Super Bowl LI

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 2:43 pm

gameoverman wrote:I didn't see the catch yesterday, but after looking at those two clips I'd say that's a catch. The roll he makes is a 'football move' and he has the ball, awkwardly but he has it. He's rolling away to get up, it's equivalent to turning and taking a step imo.

See, to me, the fact that he drops the ball while turning over show pretty definitively that he did not have control over it so any move is moot as he never caught (controlled) the ball.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:08 pm

Here's the sequence as I see it:

He catches the ball and is on the ground, the ball is in his control

He performs a football move, rolling away, with the ball in his control

After the roll, the ball bounces out of his control

That bounce was after two critical points, one- the catch and two- the roll. It was not all one move.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:09 pm

To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:18 pm

McNutt wrote:To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.

The question is catch or no catch? The fumble would be after a catch was made, no catch=no fumble possible.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:22 pm

But it could easily be a catch and no fumble, right? He catches it, gets control, goes to the ground, the Lions player makes contact with him on the ground (at which point he's down by contact), then he rolls and the ball comes out.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:30 pm

Remus West wrote: Used to feel I understood it. Now? Not a fucking clue.

2016 rule catch wording

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... f-a-catch/

which is not what Fox sports or Mike Piera(?) said any of the three times the ground help secure a catch and it was called a catch. All three times they said the change was something about "the ground causing the fumble"

The language has now been enhanced, with an effort to articulate the always-ambiguous time requirement inherent to completing the process of catching the ball. Under the 2016 rule book, a player has caught a pass when he “maintains control of the ball . . . until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps.” (New language added in italics.)

I don't think any of three plays I saw over two games showed the receiver with control, but they were all called consistently, so I have to defer.

Xmann · Post by **Xmann** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:34 pm

RG3 out a minimum 8 weeks, perhaps the season.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:04 pm

gameoverman wrote:
McNutt wrote:To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.
The question is catch or no catch? The fumble would be after a catch was made, no catch=no fumble possible.

Sorry, I meant to say incomplete pass.

Trent Steel · Post by **Trent Steel** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:15 pm

McNutt wrote:
gameoverman wrote:
McNutt wrote:To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.
The question is catch or no catch? The fumble would be after a catch was made, no catch=no fumble possible.
Sorry, I meant to say incomplete pass.

This angle makes it look like a catch to me.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:22 pm

El Guapo wrote:But it could easily be a catch and no fumble, right? He catches it, gets control, goes to the ground, the Lions player makes contact with him on the ground (at which point he's down by contact), then he rolls and the ball comes out.

From the two angles I saw I couldn't tell if the defender made contact, if he did then it's a catch and marked down right there and then with no fumble possible.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:33 pm

Man, you have to feel for RG3. He may be done as an NFL QB, at least as a starter. Once the healing process is finished after this most recent injury, he will have missed at least 30 of his last 40 regular season games. You just cant pay starter money to someone that breakable. Playing Quarterback in the NFL is a very tough job.

Xmann · Post by **Xmann** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:20 pm

Is Lindsey Stirling really wearing a Bruce Miller jersey playing the national anthem!

No one at the stadium realized what an awful decision it would be to wear that jerks jersey?

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:44 am

I was watching the Cubs game tonight (I know this is a football thread), and the crawl at the bottom of the screen showed an update for the NFL - STL vs. SF. Time to update things, Comcast SportsNet!

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:11 am

My understanding is that the Rams/49ers was unwatchable. Even had that not been the case, this still would have been an awesome call and the best part of many games. It's the Westwood One call of the guy who ran on the field.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:44 am

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:46 am

McNutt wrote:To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.

Don't get me wrong, there is no outrage, just confusion over the rule. I'm a Lions fan. That play meant nothing. The Colts had two more after it in which to score during the half and certainly would have done so. They were playing the Lions. We don't stop people at critical times.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:05 am

gameoverman wrote:Here's the sequence as I see it:

He catches the ball and is on the ground, the ball is in his control

He performs a football move, rolling away, with the ball in his control

After the roll, the ball bounces out of his control

That bounce was after two critical points, one- the catch and two- the roll. It was not all one move.

The question is the definition of "in control" what you see as in control, others see as not so much. In the end its subjective and up to the ref. Thats why so many of these plays piss people off, its too subjective.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:06 am

Remus West wrote:
McNutt wrote:To my untrained eye that's a fumble. I can totally understand the outrage.
Don't get me wrong, there is no outrage, just confusion over the rule. I'm a Lions fan. That play meant nothing. The Colts had two more after it in which to score during the half and certainly would have done so. They were playing the Lions. We don't stop people at critical times.

Fortunately, neither do the Colts!

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:13 pm

28-0 is a nice start to the Chip Kelly era, especially over the LA Rams. I think it says a little bit about the 49ers - they will be a better team than last year, though the record may not improve much, but it says a LOT about how bloody awful the Rams are going to be. Given that Goff couldn't even stay healthy during the preseason, they had better plan on sitting him all year to get bigger and learn, because if they throw him into that horrendous offense, he'll have a worse career than RG 3.

As to the Niners - looking at their schedule, they'll be lucky to go 1-3 over their next 4 games. If Kelly can manage that, it will be impressive.

Next 4:

@ Carolina
@ Seattle
Dallas
Arizona

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:22 pm

Pyperkub wrote:28-0 is a nice start to the Chip Kelly era, especially over the LA Rams. I think it says a little bit about the 49ers - they will be a better team than last year, though the record may not improve much, but it says a LOT about how bloody awful the Rams are going to be. Given that Goff couldn't even stay healthy during the preseason, they had better plan on sitting him all year to get bigger and learn, because if they throw him into that horrendous offense, he'll have a worse career than RG 3.

As to the Niners - looking at their schedule, they'll be lucky to go 1-3 over their next 4 games. If Kelly can manage that, it will be impressive.

Next 4:

@ Carolina
@ Seattle
Dallas
Arizona

The Dallas game shouldn't scare you. The others would be a nice win to get.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:31 pm

It amazes me that year after year the Rams manage to be mediocre (or worse), yet year after year Jeff Fisher still has a job.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:44 pm

I don't know what to think about the Rams. First off, bringing football to LA means bringing a winner, otherwise it's a colossal waste of everyone's time and money. Then they have a top draft pick QB but don't have him in the game. Okay, if you have a guy better than your rookie, for now, the better guy should play. Zero points! ZERO! How can the number one draft pick be worse than that?

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:47 pm

Remus West wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:28-0 is a nice start to the Chip Kelly era, especially over the LA Rams. I think it says a little bit about the 49ers - they will be a better team than last year, though the record may not improve much, but it says a LOT about how bloody awful the Rams are going to be. Given that Goff couldn't even stay healthy during the preseason, they had better plan on sitting him all year to get bigger and learn, because if they throw him into that horrendous offense, he'll have a worse career than RG 3.

As to the Niners - looking at their schedule, they'll be lucky to go 1-3 over their next 4 games. If Kelly can manage that, it will be impressive.

Next 4:

@ Carolina
@ Seattle
Dallas
Arizona
The Dallas game shouldn't scare you. The others would be a nice win to get.

That would be the most likely 1, but Dallas is likely to get better, while SF may well get worse (or at least look it). It really depends upon how truly awful the Rams are.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:08 pm

gameoverman wrote:I don't know what to think about the Rams. First off, bringing football to LA means bringing a winner, otherwise it's a colossal waste of everyone's time and money. Then they have a top draft pick QB but don't have him in the game. Okay, if you have a guy better than your rookie, for now, the better guy should play. Zero points! ZERO! How can the number one draft pick be worse than that?

It's often not a great idea to throw a rookie QB (even a high draft pick QB) to the wolves right away, if you can avoid it.

That said, if the Rams lose the next game, or two, I suspect Fisher will panic regardless and make the QB switch.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:13 pm

El Guapo wrote:
gameoverman wrote:I don't know what to think about the Rams. First off, bringing football to LA means bringing a winner, otherwise it's a colossal waste of everyone's time and money. Then they have a top draft pick QB but don't have him in the game. Okay, if you have a guy better than your rookie, for now, the better guy should play. Zero points! ZERO! How can the number one draft pick be worse than that?
It's often not a great idea to throw a rookie QB (even a high draft pick QB) to the wolves right away, if you can avoid it.

That said, if the Rams lose the next game, or two, I suspect Fisher will panic regardless and make the QB switch.

That would depend largely on your OLine *cough*Harrington*cough* IMO.

From the sound of it LA has no OLine, which is odd considering they were projected to be meaningful, weren't they?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Wed Sep 14, 2016 12:09 pm

Fines for the Broncos have begun to trickle out. So far $24k for Marshall and $18k for Darian Stewart for helmet hits on Cam.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Wed Sep 14, 2016 12:51 pm

Goff got destroyed in the pre-season, often against back-ups and roster casualties. Part of that is the o-line and part of that is Goff not being able to anticipate defenses and/or not getting rid of the ball quickly enough. You throw him out there now against the likes of Seattle and he won't live through the season.

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Wed Sep 14, 2016 1:15 pm

LordMortis wrote:
El Guapo wrote:
gameoverman wrote:I don't know what to think about the Rams. First off, bringing football to LA means bringing a winner, otherwise it's a colossal waste of everyone's time and money. Then they have a top draft pick QB but don't have him in the game. Okay, if you have a guy better than your rookie, for now, the better guy should play. Zero points! ZERO! How can the number one draft pick be worse than that?
It's often not a great idea to throw a rookie QB (even a high draft pick QB) to the wolves right away, if you can avoid it.

That said, if the Rams lose the next game, or two, I suspect Fisher will panic regardless and make the QB switch.
That would depend largely on your OLine *cough*Harrington*cough* IMO.

From the sound of it LA has no OLine, which is odd considering they were projected to be meaningful, weren't they?

No kidding. Poor Joey had all the tools needed to be a very good QB. Sadly, PTSD from playing behind the Lions poor excuse for a offensive line left him jumping at shadows. He did light the Lions up playing against them though. Something calming and therapeutic about playing across the line from the Lions defense.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:53 am

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:53 am

MMQB took over SI this week and one of the articles is all about Gronk. This should be of interest to most as it's all about football (at least I found the formations/routes/roles thing interesting).

Practice is about to begin at Gillette, but Belichick is volunteering more information on Gronkowski. In fact, he’s expansive, even congenial.

“Rob is a versatile athlete, but he’s also a versatile guy mentally. He can handle a lot of different assignments. Some guys can’t. Either they mentally can’t do it, or it’s just too much and their game slows down. They don’t play to the same skill set you see athletically because they’re thinking too much. That’s not the case with Rob.”

And with that, we introduce you to a player you’ve seen but never truly known: Rob Gronkowski, Football Mastermind.

Obviously all Patriots fans should study it.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 9:59 am

Tom Brady Matt from San Mateo called in to a radio show in Boston.

Both Rapoport and Scott Zolak think it was actually him. I would love this to be true.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 12:03 pm

Seeing as Hochuli told my QB to get off the field last night, I'd say it's now week 2.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 1:43 pm

The Bills' motto is "Let's not be hasty."

Oh wait...

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 10m10 minutes ago
The #Bills have fired OC Greg Roman, source said (@AdamSchefter on it first).

He was the highest paid OC in the league. That's kind of amazing.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:04 pm

The idea that the Bills should be paying anyone league-leading salaries is ludicrous.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:29 pm

Sort of ridiculous, especially considering they scored 31 points yesterday. Seems like their defensive coordinator might be the bigger problem....

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 5:56 pm

The NFL is promoting their Game Pass by posting Panthers vs. Broncos Full Game (Condensed) | Every Play from Week 1.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Fri Sep 16, 2016 10:49 pm

Uh, I think we are into week 2.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sun Sep 18, 2016 1:44 am

NYJ @ BUF
CIN @ PIT
TEN @ DET
BAL @ CLE
DAL @ WAS
NO @ NYG
SF @ CAR
MIA @ NE
KC @ HOU
SEA @ LA
TB @ ARI
JAX @ SD
ATL @ OAK
IND @ DEN
GB @ MIN
PHI @ CHI

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Sun Sep 18, 2016 4:30 pm

While the score doesn't suggest it, Stafford played a great a game.... I just had to say that because I'm always down on him. Had the Lions not been taking stupid penalties, that would be a much different game. Had the refs not decided to be whistle happy against the Lions when they weren't already sabotaging themselves, that would be a much different game. I'd take solace that in the refs being whistle happy for both sides, but it was a little unevenly weighted.

Penalties (Number-Yards) 17 - 138

Obscene.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sun Sep 18, 2016 4:47 pm

I can't believe the Pats/Dolphins game. At least there is no fear of a quarterback controversy now.

With 5:00 left in the second quarter, I was sure the Pats were going to start 4-0. With 4:00 left in the second quarter, I was praying they would hang on to win. What a rollercoaster ride. If the Pats beat the Texans, BB deserves Coach of the Year.