Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

0 (0%)

No

1 (100%)

Total Members Voted: 1

Voting closed: October 22, 2020, 02:04:36 PM

[Hairy Lime]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

[josh]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

But I'm still trying to figure out the rationale for overtime's allowing a touchdown to end it, but not a field goal, for the first possession. Let both teams have the ball a minimum of once. (I would really prefer that they just play out a full 15 minute period, but I get that that is not going to happen.)

[Espnthree]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

[kiidcarter8]

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.


Who said they want that?

[REDSTATEWARD]

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.


Who said they want that?

Note the FG USED to win. No longer.
The NFL is not a league for sissies.

[Hairy Lime]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

I don't think Josh was asking about that specific play - all scoring plays are automatically booth reviewed so a.challenge would be otiose - but why, for instance, forward progress not resulting in a first down or down by contact cannot be challenged. Or in my example, why no challenge for any other action penalty besides interference. Why not a clip, or a hold, or a facemask?

And explaining why the game continues after an initial OT field goal does not explain why it does not also continue after an initial touchdown.

[Espnthree]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

I don't think Josh was asking about that specific play - all scoring plays are automatically booth reviewed so a.challenge would be otiose - but why, for instance, forward progress not resulting in a first down or down by contact cannot be challenged.

  Because forward progress is a judgement call by an official and often does not match what a replay official sees or hears. Down by contact is called immediately and stops the play for safety reasons.

Or in my example, why no challenge for any other action penalty besides interference. Why not a clip, or a hold, or a facemask?

why not the Coin Toss?

And explaining why the game continues after an initial OT field goal does not explain why it does not also continue after an initial touchdown.

Because the NFL wants its OT to be sudden death. It took a groundswell from fans and players to successfully argue a one possession FG is not an acceptable way the end the game.

[Hairy Lime]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

I don't think Josh was asking about that specific play - all scoring plays are automatically booth reviewed so a.challenge would be otiose - but why, for instance, forward progress not resulting in a first down or down by contact cannot be challenged.

  Because forward progress is a judgement call by an official and often does not match what a replay official sees or hears.

So is forward progress resulting in a first down, but that is reviewable.

Down by contact is called immediately and stops the play for safety reasons.

Or in my example, why no challenge for any other action penalty besides interference. Why not a clip, or a hold, or a facemask?

why not the Coin Toss?

Indeed. If the coin comes heads and he calls.tails, why not to to replay? But the real issue is there are major penalties refs call in the flow of the game that.require instant recognition and interpretation of.the rules. We have singled out interference. Why, other than because of one bad call?

And explaining why the game continues after an initial OT field goal does not explain why it does not also continue after an initial touchdown.

Because the NFL wants its OT to be sudden death. It took a groundswell from fans and players to successfully argue a one possession FG is not an acceptable way the end the game.

That is a good answer.

[Espnthree]

 Because forward progress is a judgement call by an official and often does not match what a replay official sees or hears.
So is forward progress resulting in a first down, but that is reviewable.

What is reviewable is the spot of the ball AFTER the officials determine forward progress has been stopped.

[josh]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

1. Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. 2. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

1. Missing the point. Care to try again? Why are some things not challengeable?

2. Missing the point even more widely. I agree. My complaint is that winning on the first possession at all is inherently unfair.

[Espnthree]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

1. Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. 2. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

1. Missing the point. Care to try again? Why are some things not challengeable?

Because the League Rules Committee determines what plays are reviewable.

2. Missing the point even more widely. I agree. My complaint is that winning on the first possession at all is inherently unfair.

Again the Rules Committee set the parameters for OT.

[josh]

The thing is that WRs push off all the time and it is seldom called. It would mess up their offense is everything mantra. Got to keep the masses showing up at the gates and the living rooms and bars. Money talks and defense walks. Don't touch that QB, don't touch that WR. Don't hit anyone.


Bitch game now of preening dickweeds.

I think the whole booth review of interference is a stupid rule. Why not holding? Because a playoff game did not turn on a blown holding call? You can't change last year's result with this year's rule.

Why some plays are unchallengeable is beyond me.

1. Because the Minnesota TD, by rule, was ruled a TD by the replay booth. There was nothing left to challenge.

As for the OT rules in the NFL. 2. Winning a game on a first possession field goal has proven to be universally hated by football players and fans.

1. Missing the point. Care to try again? Why are some things not challengeable?

Because the League Rules Committee determines what plays are reviewable.

2. Missing the point even more widely. I agree. My complaint is that winning on the first possession at all is inherently unfair.

Again the Rules Committee set the parameters for OT.

Such brilliance!

[bankshot1]

Rhule to Panthers

Pat's ST coach Judge new G-Men HC

Josh McD to the Browns?

[Hairy Lime]

Rhule to Panthers

Pat's ST coach Judge new G-Men HC

Josh McD to the Browns?

DePodesta loved Stefanski the last time around, but was overruled. I suspect HC experience is a must this year. Who knows about next year.

Are we sure Belichick is coming back? JMD may be primed to inherit the Pats on their slide to post Brady irrelevanc9.

[bankshot1]

Rhule to Panthers

Pat's ST coach Judge new G-Men HC

Josh McD to the Browns?

DePodesta loved Stefanski the last time around, but was overruled. I suspect HC experience is a must this year. Who knows about next year.

Are we sure Belichick is coming back? JMD may be primed to inherit the Pats on their slide to post Brady irrelevanc9.

MCD-Who knows.

But his interest in interviewing suggests he was ready to move on from the Pats.  I would think his long tenure as Brady's OC might be a selling point of stability to the Browns and the need to further development of Mayfield.

and perhaps the Pats post Brady would make coaching Chernobil look like Eden

Burn on big river, burn on.