on a bobbled kickoff return,
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Assistant coaches: "OK guys, if we don't win this one, the owner's going to fire the coach. Let's go out there and play this one for Chilly!"
Players: (getting stomped at home by a miserable Cardinals team)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
14:08 left in the game, and I'm pretty sure this is Atlanta's first punt.
ETA: Maybe the second. I remember the D stiffening at the end of the half when running wasn't an option.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
14:08 left in the game, and I'm pretty sure this is Atlanta's first punt.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Most blatant faked injury to stall a drive ever after the 3rd down completeion (to a makeable 4th down) in Cleveland. The Browns guy wasn't near the play, jumped over the downed receiver, looked and gestured at the sideline, then slowly "fell" down and pretended to be hurt.
I'm on RZC so they cut away. Someone please tell me they flagged that shit. That was McGinest times a hundred.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
No flag. It's been playoff rules today.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
DPI and free first and goal at the one on the very next play. Perhaps you should stop complaining now.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Obvious call. Meanwhile, they just missed a hold on the edge for a Hillis TD.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
FO Week 9 Discussion board: your home for angry and emotional analysis!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And Clausen gets sacked to set us up at 4th and 34, at our own 2. Sigh.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Wes Welker...Extra point kicker.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And Welker kicks the point for NE with Gostokowski injured...wild day for backup kickers!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Wes Welker > Ndamakong Suh
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
What happens if the defense returns an interception for a touchdown on a two-point conversion? Does the offense still kick off?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I feel pretty certain that it's just a failed 2-point conversion, just the same as if the offense had been stopped.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
play gets whistled dead once the int is made, from what i've seen
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, by rule in the NFL the play is dead once the defense establishes possession.
NFL Europe awarded 2 points for returning a conversion attempt (incl. a return of a blocked kick) over the opposite goal line. College and CFL have the same rule.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm loving the football sense of Hillis for CLE. Twice now on this drive, while desperately trying to run out the clock to keep Brady from pulling a miracle, he's cut back away from the sidelines to keep the clock running.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Pretty greedy attempting to challenging the spot of like a 40 yard PI call.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Favre could've run the ball in for a TD on a bootleg. Instead he throws it incomplete on 4th and goal. Time for him to retire if he is not going to be aggressive enough on 4th and goal to run it in.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Why go outside when you can just dive over the pile?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Three 3rd and 10s on the this drive, and the only one the Bills don't convert is because Parish is just barely out of bounds. The Bears secondary needs some work. DJ Moore specifically has been completely abused this game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Stupid challenge by Gailey there.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Indeed, that TO would have been important too.
Now on 4th down, one of the Bear's big blitzes actually works!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Falcons hold on 4th and a foot at the 1. Now at the 2 minute warning, no TOs left for TB.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I know Favre can't move well, but his pocket awareness is abysmal this year.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
First down, game over in ATL
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Backfooted throw into tight coverage and somehow Shiancoe makes the catch and scores to tie it.
That's frustrating.
Adrian Wilson turned the wrong way.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And the Vikings just scored. The extra point will tie the game with 27 seconds to go.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Interesting use of timeouts by the Bears, and by interesting I mean confusing.
Then Maynerd gets a punt downed at the 1. Can the Bills go 99 yards in a minute with no TOs?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
In past years, I'd say no way Ryan Fitzpatrick manages a first down. This year...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Derek Anderson is terrible. Just awful.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
With three qbs used, the Carolina Panthers have managed to net a total -5 yards passing.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Ugh. I commented earlier on Favre's poor pocket awareness. He's Peyton Manning compared to Derek Anderson.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The Bills got really lucky with Peppers's injury. Stopped the clock for them after a completion in bounds.
Two plays later it doesn't matter as Fitzpatrick throws a pick.
Also, come on Cardinals, can't you just finish off this Minnesota team?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Major mistake by the Lions just now. Called for a screen on 3rd and 6, but Stanton hesitated, faked it, threw poorly, and they failed AND stopped the clock. Jets have no timeouts. That cost them a lot of clock.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Wasn't the announcers dead wrong on the Bucs (Blount) last play? Where there ever a point in challenging that, they seemed clearly short to me without that last lunge by the RB.
My point is, if the runner isn't already down when he stretches his arm forward, that's a fumble, right? And if he's down, there's no way he got the first?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Vikings win. Childress gets a reprieve for another week.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And Suh's doinked extra point comes back to haunt the Lions.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
What are the uniforms the Colts are wearing today- throwbacks?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
1955 Colts I think they said
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
They look sweet.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
For a second I thought the Giants were playing but without logos.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I love the Colts throwback Uniformas. They should play in these every week.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I like the Colts throwbacks, but why wear them on the road?
SI.com headline says Falcons are in 1st in AFC South.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
That can't be right, Coach Morris told me the Bucs were the best team in the conference.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Maybe he if he used stats he would know they aren't that good.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Only because using stats would make him a loser, though.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
What's going on in the Colts-Eagles game? All the Eagles fans told me their defense would get shredded.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Have patience. There's still plenty of time for Manning to make all the necessary adjustments and Sean McDermott to make none of them.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It will, in time.
The Colts defense is getting shredded worse.
Reid bailed them out by kicking that last FG. Kept it a 2 score game, it could've been over.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Referees completely cocked up the downs in the Chiefs-Raiders game. Raiders challenged a TD on 3rd and 2 and got it reversed and placed at the 1. Play picked up the first down, but they announced it as 4th and goal from the 1 after the reversal instead of 1st and goal from the 1.
Just horrible.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Are you sure?
I don't mean to doubt you, I just have a hard time believing that level of mistake is possible.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Yes. They got it sort of right eventually. The Chiefs ran a play on 1st/4th down and were called for a holding penalty. They announced it was 4th down before that play, and they announced after the penalty that it was "still 4th down".
Then they retroactively announced that the previous play was 1st down, not 4th, and the Chiefs wound up scoring a TD.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It was worse than that, actually-
The refs rule 4th down and goal from the 1 yard line, when it should be 1st down. Chiefs run a bootleg that comes up short (or maybe scores, it's besides the point) but there's a holding penalty. The ref calls for 4th down from the 11. So they go an entire play, saying its 4th down - at this point, you've run a play since the mistake, so you're supposed to be stuck with it (to my understanding).
After this, Todd Haley finally gets the ref's attention, and explains what happened, that it should be 1st down and goal from the 11 yard line. The refs confer, and agree, and go tell Tom Cable. Cable looks pretty unhappy about the whole development, and the refs announce that the previous play had actually been a 1st down, despite their call of 4th down.
To my understanding, just like any other mistake, if you move on and run another play, you're supposed to be stuck with the mistake. The refs made things turn out the way they should've initially, but OAK has a good case to be upset with the events here.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Samuel's tackle attempt on that TD was just pathetic.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The eagles backfield cant tackle to save their lives.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
What was that penalty for? How can a receiver with the ball be defenseless?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If Reid decides to challenge that play it looked like possession and a fumble to my untrained eyes.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Man, that was a bogus call. Still steamed about it.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Austin Collie knocked unconscious from a Curt Coleman helmet to helmet.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
While the hits don't appear to be of "dirty" intent, notice that neither defender attempts to use their arms for anything other than hitting. They aren't trying to wrap up for a tackle, and they aren't trying to strip the football. The arms are crossed in front of their bodies, and their only purpose is to add to the force of the hit.
The NFL won't get anywhere with fines or technology (e.g. new helmets) as long as "body as missile" is allowed by rule.
The rule for this is "unnecessary roughness", and it needs to be called *every* time a player makes a hit without using his arms appropriately. This is not restricted to defensive players -- for example, this should apply to cut blockers who throw their bodies at defensive players' knees, as well.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It pains me to defend the Eagles, but Collie lowers his helmet, gets hit in the head, and somehow it's a penalty on the Eagles.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Exactly. What exactly was Coleman supposed to do there?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I guess stand there and watch Collie make the catch.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
How about not make solid helmet to helmet contact?
Some people talk like this is rocket science. It's not. Don't hit someone in the head with your helmet. So, don't lead with your head.
Once in a while, the target will move unpredictably like when hit by someone else--and that might cause occasional unavoidable contact. But mostly, if you don't lead with your head you won't hit opponents with your helmet.
Will it lead to less hard hits? Good. Will it give offenses an advantage? Maybe (often tackles are missed because a defender tried to light someone up instead of making a good tackle).
Will it lead to fewer retired football players having major or minor health issues. Absolutely. And that is the point. And it's really not arguable.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Great. It was still a bad call.
He came down and was hit by one player, and that hit carried him into Coleman's helmet, which was in a perfectly ordinary and unavoidable place for his head to be.
That was momentum and accidental. Scary, but not illegal.
(I'm a Colts fan.)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Why didn't the Eagles challenge, he took about 3 steps before he was hit, it was clearly a catch and fumble ?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'd guess Reid didn't want to use his last challenge since he already blew one earlier.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
They didn't have any challenges. Reid blew on time out on that awful challenge, they burned a time out on defense because McDermott doesn't know that the Colts run the hurry up and Vick used one because of the play clock.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You can't challenge penalties that are called on the field. I guess they technically could have challenged the ruling that it was incomplete, but it would have been moot because of the (incorrect) unnecessary roughness call.
Arguably, the penalty should get overturned if the challenge shows that he had possession and was running with the ball (as he's then not a "defenseless receiver"), but in practice, I don't believe the penalty call can be overturned.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If you need a review to determine whether a player caught fumbled, caught and failed to gain control, or dropped the pass, then it's crazy to expect the defender to be able to tell the difference in the split second available to him. He must be given the benefit of the doubt and not be flagged for hitting a defenseless receiver.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Thanks Dave! My point exactly. It was a completed pass, Collie started running, and then he was hit, but the hits were clean. They were not personal fouls. The Eagles were robbed of a big turnover there, and instead the Colts walk away with a free TD.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Well, not entirely. They still had to gain a lot of yards on several other plays to earn the TD. It wasn't as bad as the 50+ yard DPIs that hand undeserving QBs balls on the one for free points...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Did you actually watch the play? Coleman didn't lead with his head; Collie did. It's not the defender's job to get out of the way. In fact, that's the exact opposite of the defender's job. Collie's position when he was hit was about as far as you can get from "defenseless"
I'm all for trying to reduce injuries, but clean plays also cause injuries sometimes. That's unfortunately the nature of the game. Neither of the Eagles' defenders did anything wrong there.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Uh, what?!
It was totally incidental contact. Unless you expected Coleman to be able to change his positioning in half of a second.
The hit that Merriweather had on Heap? Yeah, that was illegal. Things like this hit? While scary and unfortunate for Collie (like others, I hope he's okay), it's just part of the game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Then flag every offensive player who lowers his helmet (leading with his head, like you said). Then if there is a helmet to helmet when the offensive player's helmet is upright, flag the defender. If a player is getting tackled and his head goes down to about chest height, whistle him down at that point. That will clear up all the helmet hits and make the game safer (and also neuter the game.)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Can't hit him in the head. Do you want someone to die on the field?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Absolutely not. But if a player puts his own head in the line of fire, sometimes it's unavoidable.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
How is the defender supposed to change his positioning that quickly? Ridiculous.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
only when he's defenseless
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Wow. Austin just got creamed. Hope he's okay.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Its going to be impossible to play defense soon. What exactly are you allowed to do? Its getting insane! Hope Collies alright.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Manning just called the same play that wiped out Collie again. That's cold blooded.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I thought the same exact thing! Lol. Mannings thinning out the recieving core.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Jacob Tamme, Javaris James and Blair White are the skill position players Manning has to work with besides Reggie Wayne after Collie was carted off the field in ugly fasion.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Paul R-
Because he knew the Eagles players would be reticent to hit. These calls ultimately make the situation more dangerous (safety failure) and eliminate the point of defense (entertainment failure).
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm not sure if I follow your reasoning. I agree, though, that he called it because he knew that was one play the Eagles secondary didn't want to see.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The Chiefs line up for a 51-yard FG. Direct snap to Ryan Succop who pooches it. I LOVE the call, but the punt (barely) rolled into the endzone for a touchback.
Campbell is picked on the very next play.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Catching the ball, putting your head down, lowering your shoulders and taking a step and a half upfield are the new "defenseless."
Ridiculous call. That said, I hope Collie's injury isn't serious.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Complete BS call. Eagles 16, Colts 7, Officials 7.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You would already have known that qualified as defenseless if you had seen the Harrison on Massaquoi hit that yielded a $75,000 fine. Same scenario.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Shankapottomus! 19 yards ugggg
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The announcer of the Raider game just made a fascinating point: This is probably the most important game for the Raiders since their Super Bowl appearance. Boy that's a lot of lean years in Oakland.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I would like to know this once and for all - isn't ANY helmet-to-helmet contact illegal? Or does the "defenseless" part apply to recievers and backs?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You can be penalized for hitting a defenseless receiver even if it isn't helmet to helmet. So if you go Tatum-on-Stingley it's a penalty. Basically, you're only allowed to light up the receiver when the receiver actually has the ball.
(Since I was watching Giants/Seahawks, I won't comment on whether any of the Coleman-Collie hit actually qualifies for the penalty in question.)
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Based on what the announcers said, I believe (but I can't answer once and for all)that head to head hits are legal on players running with the ball - that would include a runner on a running play but also a receiver who caught the ball and was then running with it.
That makes it doubly difficult on the defender, having to decide if the receiver has put both feet down and made a football move (or whatever the current rule is) in the split second that they are closing on the player
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Helmet to helmet is illegal on defenseless receivers.
A QB in the pocket can't be hit on the head by any body or uniform part.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I believe you mean "or", not "by".
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
He means to say that defenders can't hit the QB on the head, regardless of the body part they hit with.
They can however, hit him somewhere else, but there's also the rule that they can't hit him low.
So, the shoulders to the hip is the strike zone.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Yes, it was a joke.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
How much do you think Coleman will be fined for the hit on Collie?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
At the rate we're going? $100,000.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
4 games in the Flag Football League.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If Brett Favre does retire he will be only the third NFL QB since 1960 to throw for over 400 yards in a single game, in the last season of their career. The other two were John Elway (400) and Brian Griese (407).
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I just went back and watched the Collie play again. He caught the ball five full yards before he got hit. The Eagles defender didn't even make contact with his helmet, he put his shoulder into the place where the ball would have been if Collie hadn't been hit by another defender. There is no way that is a penalty. the Eagles just got jipped.
I hate to see guys get hurt like that but why aren't folk calling out Manning for leading his receiver into traffic and then doing exactly the same thing next play (very cynical for my mind)?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Penalty or not, Coleman's helmet hit him in the head.
Aaaaaand another Colts WR is hurt. Blair White walks off on his own.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Watch it again. Helmet to helmet, clear as day. Certainly not worth a fine but a clear flag.
Blind and can't even spell your racist epithets correctly.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Not every play where one player's helmet hits another player's is a penalty on the defender. Not only did Coleman not lead with his helmet, he didn't even initiate the contact. If a receiver lowers his helmet and hits a defender in the head, that's not a penalty on the defender. Yes, their helmets made contact, but that does not, in and of itself, mean that Coleman made an illegal hit. He didn't.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I love epithets but didn't see one...who is blind?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
"jipped" is an epitaph, s/b gypped, a slur against gypsies
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I have never heard this in my life, I just thought it was a verb meaning to rip off.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Maybe the word "folk" was racist in some weirdo's scrambled brain.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If what you consider to be a racist epithet isn't spelled correctly then there is every chance it wasn't a racist epithet at all. And I have watched it plenty of times and still can't see a penalty.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Assuming he means the word jipped (meaning tipped sparingly, given a lower than expected gratuity), it's considered racist (meaning "Jew-tipped") - but it also seems to be pretty clearly not what you meant. You appear to have meant gypped (meaning ripped off), which isn't racist (but could be considered offensive in its own right if one wished to do so).
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I have never in my life heard that jipped means 'jew-tipped'. Maybe it is very commonly used in places far away from where I have lived but it is new to me. Also if that was the inferred racism, haven't I spelled it correctly? Very confused, some people will take offense at the oddest things.
It still wasn't a penalty though.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Racist epithet?
That's quite the accusation, what do you think is racist? I assume 'jipped' which could probably be spelt 'gipped'. Is that racist, maybe to gypsies or 'traveling folk as they're known in the UK, a bit, if that's the basis of the phrase, I have no idea. You're probably being oversensitive/making stuff up.
There was nothing illegal about that play. How are the defenders supposed to account for the receiver bouncing off another defender?
If ad hominem attacks weren't disallowed I'd call you an idiot.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I also don't believe that's an epithet.
I believe an epithet is by definition a noun or adjective.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
For what it's worth, the term "gypped" (also spelled "gipped") did indeed originate as a derogatory reference to gypsies. See here. Still, the term has been in use for over a century, and most people have no idea what its origins are, as can be seen from the comments in this thread.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And for those of us who did know it's origins, how can there be a derogatory reference to gypsies if nobody's ever met a gypsy?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
A gypsie woman (she looked like a holywood-style stereotypical gypsie, all hunched over with one boogly eye, not kidding) once tried to sell me some lucky heather when I was at university and I refused, not knowing that the point of this transaction is that to refuse is to invite bad luck. I was actually very, very unlucky for quite some time after that (awful car accident, health problems and other stuff), I'm still not sure that it's gone away. As a scientist I refuse to beleive in such things but there is still a small part of me that thinks that the b*tch screwed me. So I'm not sure about gypsies, I think that they should pay their taxes and stop inhabiting other people's land, both of which are issues in the UK, but if any weird crones offer me lucky heather again then I'll damn well buy it just to be sure. Life can be odd.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Even if it were true that she could give you bad luck because you refused to buy her "lucky" heather, that makes her an extortionist so screw her.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Thus the term "gypped."
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Dude, that's totally a racist epithet.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
HA!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You'd better convert to every religion ever invented then... just to be sure.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
update on Collie - CBS reporting he is moving around in the locker room and appears to have a concussion. Not great, but a much better result than first appeared when he was just lying motionless on the field. I am glad it looks like he will be all right.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Right, because we were all so concerned about someone who is paid obscene amounts of money but must undertake the risk of a daylong headache.
/apologizes for venom but is on day 3 of quitting smoking and the new bs focus and hyperenforcement aren't helping
/has collie on fantasy team in tight matchup and is still fuming
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Ad hominem attack totally unwarranted, IMO. But good for you for quitting smoking.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Who told their wife about this site?
I'm sorry darling, I just don't get the personal concern some fans have for what are essentially objects of entertainment while on the field.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Wow, really.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You don't have to admit that you cracked a smile at least..we know the truth.
Aand no, not really, but I do think that getting all maternal (regardless of gender) regarding proofessional athletes is not what gets me jacked up for Sunday and read endless hours of X and O analysis on great sites like this.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You are coming close to having made some of the most offensive comments I have ever read on this site (which is saying something).
Totally uncalled for.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm sincerely sorry if anyone was offended...albeit I never called anyone a name or anything of the sort.
I did present an exagerrated (and I thought) humorous view reflective of a consideration that I thought many shared.
Would hate to watch a game with some of y'all as the entertainment (and often enlightening) value of ribbings and hyperbole seem lost on you. I truly do feel sorry for you and hope some day you come to realize that you don't have to perceive reality in these ways...as my father used to say, "find the humor."
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Sexism and sociopathy in one package. Lovely.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
My pedantic side forces me to point out that this isn't actually an ad hominem attack, which refers to the fallacy of attacking an argument by attacking the person making it. For example, "CathyW is a stupid jerk, so who cares what she thinks about head injuries?" is an ad hominem attack (disclaimer: I don't think you're a stupid jerk).
Still, the long-term effects of concussions, particularly repeated ones, are a lot greater than a day of headaches, so the argument is stupid and mean-spirited, just not ad hominem.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
BywaterBrat: the risk of a daylong headache.
I don't think you understand what a concussion is.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I respect this site immensely and hope they have the courage and journalistic integrity to be very vocal (perhaps even on their more widely-read channel) about the absurdity of high priest goodell's most recent crackdown. These penalties are affecting the outcomes of games. As y'all have tangentially noted...concussions and big hits over the the middle are not the cause of long-term damage to players' health.
Fines are one thing but I don't see why our grand inquisitor can't make his fiines but let the game be played as intended on the field. The collie/mikell incident was the most blatant and impactful that I've seen live so far (granted I'm not a raven's fan), if collie doesn't go horrifically limp then the flag is never thrown and we may have a pick_six on our hands. The ref obviously feared repercussions and threw the flag to defend himself.
I applaud the announcer, halftime analysts and any others who point out the unintended and misguided consequences of this stance.
/apologizesz for numerous errors and lack of punctuation as I am a recent adopter of the smartphone.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Concussions are indeed a cause of long-term damage to players' health (not the only cause, but certainly one of them).
That said, I agree it was a bad call that greatly impacted the game. The rule needs to be enforced consistently and correctly, and it wasn't here.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
"The" is not the logical equivalent of "A"...duly noted all the same but my unprofessional opinion is that the subsequent and daily H2H hits are far more damaging in the long-term.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You are clearly not a medical researcher. Concussions are indeed of major long-term consequence.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Jesus, and now the Eagles commit a roughing the kicker call. Self-destruction, here we come!!
ETA: On replay, that looked ticky-tacky. Defender was carried by momentum into the kicker, who landed on top of him. These refs are horrible today.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It was called running into the kicker not roughing, 5 yards and no automatic first. Led to a 4th and 2, redo of the punt, which also sucked.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Thanks for the correction, you are right, it was running into the kicker.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Why are the Giants starters still on the field?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Is Arjen Robben punting for Indianapolis now? That was a blatant dive. Wow. They are REALLY working the refs now.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
lol at the robben comment
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Heh, Jim Nantz actually called Phil Simms out on one of his my reality is different than yours calls.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Angerer is a great name for a defensive player in football.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Eagles come out in the T-Formation to counter the Colt's throwbacks.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Reid challenges on 1st-and-goal. Inside the one. He's already used one timeout already.
Headdesk.
ETA: And loses, predictably, thus leaving the team with one timeout and no challenges for almost the entire 4th quarter.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
One timeout and one challenge had been used already, and he lost so now the Eagles have no challenges and one timeout.
Sorry Harris but I'm predicting your jam supply is safe for another week.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm not licked yet!
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I wonder if Tanier will make snarky comments about the Eagles getting a TD even though Vick didn't cross the line. Probably not.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I gotta say, as a Colts fan who watched the first half and is listening to the radio for the second, it doesn't sound remotely like the Colts deserve to win this game. Sloppy play, and I hope that's to the Eagles' credit.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
My thoughts too. All that work (and luck) to take a lead at the half, and now they're down 2 scores again. Totally shut down in the 2nd half. Where was this Eagles D against the Titans?
Very frustrating.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
This Eagles D was on the field vs the Titans right up til Kenny Britt woke up and Ellis Hobbs decided he would rather play injured than tell anyone about it. 14pt lead in the 4th quarter, at one point, for the Eagles vs the Titans.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The refs are going to need a security detail to get out of philly tonight.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Certainly wouldn't be the first time.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
You're thinking of Cleveland.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Love the back-to-back QB sneak calls by the Eagles. I really think teams should do this more often in that type of situation. It's a very difficult play to stop, even if you're expecting it.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
At what point do the Colts just forfeit for lack of warm bodies?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
When Manning's power supply is disrupted.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
What did Cable and the Raiders use their challenges on earlier in the game?
The Raiders just lost the ball on a muffed punt where the returner was clearly down by contact, but it was called wrong and they didn't have a challenge left! Chiefs score a short touchdown and take the lead.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Two consecutive challenges relating to a goal-line stand by the Chiefs, I think in the second quarter. They won the first challenge but lost the second, since I only have stat tracker I didn't actually see what happened.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
There's going to be a riot
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Game over. The refs aren't going to let the Colts lose.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
If I were the Colts I would have used my timeouts in that goalline sequence.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Perhaps saving them for the possibility the onside kick doesn't work.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Opinions on the "penalty"? I know you're not allowed to take shots at the head, but I don't know the exact wording of the rule and whatever the legalisms that looked like a "Well, it's Peyton Manning" flag.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Radio announcers were talking about a facemask.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
On the back of his head? Manning's head is big but it's not THAT big.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Beats me. It's possible I misheard/misinterpreted, I can't see anything.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
By the letter of the law, it was a penalty since he did touch Peyton's helmet. I doubt that the flag comes out if Matt Cassel is the QB.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I cant believe its a penalty if you just brush a qb's helmet. That seems a bit absurd. I know its manning and all but really?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Anybody seriously believe that Peyton Manning's safety was at risk because Trent Cole's hand brushed against the back of his helmet as he reached to the other side to go for the arm with the ball? I don't buy for a moment that making calls like that in some way makes players safer.
As an aside, there was no reason to go for a strip on 4th and 18.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
The problem is that the NFL insists upon crafting rules that do not allow the officials to make judgments about the intent of the players' actions in any way whatsoever.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Intent is a quagmire. Judging the action is a much better policy.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Intent is built into numerous NFL rules. There's the rather obvious example of intentional grounding, which has it built into the name, as well as pass interference (incidental contact), roughing vs. running into the kicker, and various unnecessary roughness/unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. It's not really something you can get away from, and taking extreme positions about things like brushing a QB's helmet really doesn't help anyone except the occasional offense that benefits from the call.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
There should never be a call made based on intent. Calls should be made based on WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.
By judging intent, you can say, "well Brett Favre did not intend to throw the ball 2 yards into the back of his center, he intended to throw a touchdown pass, so instead of a intentional grounding penalty, the ruling on the field is a touchdown!"
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm pretty sure intent is necessarily built into the concept of intentional grounding. Otherwise, we'd penalize every incomplete pass. All of the specifics about whether there was a receiver in the area, etc. are designed as ways of determining intent.
Intent's built into a lot of rules because the whole idea is to discourage various forms of intentional activity like mugging the receiver before the ball gets there (PI), throwing the ball away any time you'd be sacked (grounding), or trying to take out the other team's kicker/punter (running into/roughing the kicker). Penalizing unintentional activity in the course of normal play isn't helpful.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I expect the reasoning is that by outlawing ALL contact with the QB's helmet, you take away all interpretation, all ambiguity, and for defenders, all temptation. No guessing about intent or judging how hard it was.
Why WOULD you want to all hitting the QB's head? Linemen can't headslap each other either.
You guys really are just totally off your rockers about safety. It's just not that hard and won't change that much to keep players' heads safe.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Because (1) accidents happen, (2) accidents are often distinguishable from intentional actions, (3) it's unjust to punish accidents as harshly as intentional actions, and (4) forcing players to adapt their game to avoid such accidents is making the game borderline unplayable for them?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
No no it's a total quagmire. This absurd solution is clearly the best we can do.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm patenting a new full body helmet that will make it illegal to be tackled. It's going to revolutionize the game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Peyton Manning had stepped forward in the pocket, and Cole was being pushed too deep to have any real chance at tackling him. Going for the strip was probably the highest percentage play for Cole in that situation.
I'd say the NFL is lucky that the Colts didn't manage to win after that play - it would likely lead to an increase in the backlash against the deeper focus on player safety.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
refs working the eagles tonight
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Oh jesus, they are going to win.
That last Vick scramble would have been flagged late hit were it Manning. Perhaps in the only defensible case, Vick doesnKt get that treatment.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
OH, IT'S A JAM NIGHT TONIGHT, MOTHERFUCKERS. BLUEBERRY? BLACKBERRY? NAH. I'm making my own combination tonight. Mapleboysenberrykumkatbaconplatinum Motherfucking Jam.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Platinum jam huh? I like your style, Harris. Enjoy!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It's his wife who'll enjoy it or not, she hasn't let on whether or not she's a fan.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
She is, which makes these things fun for both of us. Clean up is Hell, though. Jam gets into just everything.
Hail Hydra!
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Gross, but funny.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
CBS just switched me to OAK vs KC after the Colts game. Same scenario as Manning's last play, same time on the clock, same pass down the middle, Oakland completes the pass.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Last Play 2nd-47, Oakland 22
Jason Campbell passed to Jacoby Ford down the middle for 27 yard loss
WTF just happened?
96 yard field goal?
From the NFL GameCenter: 3-47-OAK 22 (:07) S.Janikowski 96 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-J.Condo, Holder-S.Lechler.
I'm guessing - just guessing - that's NOT what happened.
Re: 96 yard field goal?
Stat tracker just fixed the glitch--the Campbell pass was to the KC 22, but they listed it as the Oakland 22, which made a bunch of stuff look really weird.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'd like to see better replay of that last catch in the Oakland-KC game. On what they showed, it didn't look like Ford had the ball under control when he hit the ground.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Have you seen the yellow flag?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Jacoby Ford > Brandon Flowers
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Party @ Raiderjoe's. Right on the money, love...
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Think DVOA will give us some love after beating #1? Me neither.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Will someone please explain to me: does the Cleveland Browns' recent success with Peyton Hillis (especially in the 1st quarter) these past couple games fly in the face of Football Outsiders' long-standing belief of the uselessness of "establishing the run" and "teams run when they win, not win when they run"?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
No, it doesn't. I don't believe that anyone at FO has argued that having an effective running game doesn't help you win. The argument is against the idea of running early solely for the sake of running early (i.e. not because you have a good running game).
To make it a bit more explicit: football announcers and commentators commonly say that running early is beneficial even if you aren't gaining many yards because it "establishes the run," which will lead to greater offensive success later in the game a)because defenses will get worn out from defending those runs and thus be susceptible to the run later and/or b) because it will make play action passes more effective. In support of these arguments, they will often point to the fact that teams with more rushing attempts usually win (which confuses correlation and causation).
This is basically the argument that FO has argued against. For example, there's no evidence that running more early makes running more effective late. None of that means that you shouldn't run the ball early if you're gashing your opponent's defense. Everybody's pretty much in agreement on that one.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
No; the official FO stance is teams win when they play effectively, regardless of whether they are running or passing. Their complaint is when announcers claim that running the ball just for the sake of running the ball somehow leads to winning. You don't run to "establish the run," you run to effectively move the ball toward a first down.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Seriously, how the hell can Matt Cassel have 35 pass attempts, Thomas Jones have 19 rushes, whilst Jamaal Charles only has 10 rushing attempts? Charles is so obviously the most talented offensive player on that team.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
From a fantasy football perspective, Haley looks stupid. But if you actually watch a Chiefs game, you get the sense that Haley actually does understand the strengths of his running backs and utilizes them accordingly. I think he also understands that he's going to need Charles in the playoffs, and he uses Jones to take much of the regular-season beating.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
All well and good but they have to get to the playoffs first for that strategy to pay off. The way they've played the last two weeks doesn't inspire confidence.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I believe he missed a series or so with some malady. However, at one point close to halftime Jones was averaging 26" per carry on 11 totes.
That's real impressive.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Clay Matthews > Jason Witten + Marion Barber
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Ladies and gentlemen, the Dallas Cowboys, featuring Wade Phillips, are brought to you this week by the Andrew Reid School of Clock Management.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Who is this "Master Pass Rusher" on the Vikings that NBC speaks of? Are they even watching this season?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
OK, I've missed something. What happened to Romo?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Broken Collarbone a few weeks ago.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I remembered that as soon as I posted. Poster is on his way to getting drunk. Pretty bored with awful game.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
I'm an Eagles fan, with the GB defence in fantasy, so this is a fun game for me.
News Flash - NFL Rule Change
Apparently, you need to have possession of the ball and run more than 5 yards with it, for a pass to be complete. Stock up on RB's for your fantasy teams, the era of the forward pass is over:
Referee Carl Cheffers issued a statement after the game to explain the ruling on the penalty on Kurt Coleman, although it was announced as being on Quintin Mikell.
“The fact of the matter is that the ball was incomplete,” Cheffers said. “So he has protection throughout that entire process on that play because we don’t have a completion. At no time did he have possession and become a runner to where he would have transitioned out of being a defenseless receiver.”
Re: News Flash - NFL Rule Change
The announcer kept saying that 'collie is now a runner', while it should be ruled a fumble if that was the case.
The 'defenseless player' as described by the rule is (also) 'a receiver in the act of catching the ball'. Well. Every flag for illegal hit is by definition an incomplete pass.
"Apparently, you need to have possession of the ball, run more than 5 yards with it, order a cup of tea and wave to your mom in the stands for a pass to be complete"
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
It must pain Jerry Jones to have to sit there and watch this.
------------------------------------------------------------
Always looking to learn more about the game. Always.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Yes, but we get the enjoyment of watching Jerry Jones watch this.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
+1
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Nick Collins demonstrating the textbook blatant head-to-head shot that does really need to be taken care of. Late hit, lowering the helmet, leading with the helmet, no attempt to tackle.
On the plus side, the TV crew called him on it.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
And Collins' punishment will be a large fine that will surely prevent him and others from ever attempting such a hit ever again.
Glad to see that Collinsworth agrees with me.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
As a soccer referee, I'll admit I'd love to see more players thrown out when the question is safety/unnecessary violence. As a normal person, I don't like the (apparently randomly determined) fines that much either.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
So who thought the FO Almanac's prediction on the Cowboys would end up being optimistic?
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Hard to predict a team quitting on its head coach..
Especially by late October. Ouch.
Re: Week 9 Open Discussion Thread
Why are Suh and Welker kicking footballs?
Are you really telling me they are better than the punter? or is it because the punter is the holder... which begs the question if there aren't other holders on the team.