PDA

View Full Version : The NFL



TREPYE
December 1st, 2012, 02:04 PM
http://espn.go.com/i/print/espn.gif




Saturday, December 1, 2012
Jovan Belcher kills girlfriend, himself
ESPN.com news services

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- Kansas City Chiefs (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/kc/kansas-city-chiefs) linebacker Jovan Belcher (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13100/jovan-belcher) fatally shot his girlfriend early Saturday, then drove to Arrowhead Stadium and committed suicide in front of his coach and general manager, police said.
Police said the 25-year-old killed his girlfriend and then went to the team practice facility, where he shot himself. Police did not identify the victim.
Members of the Chiefs organization told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter that some players noticed Belcher was troubled in his car, and went in the facility and told someone, before coach Romeo Crennel and general manager Scott Pioli called police and went outside to talk to him. Belcher then killed himself in front of them.
Before turning the gun on himself, Belcher thanked Crennel and Pioli for all they had done for him, police spokesman Darin Snapp said.









Belcher's mother was visiting the couple and saw the shooting. The couple had a 3-month-old daughter who was also at the house, the report said. Authorities received a call Saturday morning from a woman who said her daughter had been shot multiple times at a residence about five miles away from the Arrowhead complex.
"When we arrived, a lady informed us that her daughter had been shot multiple times by her boyfriend, by the daughter's boyfriend," Snapp said. "She identified him as a Chiefs player."
Snapp said a call was then received from the Chiefs' facility.
"The description matched the suspect description from that other address. We kind of knew what we were dealing with," he said. The player was "holding a gun to his head" as he stood in front of the front doors of the practice facility.
"And there were Pioli and Crennel and another coach or employee was standing outside and appeared to be talking to him. It appeared they were talking to the suspect," Snapp said. "The suspect began to walk in the opposite direction of the coaches and the officers and that's when they heard the gunshot. It appears he took his own life."
The coaches told police they never felt in any danger, Snapp said.
"They said the player was actually thanking them for everything they'd done for him," he said. "They were just talking to him and he was thanking them and everything. That's when he walked away and shot himself."
Snapp described the girlfriend as in her early 20s and that she and the player had a child together. He said the woman's mother told police they had recently been arguing.
Arrowhead Stadium went into lockdown at about 8 a.m.
"We are cooperating with authorities in their investigation, the Chiefs said in a statement."
Belcher, an undrafted player out of Maine and native of West Babylon, N.Y., on Long Island, had started 44 of 59 games in his four seasons for the Chiefs, recording a career-high 61 tackles in 2011. Kansas City is scheduled to host the Carolina Panthers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/car/carolina-panthers) on Sunday. The league has informed the Panthers to travel as scheduled because the game is going on as scheduled.
The Chiefs, expected to contend for the AFC West title, are 1-10 and mired in an eight-game losing streak.
The Chiefs have been ravaged by injuries, lead the league in turnovers, can't settle on a quarterback and are dealing with a full-fledged fan rebellion.
Things have been so bad this season that Crennel fired himself as defensive coordinator. The Twitter account for a fan group known as "Save Our Chiefs" recently surpassed 80,000 followers, about 17,000 more than the announced crowd at a recent game.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

eddhead
December 3rd, 2012, 08:22 PM
What a horrible story.

eddhead
December 31st, 2012, 09:12 AM
Yesterday's Packers - Vikings' game was amazing. Lead changes, comebacks, clutch , big plays - really a terrific game.
Adrian Peterson is an incredilbe football player.


OF course as a Jets' fan I don't really get to see many good games, or incredible football players, so what do I know?

IrishInNYC
December 31st, 2012, 10:10 AM
AP is astounding...I was off my chair on that last 30 yard burst screaming for him to make it into the end zone. He has made a Peyton Manning lock for MVP a much muddier decision after yesterday's performance.

The Jets again are a joke. Tebow with a one snap hand off...Sanchez with no TDs and a sub 50% completion day to (perhaps) end his starting career. And then you read this (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/sports/football/norwegian-earns-internet-stardom-and-an-nfl-tryout-to-boot.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) story and it just seems so "normal" for that organization.

eddhead
December 31st, 2012, 11:59 AM
Unfortunately, the observation about the sublime being normal with the Jets is probably true. As a fan going for over 45 years, I can tell you that following this team is a curse. Still, I don't blame them for looking at Rugland, you would be surpised at now many successful past and present day kickers and punters have non-American football backgrounds.

IrishInNYC
January 7th, 2013, 12:02 PM
A little trivia piece; Indy has played only 2 playoff games in Baltimore ever. Adam Vinatieri has scored all 24 points for Indy in those 2 games.

eddhead
January 12th, 2013, 04:56 PM
That TD pass from Flacco to Smith is what he does best. Get the ball over the top. He might not always be the most accurate passer statistically, but when he is on, he is one of the best deep passers in the game.

I know he is having an inconsistent season, but Flacco is otherwise a good example of how QB ratings do not always reflect how good certain QB's are. Andrew Luck is another example. I think Phil Simms (who threw a lot of deep seems and 20 yr posts and outs) Daryle Lamonica and Sonny Jurgenson are other such examples. Needless to say I feel the same way about Namath.

eddhead
January 12th, 2013, 10:10 PM
...exactly what I mean about Flacco. He may not have a high completion percentage, but because he throws downfield, low percentage passes. You don't see a lot of 7 yard slants from him. But when he is on he is good at deep passing, and it opens up lanes for the power running game. It's old school but when he is on, it is effective.

Of course when he is off he really sucks. He has been very inconsistent so far this year. But I would take him.

I think this is what the Jets would like to be. Now all they need is a QB who can get the ball downfield, WR's, an o-line, and maybe a power running back, and presto!

eddhead
January 14th, 2013, 11:57 AM
I was rooting for the Seahawks, but it serves them right for trying to freeze Bryant. I really hate that stuff.

I wonder if anyone has ever done an analysis on how successful a tactic that is vs. how many times it has bitten the 'freezer' in the a$$

IrishInNYC
January 14th, 2013, 03:14 PM
I was rooting for the Seahawks, but it serves them right for trying to freeze Bryant. I really hate that stuff.

I wonder if anyone has ever done an analysis on how successful a tactic that is vs. how many times it has bitten the 'freezer' in the a$$

And worse, Carroll pretends like he didn't call it...he may not have made the hand gesture but he clearly told the official he was calling the time out.

ZippyTheChimp
January 15th, 2013, 03:38 PM
I think he was pissed that time wasn't called sooner by the official, allowing the ball to be snapped and Bryant getting a practice kick. It may not work, but if you're going to do it, best time is when the kicker is measuring his placement.

ZippyTheChimp
January 22nd, 2013, 12:19 PM
So the pattern by the Patriots after a tough loss is for the coach to say nothing, and let a player's wife throw a hissy-fit.

Last year Gisele called out the Pats WRs for dropping her hubby's passes. This year Anna takes to Facebook, I guess because Wes Welker is being blamed for the loss by clueless fans - how could some people in Foxboro actually boo the loss. Wasn't Welker's fault anyway; Pats were thoroughly outplayed in the 2nd half.

I'm no fan of Ray Lewis, but a team extended family member should know when to shut up, especially at a keyboard. If she F-bombed like Gisele did, at least it would have been funny.

http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/wes-welkers-wife-ray-lewis/

eddhead
January 22nd, 2013, 02:41 PM
If Pats fans don't want Welker, I know one Northeast AFC team he can play on.

You're right, Welker is not the reason they lost. The Ravens were simply the better team. And Flacco played a great game. I was happly to see it, because I think he gets a bad rap from his own fan base. It is true that he was inconsistent this year, but the Ravens ask him to make a lot more low-percentage, high reward plays than other teams ask of their QB's.

I will take him too.

eddhead
January 22nd, 2013, 04:31 PM
Did anyone catch the Tom Brady slide where he appeared to kick his leg at Ed Reed? There is a lot of buzz on it on NFL.com and a few other sites.

It semms to me if Suh had done that he would have been heavily fined. I wonder what the NFL plans to do to Brady.

In the meantime, more classy actions by Pats fans.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Torrey Smith: Pats fans taunted me over dead brother



Sunday's AFC Championship Game (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2013012000/2012/PRO20/ravens@patriots#menu=highlights&tab=recap) loss to the Baltimore Ravens (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/baltimoreravens/profile?team=BAL) has brought out the worst in a handful of New England Patriots (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/newenglandpatriots/profile?team=NE) fans.
Torrey Smith (http://wirednewyork.com/player/torreysmith/2495459/profile) claims he was the subject of angry tweets from Patriots (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/newenglandpatriots/profile?team=NE) supporters taunting the Ravens (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/baltimoreravens/profile?team=BAL) wideout for the death of his younger brother. Tevin Smith passed away after a motorcycle accident in September, an event that united Baltimore's locker room.

"Played a lot of games since my brothers death and I never received as many rude tweets after a win than Sunday...yet NE fans cry about class," Smith tweeted Tuesday (https://twitter.com/TorreySmithWR/status/293726783805743104).

Patriots (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/newenglandpatriots/profile?team=NE) fans were up in arms over comments by Ravens (http://wirednewyork.com/teams/baltimoreravens/profile?team=BAL) linebacker Terrell Suggs (http://wirednewyork.com/player/terrellsuggs/2505660/profile), who shredded New England after the game.
"These are the most arrogant (expletive) in the world," Suggs said.

Twitter can be a comfortable home to classless, vapid behavior. It's better to expect the worst, but anyone going after Smith for the death of a family member has outdone Suggs by a country mile.












The fierce rivalry between these two teams is one of the best in the NFL. Some of the antics surrounding the game itself we could do without.

IrishInNYC
January 25th, 2013, 10:42 AM
I watched both games from a dusty, lakeside hut/bar in Nicaragua....(there's no escaping the droning of Joe Buck!)...I saw Brady's slide, it was nothing...a QB, who is targeted with intent to injure on every snap, throwing a leg up in at an old enemy who was bearing down on him like a truck. He was more liable to break his own than do major damage to anyone else.

Overall, it's a bad Superbowl match up. Yet another running rookie QB who was crow barred into his team mid-season by a maniacal coach against the never ending and sickening run of Ray "pay-off" Lewis.

I hope Ed Reed gets a mention in his first SB despite the hogging of the headlines by the Harbaughs, Lewis and Kaepernick.

I find it virtually impossible to want either team to win so I'll be buying a few extra boxes this year to get excited for this one.

eddhead
January 26th, 2013, 03:05 PM
There must be something very cool about beginning a sentence with the phrase " I watched both games from a dusty lakeside hut/bar in Nicaragua...". It may not sound very neat to you, but I kind of wish I could say that.

I don't agree on Brady's slide. It looked to me like he tried to spike Reed and if a lineman had done it, he would have been flagged. Letting him slide gives him enough protection outside the pocket, and I think the days when players and fans resented the protections afforded QB's by officials are over. Still he should not have been allowed to do something that would have resulted in 15 yds had it been done by another player.

As to your statement about not being able to get excited over the game, who would you rather have seen play? The Broncos would have been a cool story, but no one else from the AFC comes to mind.

I kind of like the Ravens story because the team and the QB were all but dead in the water 4-5 weeks ago. Suddenly both have emerged from the ashes. I have to admit, I like Flacco for a number of reasons, and want to see him do well.

IrishInNYC
January 29th, 2013, 09:43 AM
Broncos were my pick and still can't quite believe they're not in it. On the NFC side...yeah, I don't have much of a feeling once the GMen go out....the Pack probably deserve more than one trophy with the current team.

ZippyTheChimp
January 29th, 2013, 10:58 AM
John Fox goes on the list of worst coaching performances in NFL playoff history.

Packers really didn't have that good a defense, and the 49ers exposed it. They got as far as they did on the back of Aaron Rodgers, who had an outstanding year.

Overall, the 49ers seem to have the better personnel, but the Ravens are peaking. Will the two-week layoff hurt them?

The restructured OL is playing well, and 49er DL Justin Smith will have his hands (hand?) full. He is wearing a brace for his torn triceps injury, which will need surgery in the off-season. He says he is "feeling better," but since his injury, points-allowed has gone from 15.6 to 27.5; and LB Aldon Smith has gone from 19.5 sacks - on his way to breaking Strahan's record of 22.5 - to zero.

And then there's Akers. It will be interesting if the game is close, and it comes down to field position for a FG.

Flacco has almost flawless in his 8 playoff wins (1 INT), but mistake prone in the four losses (7 INT). Which one will show up?

My gut tells me not to do it, but I'm going to put my Super Bowl Hat record on the line this year.

5-0.

Two were no options - Giants.

Others were Packers in 2011, Colts in 2007, and Steelers 2006.

So I'm off to buy a Ravens hat. Nice Harbaugh over Nasty Harbaugh.

eddhead
January 29th, 2013, 01:19 PM
If Aaron Rogers is not the best quarterback I have ever seen, he is in the top 3 or 4. He has the fastest release of anyone in the game today. He makes incredible decisons in the pocket - really moves through his progressions quickly and always seems to find the best option, either the right receiver, or to scramble for yards. In fact, he is so fast with his release, and his decison making is so good, he makes a rather ordinary (at best) pass blocking line look good. You're right, he is the major reason Greenbay is successful year after year.

I also agree with your commentary on Fox. You can't sit on the ball in a two minute drill when Peyton Manning is your QB.

Everything about this match-up seems to point to San Francisco, but my instincts also tell me to go with the Ravens. I think this is their time - both the team, and its QB are peaking, and they're playing their best defense of the season.

I also think the Seahawks exposed something in the 49er run defense at the end of the season; basically they beat them up. The Ravens line is huge and strong, and power running is their forte. Both Rice and Pierce have run the ball well.

Despite that, as I posted when the Ravens played the Pats, and Zip did above, at the end of the day, this is going to be about Flacco. If 'good Joe' shows up they win. If not, they lose.

I am betting they win, but it should be a fun game.

IrishInNYC
February 4th, 2013, 12:05 PM
Fair result. It would have been plain wrong to have had the momentum sucking joke of a power outage allow a reeling Niners to regroup and a boiling Ravens to cool off enough to flip the game on its head.

It was not pass interference on Crabtree. Barely a discussion, never mind an argument.

Flacco was awesome...very cool to throw so well in the 1st half. 84 mins sitting around waiting did nothing to help him get a 12th TD and the outright record on TD's to Int's in the postseason.

Rice, typically dependable and safe. Jones, special. Torrey Smith, reliable. Ed Reed, stoic and without a dirty hit for once.

Though Davis and Kaepernick had their moments for San Francisco, I think the Ravens had a more impressive team performance. Something that should always be rewarded.

eddhead
February 4th, 2013, 05:36 PM
I thought Flacco played extremely well, espcially in key spots on third downs. I can't find the stats for some reason, but it just seemed that Ravens converted a higher percentage of 3rd down plays than the 49ers did, and many of them were from Flacco's right arm. Kaeparnick played well too, in fact he made some incredible throws in the second half. But 49ers didn't seem to be as consistent on third down.

I am happy for Flacco. He is a throwback to a different age when QB's didn't restrict themselves to high percentage passes, and took a lot of chances down field. I sometimes miss the old days of Johnny U, the mad bomber, Joe Kapp, and Sonny Jurgenson,

Ironically,Flacco did had a bigtime completion day, but it wasn't because he threw a lot of slants. And that 4th and inches audible completion to Boldin, took balls.

As for Crabtree, I feel that call could have gone either way. But I agree with you, the blackout affected the momentum of the game, so I guess it was karma.

I guess Zippy's hat record remains in tact.

ZippyTheChimp
February 4th, 2013, 07:29 PM
I don't think you can say with any certainty that the power outage delay caused a shift in momentum.

The 2nd half kickoff was run back for a touchdown. That's one play; it doesn't establish dominance. SF had the ball for the first time in the 3rd quarter when the power failed at 13:22. I thought Kaepernick was terrible in the 2nd quarter, maybe the pressure was getting to him. But they opened it up more in the 3rd quarter - Kaepernick hit Crabtree for a 29 yd gain on 1-10 from the 14. Play was stopped during the second series of downs.

The 49er drive stalled after play was resumed, and they punted.

The next three times they got the ball, it looked to me like the older Raven defense was running out of gas. And the 49ers were capable of mounting a charge; they were down 17-0 in Atlanta, and did the same thing. They're the better team, but the Ravens played the better game - fewer mistakes.

A key series was after the Rice fumble on the Raven 23. I thought if the 49ers take it in for their third TD of the quarter, they would probably win the game. My hat was in jeopardy. But the Raven defense made a big stop, and the 49ers settled for a FG.

Other than that, I don't think the defense was a big factor in the win. Kaepernick could have gone to Vernon Davis all night; Ray Lewis had a tough time with him. Flacco won the game.

The last series:

Kaepernick moved the offense smartly from his 20 to the Ravens 7. I guess with all of it staring him in the face, he sputtered. Should have taken the 5 yard penalty instead of a valuable TO. Rookie mistake. And the play-calling from the sideline was hard to figure.

Smith definitely hooked Crabtree in the end zone, and the ball was catch-able. It was a penalty, but not something you're always going to get called in that situation. Ask Matt Ryan if his TE was held on that last play in Atlanta.

On an earlier play, there was a helmet-helmet contact on Crabtree at the sideline. That could have been called also.

Jim Harbaugh should have made his complaints brief. But now he comes across as a sore loser.

eddhead
February 4th, 2013, 08:20 PM
You're right, we cannot no for certain that the outage caused a shift in momentum. but we (or at least I) can suspect as much. The fact is SF was reeling BEFORE the 3rd qtr return, they were on the ropes at the end of the 2nd qtr. The score was 21-3 at the half and 28-3 after the kickoff. And the 49ers did not look all that alert on the return. So while we do not know for sure, it did seem to me that the outage gave the 49ers an opportunity to regroup. And I also got the sense the Ravens let up for a period in the 3rd qtr.

I don't remember the helmet-helment play, but I do think the last play could have gone either way. Crabtree was hooked, but it looked like he got hooked as he was trying to push off. Or maybe not. I wouldn't have argued either way,

ZippyTheChimp
February 4th, 2013, 10:26 PM
The fact is SF was reeling BEFORE the 3rd qtr return, they were on the ropes at the end of the 2nd qtr. The score was 21-3 at the half and 28-3 after the kickoff.The scores were 21-6 and 28-6. BEFORE the 3rd quarter is my point. Kaepernick was lousy in the 2nd quarter, and looked more like himself on their opening drive in the 2nd half. They were moving the ball when the lights went out.


And the 49ers did not look all that alert on the return.That was one mistake on special teams. special teams had little impact on the game; it wasn't a battle for field position.


And I also got the sense the Ravens let up for a period in the 3rd qtr.Since I had money riding on the Ravens, I would have liked to think they just lost focus. But three straight scores? Neither defense played great.

The 49ers outgained the Ravens in total offense, and lost - only the third time that's happened in a SB.


I don't remember the helmet-helment play, but I do think the last play could have gone either way. Crabtree was hooked, but it looked like he got hooked as he was trying to push off. Or maybe not. I wouldn't have argued either way,3rd down. Second DB comes up the sideline. I saw it on TV today from a field level camera. It wasn't a ticky-tacky hit.

The only pass that the refs get for a no-call is that they weren't really calling much the entire game. The fight early in the game was bad enough, but how did Williams not get ejected for shoving the ref.

Harbaugh doesn't get a pass because (forget about the penalty) he just marched down the field with no trouble, was set up with a first and goal, with plenty of time and a timeout. He had the win right there. If he had three pass plays called, why not that last over the top to Randy Moss. I think that's his specialty.

eddhead
February 5th, 2013, 12:16 AM
Zip, we can agree to differ, but from my perspective, the Ravens took control of the game in the 2nd qtr and laid the hammer down with the kickoff return in the 3rd. When the score was 21-6 they had momentum. When the lead was extended to 28-6 they had MOMENTUM!. I mean 21-6 and 28-6 are pretty much blowout scores.

I believe the lights actually went out on SF's first series at about 1:30 into the third quarter right after Kaepanick took a sack. They were hardly moving the ball at the time, in fact to me they looked totally listless and disorientated. Ed Reed, for one felt the Ravens let the blackout get into their head a bit. He defiinetly felt it was a momentum changer.

I am not sure how you can say special teams had little impact on the game. Not only was the kickoff return was hugely important, the Ravens running into Akers (a dubious call in my opinion) as he missed a 38yd FG, allowed SF one more shot at it which he ultimately made. Those were two of the more important plays in the game and each could have or did, impact the outcome.

As for Harbaugh, I think you have to give a little credit to the Ravens defense. True, they gave up yardage but they tightened up at the goal lines. They put 2 blitz packages on on 3rd and 4th down that caused Kaepernick to rush his passes.

As for the play selection, I don't have a problem with him going to Crabtree, that his his guy, and they had single coverage on him. But it did not look to me like he had a lot of time to throw.

IrishInNYC
February 5th, 2013, 08:39 AM
I think Zip you'd be one of the few people in the country to argue the outage didn't swing the momentum. The score was 28-6 at that point. The Ravens had dominated the first half and were buzzing on the back of Jones' return. Quite frankly it could have got ugly. Flacco was chomping at the bit to get back out and throw downfield, he had the number of every guy on the Niners' secondary. Power outage happens and the Niners score 17 straight in a handful of minutes. That does not happen without the hold up. It's has been seen countless times when an injury, a random stoppage, a weather delay etc knocks the wind out of a leading team's sails and the game flips.

Secondly, I agree with Edd and the impact of special teams. Despite one of his worst performances ever, Koch managed to pin the Niners back around their own 20yd line to start almost every possession. The Akers hit, the return....there was a lot going on in specials teams.

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 10:21 AM
The Ravens had dominated the first half and were buzzing on the back of Jones' return.The 49ers were moving the ball on their first possession. They had the ball when the lights went out. Their drive stalled after power was restored.

That's a fact. You can check it.


Quite frankly it could have got ugly.That's speculation, and unless you can prove it, not worth debating.


Flacco was chomping at the bit to get back out and throw downfield,That's also speculation. You don't know what would have happened if the 49ers had continued on offense without the power failure. They may have gone on for a score, or they may have punted. Tell me what people did, not what you think they may have done.


he had the number of every guy on the Niners' secondary.The issue after the power outage was the 49er offense vs the Ravens defense. When play resumed, the Ravens defense stopped the 49ers. If there was a momentum shift, why didn't it happen right then? You can make a better case that the 49ers offense stalled after the stoppage.


Power outage happens and the Niners score 17 straight in a handful of minutes.It was two-handfuls. :rolleyes:


That does not happen without the hold up.So that's cause-and effect? Are you saying that the 49ers weren't capable of doing it.


It's has been seen countless times when an injury, a random stoppage, a weather delay etc knocks the wind out of a leading team's sails and the game flips.It's been seen many more times when nothing happens to explain it - one team is dominating, and the other team just takes the momentum back. It happened two weeks ago in Atlanta. Sixteen minutes into the game, the 49ers were losing 17-0. There was no power failure, no big injury, no change in the weather. Momentum just shifted. No one can really explain it.

That's a fact. You can check it.


Secondly, I agree with Edd and the impact of special teams. Despite one of his worst performances ever, Koch managed to pin the Niners back around their own 20yd line to start almost every possession.Here are the facts:

Ravens drives in the 2nd half all began on their own side of the field - 20, 17, 20, 28, 21, 5.

Sf 2nd half drives: 14, 20, Balt 20, Balt 24, 24, 20.

I don't think you can make a case either way.


The Akers hit,The penalty would have been dubious (as Eddhead states) if it was a 15 yarder - roughing the kicker. Running into the kicker is incidental contact. You have to allow the kicker a place to land. That's the rule.

It's a fact. You can check it.


I believe the lights actually went out on SF's first series at about 1:30 into the third quarter right after Kaepanick took a sack.Did you guys watch this game? Kaepernick's first play of the 2nd half was a 29 yard completion to Crabtree at the 43.


Ed Reed, for one felt the Ravens let the blackout get into their head a bit. He defiinetly felt it was a momentum changer.And his coach said that he knew the 49ers would make a comeback.

It's not like momentum shifted back after the Raven's "recovered." It ended like it was predicted - a close game.

IrishInNYC
February 5th, 2013, 10:49 AM
Zip, your posts are always concise, thorough and thought out but sometimes you need to look beyond stats, facts, numbers and what people can "prove" (your favorite request). Trust millions of people with gut instinct and feeling...trust the players, coaches, pundits and experts with knowledge of how the intangible affects sports all the time.

The power outage changed the momentum of the game. It just did. With certainty.

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 11:19 AM
Trust millions of people with gut instinct and feeling.Do you want a list of things that millions of people believe to be true in their gut? If SF had won the game, how many would think that the power failure was a conspiracy?

How about the countless times an offense goes into halftime with a big lead, and comes out flat? If you watch a lot of football, a huge part of any game is halftime adjustments. If the Ravens had opened the second half on offense and were driving when the power failed and stalled afterward, you could maybe make a case. But the fact is that Flacco didn't get his hands on the ball until after halftime and the failure. You have no idea as to how Flacco was going to come out. "Chomping at the bit" is just something you made up.

When you say something with certainty - that has to be backed up. I'm not saying anything with certainty, just that you can't make the case.

I elicit proof from you because you seem to state opinions with certainty:

It was not pass interference on Crabtree. Barely a discussion, never mind an argumentReally, no argument?

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 12:42 PM
I think Kaepernick's play from the opening drive of the 2nd half until the last series of the game was a huge difference.

Passing: 7-12 for 163 yards, 20 yds avg per catch.
Rushing: Five for 46 yards, 9 yds per rush, one TD run.
209 yards total offense for Kaepernick in the 2nd half.

But I forgot one key series by the Ravens:


Secondly, I agree with Edd and the impact of special teams. Despite one of his worst performances ever, Koch managed to pin the Niners back around their own 20yd line to start almost every possession.Except maybe when they really needed a big one. Flacco sacked, 4th down from the 9. Koch's punt run back 32 yards to the Balt 20. Two plays for a TD.

eddhead
February 5th, 2013, 03:06 PM
The 49ers were moving the ball on their first possession. They had the ball when the lights went out. Their drive stalled after power was restored.

That's a fact. You can check it.

The power outage occurred 1:30 into the thrid qtr. Allow 20-30 seconds for the kick return. That gives the 49ers a little over 1 minute to build momentum. Hardly what I would consider game changing. The play preceding the outage was a sack, meaning they had maybe 30-45 seconds to establish momentum. Yes, they had success on one play. That does not mean they turned the game around.



That's also speculation. You don't know what would have happened if the 49ers had continued on offense without the power failure. They may have gone on for a score, or they may have punted. Tell me what people did, not what you think they may have done.
Of course it is specualtion. We're speculating that the momentum the Ravens had in the 2nd period would have carried over to the 3rd. You are speculating that it would not have. If anything, you may be being more speculative than us.


The issue after the power outage was the 49er offense vs the Ravens defense. When play resumed, the Ravens defense stopped the 49ers. If there was a momentum shift, why didn't it happen right then? You can make a better case that the 49ers offense stalled after the stoppage.
The Ravens had stopped them before the outage with a 6 yard sack, creating a difficult conversion opportunity for the 49ers. But I do believe the break gave teh 49ers the opportunity to regroup, first defensively, than on offense.


The penalty would have been dubious (as Eddhead states) if it was a 15 yarder - roughing the kicker. Running into the kicker is incidental contact. You have to allow the kicker a place to land. That's the rule.

A. It was not clear to me that me made contact with the kicker. It looked like he may have slid under his leg
B. It also appeared that he may have been blocked into that direction in which case contact is moot, and it is not a foul

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 03:39 PM
Of course it is specualtion. We're speculating that the momentum the Ravens had in the 2nd period would have carried over to the 3rd. You are speculating that it would not have. If anything, you may be being more speculative than us.

Speak for yourself. Irish said he was certain.

I said what MAY HAVE happened - that the 49ers MAY HAVE continued the drive, or they MAY HAVE punted anyway. How is that speculation? It's one or the other.


A. It was not clear to me that me made contact with the kicker. It looked like he may have slid under his legThat's incidental contact. He can't undercut him. It's the rule; no one questioned it. If he ran into Akers, it would have been 15 yards.


It also appeared that he may have been blocked into that direction in which case contact is moot, and it is not a foulCheck the tape. He dove under Akers.

IrishInNYC
February 5th, 2013, 03:45 PM
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. ;)

eddhead
February 5th, 2013, 04:25 PM
That's incidental contact. He can't undercut him. It's the rule; no one questioned it. If he ran into Akers, it would have been 15 yards.

Check the tape. He dove under Akers.

I could not find the tape, but in looking, I did find this:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ktlincoln/did-david-akers-take-a-dive-during-the-super-bowl

Also, this:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2013/02/03/david-akers-flop-gif/1889289/


Replays showed Brown rolling into Akers after the attempt, which would justify the five-yard penalty. A closer review of the clip shows that Akers actually dropped before Brown rolled into him. It was a classic flop that would have made Vlade Divac or Cristiano Ronaldo proud.

There are other articles as well.

The bottom line is, I am not so sure he was hit. In fact I don't actually think he was.

But if he was hit, and the Raven player was blocked into him, it is not a foul.

That is why I said it was dubious.

GordonGecko
February 5th, 2013, 04:51 PM
NFL faces class action lawsuit from thousands of former players
Published 01 February, 2013 - WNYC / PRI

Thousands of former professional football players and their wives have filed a class action lawsuit against the National Football League. Now, the NFL is faced with ameliorating the problem, as well as, perhaps, a legal battle that the organization could lose. More than 4,000 former professional football players and their wives have filed a class action lawsuit against the National Football League, accusing the league of deliberately concealing information about life-altering brain injuries caused by playing football.

Attorney Gene Locks will be representing the plaintiffs. Paul Barrett, assistant managing editor at Bloomberg Businessweek, said he's one of the most-feared plaintiff's attorneys in the country. "(Locks) was one of the pioneers in the massive asbestos litigation that began in the 1970s. (He) made a small fortune representing pipe-fitters and others who were exposed to asbestos insulation and then went on to bring other mass lawsuits," he said.

Locks deals with damages on the order of billions of dollars in these massive lawsuits, Barrett said. But Locks, his colleagues and his clients face challenges ahead. They'll be trying to argue against the idea that these players knew what risks they faced when they became professional football players. "Lawyers call (this argument) assumption of risk, which is the defense argument that you knew what you were getting into," he said.

Barrett says the players knew it was dangerous, but the NFL knew playing could cause them permanent brain damage ó and covered the information up, or so the plaintiffs contend. "It is impossible for the (NFL) to argue that they were unaware of the issue. As early as 1994, they set up a committee specifically to study and issue reports on the issue," he said. The committee, though, functioned mostly to deny reports of brain injury, rather than aggressively investigating the cases brought forth, Barrett said.

"The question is, will the league at this point, proactively figure out a way to settle this litigation, put more money into research and treatment and move forward, or will this turn into a tremendous legal food fight?" he said. The NFL, Barrett says, is moving forward and seems to be trying to solve the problem. The Boston Globe reported Tuesday that the union representing NFL players has selected Harvard University to lead a $100 million study to research, treat and prevent the broad-ranging health problems of these athletes.

There's a limited pool of plaintiffs in this case made up of thousands of former players, Barrett said. Players who have recently started playing professionally can't be added to the lawsuit because they can't argue they didn't understand the dangers of the sport. "I think what we're going to see is that after a few rounds of legal skirmishing, the lawyers will get together around a conference table in private and will come up with a way to set aside some billions of dollars to be paid out over many years to treat players and investigate the problem," he said.

http://www.pri.org/stories/arts-entertainment/nfl-faces-class-action-lawsuit-from-thousands-of-former-players-12846.html

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 05:14 PM
Wow. Kevin Lincoln of Buzz Feed. Look at his other stuff. Hey Kevin, did Beyonce cause the power failure? She sure caused a problem for me.

At any rate, he doesn't understand the rule. The NFL player-safety rules have been updated at least twice, and what happened is a penalty. Contact was made with Akers' plant foot after the kick. It is one of the "defenseless player" situation defined by the NFL - he has to be allowed to come down after the kick. It's called all the time, because there's no chance to block the kick from that deep angle.

The funny thing is that the video indicates that Akers' wasn't aware of the player coming in on him. He was looking down field.

This is like "Wilfork picked up Moore and threw him into Sanchez" all over again. Maybe you can get Chris Collinsworth to back you up.

eddhead
February 5th, 2013, 06:47 PM
The quote did not come from buzzfeed, it came from USA today.

If there is no contact there is no foul

If the player is blocked into the kicker there is no foul

If (as the USA Today article claims was the case in this instance), it was caused by the kickers own actions, there is no foul

this is from nfl.com


A member of the receiving team may not run into or rough a kicker who kicks from behind his line unless contact is:

(a) Incidental to and after he had touched ball in flight.

(b) Caused by kicker’s own motions.

(c) Occurs during a quick kick, or a kick made after a run behind the line, or after kicker recovers a loose ball on the ground. Ball is loose when kicker muffs snap or snap hits ground.

(d) Defender is blocked into kicker.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/kicksfromscrimmage


Like I said, it is questionable, but I feel that if there was contact at all, it was caused by Akers' actions, which by the rules means it should not have been called. In addition, it also seemed to me as if he was blocked into the kicker. Again, no foul.

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 07:17 PM
Did anyone in the game telecast agree with you? Did they go their expert for a ruling?

You seem to think this was a pivotal call
Not only was the kickoff return was hugely important, the Ravens running into Akers (a dubious call in my opinion) as he missed a 38yd FG, allowed SF one more shot at it which he ultimately made. Those were two of the more important plays in the game and each could have or did, impact the outcome. Funny how a scoring play hardly got any game debate.

23 clearly wasn't blocked into the kicker; he dove at him.

What motions by Akers' caused the contact - putting his other leg down? He has to be given the opportunity to come down after the kick. He can't be undercut. That's how it's called, and if you want a good reason, see post #35.

eddhead
February 5th, 2013, 07:22 PM
Do the people on the telecast always get the call right?

It looked like the momentum of being hit drove the Raven player back. But even if it did not, I though Akers flopped. He fell into the Ravens player, not the other way around.

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2013, 07:35 PM
Right or wrong, at least a big discussion about putting points back on the board.

How was Brown blocked into the kicker; did someone pick him up and toss him? You can look at this over and over until your eyes glaze over. This is a penalty in any NFL game. If not, it's a missed call.


http://i.imgur.com/3dIrFx3.gif

eddhead
February 6th, 2013, 12:50 AM
Thanks for the video. Ican't tell if 23 was blocked or not he may not have been, but the point is moot.

Looking at that again, there is no doubt in my mind that Aker flopped. He is clearly going to the ground prior to any contact being made. In fact, I am not entirely sure that there was contact, but if it so it was the result of Akers flopping and landing on top of a prone no. 23. The Raven player did not initiate the contact.

So as Akers motion caused the contact (if in fact there was any), I do not believe that should have been called.

IrishInNYC
April 12th, 2013, 09:16 AM
The dream comes true (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130411/lions-sign-harvard-rugland-norwegian-kicker.ap/?sct=uk_t2_a5) for Norwegian Havard Rugland. With the way Akers has been declining this past couple of years, he could really feature next season. I'm a little disappointed the Vikings didn't take a look at him! :p

ZippyTheChimp
May 9th, 2013, 11:21 AM
Efforts by the city of Miami to host Super Bowl L are doomed. The Dolphins aren't going to renovate Sun Life Stadium; the Florida House of Representatives blocked their attempt to get public financing.

Rightly so, especially after the city was screwed by the baseball Marlins robber-baron owner, Jeffrey Loroia, who put stars under contract before the stadium - built and owned by Miami-Dade County - opened. Then he had a fire sale.

The stadium was 18th in attendance last year at 27,000 per game. This year they're dead last, under 20,000, and the upper bowl is being closed.

BTW, Super Bowl L just doesn't look right. It's taken 50 years, but the NFL decision to use Roman numerals has bitten them in the ass.

Is it Super Bowl 50 or Super Bowl El?

IrishInNYC
May 14th, 2013, 12:21 PM
^ Agreed. L for loser. Hard to market it right.

GordonGecko
May 14th, 2013, 11:16 PM
lol, the big L Bowl

IrishInNYC
June 11th, 2013, 09:17 AM
The three-ring circus (http://nfl.si.com/2013/06/10/tim-tebow-signs-new-england-patriots-bill-belichick/?sct=uk_t11_a5) heads to the three-ring franchise.

Week 2: "Brady, hands off to Tebow who rolls right, breaks the tackle, crosses the 5, drops his shoulders and reaches for the line. Touchdown! Jets 6, Patriots 35."

Cause in my world Tim should be a RB (or TE or FB)....anything but under center. Maybe Bill is listening to McDaniels and they want the upgrade at the third QB slot for cheap and with no money guaranteed (as I imagine Tebow's contract is structured).

One thing is certain, this is Tebow's last shot at anything meaningful in the NFL.

GordonGecko
June 11th, 2013, 09:45 AM
If anyone can find a productive role for Tebow, it's Bill Belichik

GordonGecko
June 11th, 2013, 09:46 AM
Ex-NFL star Chad Johnson gets 30 days in jail

Johnson, known as Chad Ochocinco for his jersey number in Spanish during his playing days, had reached a deal with
prosecutors calling for community service and counseling instead of jail. ... It was all set until Johnson, when asked by McHugh if
he was satisfied with his lawyer Adam Swickle, gave the attorney a light swat on the rear
...
‘‘I don’t know that you’re taking this whole thing seriously. I just saw you slap your attorney on the backside. Is there something funny about
this?’’ McHugh said, slapping the plea deal document down on her desk....Johnson, 35, tried to apologize and insisted he meant no disrespect.
...‘‘It’s not the first time he’s behaved that way in my courtroom,’’ she said. Johnson then was handcuffed and hauled away to jail.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/06/10/nfl-star-chad-johnson-gets-days-jail/9Ib6seSvHFqUt0vILlnprK/story.html

ZippyTheChimp
June 11th, 2013, 10:22 AM
Will Ochocinco change his name for 30 days to match his inmate number? It could be unwieldy.

ZippyTheChimp
June 11th, 2013, 10:25 AM
If anyone can find a productive role for Tebow, it's Bill BelichikTwo year contract; no guaranteed money. If he stinks, he's cut.

I think it's a low-risk opportunity for the Patriots to once again rub the Jets' face in it.

IrishInNYC
June 12th, 2013, 11:52 AM
Being the #3 QB is the key to this puzzle. Many other clubs who have no-question starting QBs (like the Packers) have quite shaky #2 guys (like the Packers). Mallet is rock solid at #2 for the Pats and, as Cassel did a few seasons ago, I believe the team could struggle on respectively given the unfortunate absence of Brady.

No one in the NFL wants Tebow at #1 and, like a gridiron Sarah Palin, no one wants him a thumb sprain away from the starting job either.

That's if he even makes it. Belichick gets to kick the tires for 3 months without it costing the Pats a penny. Tebow needs to be on the 53 man roster on Sept 3 for this to mean a thing.

eddhead
June 12th, 2013, 12:51 PM
He may not even be the #3 QB. The Pats lost Danny Woodhead to the Chargers, and while they are certainly different style players, I can see Belichik envioning him in a similar role - third down, specialist who can run the ball and maybe even catch a pass while focusing on special teams.

Tebow is an athlete and does have skills. Just QB skills.

infoshare
June 15th, 2013, 03:35 PM
New England Patriots owner: "Putin stole my Super Bowl ring" .

The last thing I would do when in the company of belly crawling slime like Vladimir Putin would be (particularly when on his turf) to offer a 'try-on' of my 250,000 dollar diamond encrusted ring. If this is not the most perfect - and humiliating - indication of how far we have fallen as a nation: I don't know what Patriot even means - what irony.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/15/patriots-owner-vladimir-putin-stole-my-super-bowl-ring-and-the-white-house-wanted-it-hushed-up/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/06/15/robert_kraft_new_england_patriots_owner_says_russi a_s_vladimir_putin_stole.html

http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/kraft_putin_stole_bowl_ring_qtB16b5PI0jipYT6tQxUGO ?utm_source=SFnewyorkpost&utm_medium=SFnewyorkpost

IrishInNYC
June 26th, 2013, 09:45 AM
New England Patriots TE Aaron Hernandez arrested (http://tracking.si.com/2013/06/26/aaron-hernandez-led-out-of-home-handcuffs/) this morning in connection with the murder of 27yr old Odin Lloyd.

GordonGecko
June 26th, 2013, 11:11 AM
New England Patriots TE Aaron Hernandez arrested (http://tracking.si.com/2013/06/26/aaron-hernandez-led-out-of-home-handcuffs/) this morning in connection with the murder of 27yr old Odin Lloyd.

So he'll be out on bail for the entire 2013-14 season and on the Patriots roster. After the Super Bowl he'll finally make a court appearance after which his $800/hour lawyer will get him acquitted on all charges because the gloves didn't fit

ZippyTheChimp
June 26th, 2013, 11:17 AM
Sort of like Plaxico Burris.

Article states that Pats released Hernandez.

ZippyTheChimp
June 26th, 2013, 11:38 AM
Funny how things often come full circle.

The Patriots took two TEs in the 2010 draft. Rob Gronkowski was regarded as damaged goods. Hernandez had character issues, and as a result, dropped to the 4th round.

They were a potent one-two punch with Brady, and the Pats looked like geniuses.

Today there's probably a lot of finger pointing. Gronkowski has had four surgeries on his arm and one on his back last year, and he will open training camp on the Physically Unable to Perform (PUP) list. Whatever character issues Hernandez had, they seem to have exploded.

IrishInNYC
June 26th, 2013, 12:00 PM
I know one team looking for a TE! Where is eddhead today?:D

GordonGecko
June 26th, 2013, 12:09 PM
Guess I missed the part about him getting released. He'll be meeting with Woody Johnson any day now

GordonGecko
June 26th, 2013, 12:41 PM
according to @SportsCenter : 28 NFL players have been arrested SINCE the Superbowl.

IrishInNYC
June 26th, 2013, 05:45 PM
This Hernandez story is no joke. He allegedly drove Lloyd to a place where he "executed" him.

ZippyTheChimp
June 27th, 2013, 07:00 AM
Murder 1.

IrishInNYC
June 27th, 2013, 10:20 AM
He is also alleged (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1678397-aaron-hernandez-reportedly-will-be-sued-for-shooting-man-in-face-at-strip-club) to have shot another guy in the FACE during an argument in Miami this past February.

Another excellent role model from the NFL. I don't think we'll see Hernandez outside of Plexiglas for the rest of his life.

GordonGecko
June 27th, 2013, 10:36 AM
The guy is obviously really disturbed. What a waste

eddhead
June 27th, 2013, 07:43 PM
I know one team looking for a TE! Where is eddhead today?:D

I would say you are joking, but with the Jets you never know.

IrishInNYC
July 29th, 2013, 01:34 PM
Tim Tebow caught 3 passes during the Patriots' first practice session.

GordonGecko
July 29th, 2013, 01:57 PM
Belichik's mission in life is to make Rex Ryan look bad lol

IrishInNYC
August 23rd, 2013, 09:43 AM
Anybody doing any drafting this season? I have a couple coming up before the kick off on Sept 5. Any sleepers I should be keeping an eye on?!

eddhead
August 23rd, 2013, 09:51 AM
It depends on how deep you league is - how many players.

For larger leagues say 12 teams, I like Pierre Thomas and (don't laugh) Shonn Greene as sleepers at RB. Green won't get a lot of carries but he will be the Titans goal line RB and could score a lot of TDs'. I think Thomas is going to outright win the starting RB job with the Saints, bit we'll see. Chris Ivory is another late, late round sleeper.

BTW, I didn't pick any of these guys LOL. But they could be sleepers

You don't get much production at TE, but I also drafted Jeff Cumberland as my last pick. The Jets have no one to throw the ball to. They are moving to a Westcoast offense and the TE could get some play. ANd he has looked good in camp.

He is the sleepiest of sleepers, but I HAD to pick one Jet.

IrishInNYC
August 23rd, 2013, 10:26 AM
...I also drafted Jeff Cumberland as my last pick....but I HAD to pick one Jet.

Love it. Last pick.

Yeah 12 teams so pickings can be thin. We're at 10th in the first round too so the big RB's will be gone; I would think 9 or 10 RB's in round one total along with maybe Rodgers and Megatron.

I'm keeping a watch (as a sleeper) on where Michael Turner might land a spot. He's a big goal line RB and some team is bound to pick him up in the next week or two.

eddhead
August 23rd, 2013, 02:48 PM
Love it. Last pick.

Yeah 12 teams so pickings can be thin. We're at 10th in the first round too so the big RB's will be gone; I would think 9 or 10 RB's in round one total along with maybe Rodgers and Megatron.

I'm keeping a watch (as a sleeper) on where Michael Turner might land a spot. He's a big goal line RB and some team is bound to pick him up in the next week or two.

My strategy has always been to load up on RB's in the early rounds but you're right, 10th is a tough place to draft from. Depending on who is left, you might look at Dez Bryant. He killed for me last year, especially late, when Romo started to turn it around.

In most pools, he would drop to the second round, but you are almost drafting from the top of the second round anyway, and I think he, along with A.J Green are the second and third best WR's out there.

I usually wait unitil later for a QB, but if Brees is around, I would consider him in round 1 as well. The other QB's will probably go to round 3 or so, but I like Newton and Manning. All the rest of the top ones pretty much fit into the same bucket to me. I just missed out on Newton in my draft - the dude ahead of me (who happens to be my B-inlaw) got him. Totally killed my draft strategy.

IrishInNYC
August 30th, 2013, 07:10 AM
Tebow is soooo bad. Did anyone see him last night? He has to be cut right?

IrishInNYC
August 31st, 2013, 11:21 AM
Aaand he's cut.

eddhead
September 1st, 2013, 01:04 PM
I wonder where all he Tebow lovers are now. This guy is not an NFL QB.

TREPYE
September 26th, 2013, 02:58 PM
Check out that ESPN documentary The Book of Manning (http://www.secdigitalnetwork.com/NEWS/tabid/473/Article/246126/espn-films-the-book-of-manning-debuts-sept-24.aspx). Such incredible detail into the historical intricacies of this football dynasty. Itís a shame it was only an hour and a half as it was mostly centered on Archie and was very brief on Peyton and Eli (and a small potent bit on Cooper); they could have filled in another 2 hours of great material in there. Beautifully done (as it made me look forward to having kids moreso than watcing football); but badly truncated.

From a football standpoint, one of the biggest things I got out of this is how much more like his father Eli is than Peyton. From a family standpoint, how those boys buoyed Archie's tenure while playing for the miserable New Orleans Saints.

IrishInNYC
October 28th, 2013, 07:49 AM
I have Brees AND Megatron on one of my fantasy teams. What a pair of beasts those guys were yesterday. Johnson was only 7 yards shy of the all time single-game receiving yards record. Amazing athlete.

eddhead
October 28th, 2013, 04:28 PM
Sometimes it seems like Stafford and Johnson are playing sandlot football. Just do a post and I'll throw it to you. It doesn't matter how covered he is or how many defensive backs are hanging on his arms, he always pulls it down.

Jerry Rice was phenominal, but Johnson has a real chance to eclipse him in peak performance if not longevity. Honesly, I have never seen anything like some of the catches he comes up with.

mariab
December 8th, 2013, 06:37 PM
I don't care for either team, but that Detroit-Philly game was a hoot in the snow.

eddhead
December 8th, 2013, 08:25 PM
Throw back game - that is how many of the December games were played in the north, and northeast while I was growing up. I miss it.

IrishInNYC
December 9th, 2013, 01:44 PM
A stark reminder of the weather that could easily be around SB weekend.

eddhead
December 9th, 2013, 03:02 PM
I would love that.

ZippyTheChimp
January 5th, 2014, 12:00 PM
Colts-Chiefs was a great game to watch, although I sort of wanted KC to win.

I think the Chiefs are a better team, but the Colts outplayed them in the 2nd half.

Maybe the loss of Jamaal Charles during the first drive made a difference, but the Chiefs owned the trenches on offense and defense during the first half. The time of possession for the game was skewed 37:33 to 22:27, but almost all of it was in the first half.

Maybe there was some luck - that fumble on 2nd and goal from the KC 2 that was recovered for a TD. If the Chiefs recover, it remains a two score game; and even if they wind up punting, it would eat clock, and there might not have been time for the Colts to score twice.

But there was a lot of Luck too.

The 4th down pass from Smith to Bowe at the two minute mark: You can't let the sideline be a defender on a game ending play; you have to give yourself room where the only concern is getting separation from the defender. Tough way to lose; make the catch and get one foot OOB.

The Chiefs have not been able to finish big games.

Remark from the booth on the Chiefs burning their last timeout right after the 2-minute timeout: The knock on coach Andy Reid has been time management.

eddhead
January 5th, 2014, 12:14 PM
I too wanted to see the Chiefs win, primarily because I still think they are the better team. But Luck was superb in the second half. For most of the season he was more or less a game manager except he did engineer some comeback wins and watching him you had the idea he could win a game for the Colts if he was called upon to do so. Still his numbers were good but not really gaudy.

Yesterday's game may have been his coming out party.

Given how important he is to their offense, it is too bad Charles got hurt. It is odd to say this, considering how high scoring a game this was, but KC's offense all but floundered in the second half, and they may have benefitted from his ability to chew up the clock, and supercharge the passing game if needed. We'll never know what might have been. But injuries are a part of the game, and this represents a case study of the risk associated with having too much of your offense centered on the performance of a non QB single player, particularly a running back. It can happen with QB's too (see Aaron Rogers) something Denver needs to be aware of, but for the most part, the rules of the game and team focus seems to provide an extra layer of protection for them.

IrishInNYC
January 8th, 2014, 12:41 PM
Watched the second half of the KC/Colts game in a bar back home in the north west of Ireland. It was late there and people really don't understand much about the game (the stop/start pattern drives them crazy when they're used to soccer or Gaelic football) but the crowd got into it.

On a day that Alex Smith had a career game, Andrew Luck just found another level and then another in that half.

Some other great games too. Bengals must be worried about Dalton's play-off nerve...Saints with a huge play-off road win. Looking forward to next weekend.

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2014, 07:17 PM
No offense to San Diego, but does anyone outside of their fans want the Chargers to beat Denver.

I didn't care who won the NE-Indy game. Either Peyton Manning vs his peer or Peyton Manning vs his replacement is a compelling game.

I know what TV wants.

eddhead
January 12th, 2014, 10:43 PM
Yes, I agree.

I am really rooting hard for the Broncos this year because I want to see Peyton Manning get another ring. In my estimation he is often underrated as an all time great because of perceived post season under performance especially in Super Bowls. But championships are team awards. The fact is with the exception of the 2006/07 Colts, every team he has played on, including this one, has had major flaws, either on defense or with running the ball. He has not had the same level of balance to his teams that a Tom Brady has had.

Manning does not get the credit he deserves for getting his teams to the show. Even the Pats made a superbowl with Matt Cassel at QB. The Colts would have been nothing without Manning.

Manning has now almost single handedly created transformed mediocre or marginally playoff quality teams into dominant teams. In my estimation he is the greatest QB of my lifetime, perhaps in the history of the game.

Unfortunately, I don't think this is his year. Both the Seahawks (who I think are the best team in the league) and the 49ers are deeper, better rounded teams, and overall superior to the Broncos.

IrishInNYC
January 13th, 2014, 10:58 AM
Ended up a rather flat weekend with the four favorites running out pretty comfortable wins. I think the Seahawks still look the strongest of the final 4 but any one of the teams could win.

I'm still rooting for Manning this year. With time running down on his career he may have broke the two major records for a QB in a single season but it's the big prize he wants more than anything.

eddhead
January 13th, 2014, 11:08 AM
I agree with you, however I do have to say, San Francisco looked stronger than I thought the would and is peaking at th right time. I still favor Seattle, but they could be a dark horse.

Very impressed with New England's running game. But Manning is over the top, and I think he will do enough to carry the Broncos

TREPYE
January 29th, 2014, 01:32 PM
Sick of hearing all this yelping about the Super Bowl being in a cold weather site. It’s a cold weather sport :rolleyes:. If a summer sport like baseball can buckle down and play its games in fall temperatures then I think it is only obvious that football can. I never understood why so much is being made to accommodate the ~80k dopes who are willing to be overcharged for a game that is best seen on the TV. Deal with it. Even if the SB tix is selling weakly in the 2ndary market, football makes the majority of its bread through TV, not stadium attendance. Halftime show performers can wear coats just like all those other attendees can.

Less than ideal weather helps the drama of the game, much, much more important than the comfort of the attendees.

eddhead
January 29th, 2014, 03:51 PM
Amen.

Bring back the Ice Bowl game - NFL 1967 Championship contest between Green Bay and Dallas. It was maybe the greatest game I ever watched.

antinimby
January 31st, 2014, 10:11 AM
The warmest day we will have in weeks will be...on Super Bowl Sunday. We got lucky folks.

TREPYE
January 31st, 2014, 03:55 PM
^And hence less dramatic build-up and perhaps even game. <yawn!>

ZippyTheChimp
January 31st, 2014, 04:43 PM
I don't necessarily want bad weather conditions; just think that football is moving in the wrong direction when games in Michigan and Arizona look the same. Teams should have to prepare for weather variables, but if it turns out to be a nice day, so what. There may be a pregame shower which could make the field a little slick. And wind in the 10-15 mph range is forecast - enough to make a coach think twice about trying a 55 yard FG late in the game.

Forget the weather. This will be a classic old-style matchup if both teams show up. A dominant offense and dominant defense, both #1 seeds, make it to the final game. In the years before parity, it was usually one or the other, and you got a lopsided game.

I'm looking forward to this game.

IrishInNYC
February 2nd, 2014, 03:07 PM
They looked out. Should be around 40 at kick off. Pretty calm and with the field likely to be slick.

Hoping for a great game. And a hit on one of my boxes.

antinimby
February 2nd, 2014, 04:18 PM
High temp in the mid 50's today. I think someone made a deal with the weather devil today. For this unusually warm day, tomorrow's forecast calls for half a foot of snow. The teams might not be able to leave!

mariab
February 2nd, 2014, 07:07 PM
Well at least we won't have to hear all the poufs whining about the weather. NOAA.gov says 47 at the stadium right now. You couldn't ask for better in February.

Something going on for next weekend that, if it doesn't dissipate, could be one for the ages. This time I hope the meteorologists are wrong.

Felix Ku
February 3rd, 2014, 01:32 PM
haha good weather turned immediately bad right after the Bowl...

mariab
February 3rd, 2014, 03:53 PM
Yeah 1-3" my a**. Well, at least the ads were good and viewable on youtube before the game, and I was surprisingly into Bruno Mars halftime show.

Dopes rioting (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/seattle-residents-celebrate-seahawks-super-bowl-win-article-1.1600079) in Seattle. Yay, our team won! Let's riot! Boo, our team lost! Let's riot!. Someone somewhere on the planet p***ed us off, let's riot! Lame.

ZippyTheChimp
February 12th, 2014, 11:10 PM
Dale Hensen, sports anchor for local ABC affiliate WFAA in Dallas, comments on SEC defensive player of the year Michael Sam, who announced that he is gay.

That's Dallas, in Texas, football country.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Olc5C4SXAYM

Surprised, right?

eddhead
February 14th, 2014, 09:57 AM
Wow, what a great rant.

I have to say, I am impressed.

IrishInNYC
June 5th, 2014, 10:31 AM
http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/super-bowl-50-san-francisco.jpg?w=600&h=491

The NFL is moving away from Roman numerals starting in 2016. (Courtesy @SuperBowl)

The NFL has been using Roman numerals to designate Super Bowls since the fifth installment of the game in 1971. If you were a football fan growing up, thereís a good chance that because of this, you had a better grasp of the system than most of your classmates and friends.

The league announced Wednesday, however, that the designation will change in 2016, as it has decided to go with Super Bowl 50 rather than utilizing the Roman numeral ďL.Ē
When asked about the change, the NFLís vice president of brand and creative, Jamie Weston (via ESPNís Darren Rovell (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11031941/nfl-take-one-year-hiatus-roman-numerals-super-bowl-50)), stated that this decision actually began to swing into motion back with Super Bowl 40, the first time the league had to use the ďL.Ē

ďWhen we developed the Super Bowl XL logo, that was the first time we looked at the letter ĎL,íĒ Weston said. ďUp until that point, we had only worked with Xís, Vís and Iís. And, at that moment, thatís when we started to wonder what will happen when we get to 50?Ē

Super Bowl 50 will be played at the new San Francisco 49ersí home, Leviís Stadium, on Feb. 7, 2016.
Now if there is anyone out there that is disappointed by this move, for whatever reason, the good news is that once this Super Bowl has been played out, the league will be going back to using the Roman numerals (https://twitter.com/darrenrovell/status/474244490233126912).

scumonkey
June 5th, 2014, 12:41 PM
the vid is now private...wish i had seen it before they took it down.

IrishInNYC
June 5th, 2014, 02:44 PM
the vid is now private...wish i had seen it before they took it down.

Many copies of it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hVR9o3N6k8

scumonkey
June 5th, 2014, 05:04 PM
Thank you good Sir...I had seen this before http://www.octobertoys.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_redface.gif - but it is well worth watching again!

ZippyTheChimp
September 12th, 2014, 10:42 AM
I'm not going to elaborate on all the idiocy that now permeates the NFL; just let it play out top its predictable end.

One thing, however, I find truly laughable, and since the incident happened in New Jersey, ironic. The NFL seems to have followed Gov Christie's example on how to conduct an investigation.

So they hired an ex FBI director to investigate. his credentials may have been impeccable, but he is now a partner in a law firm with extensive ties to the NFL. They helped negotiate the Direct TV package, represent the Redskins' owner (over the team name?), and several former firm members work for NFL teams.

Also, team owners John Mara and Art Rooney will oversee the investigation. Both are closely associated with Commissioner Goodell, and John Mara seems to have prejudged the entire situation from previous comments he has made.

All this investigation has to do is determine at exactly what date and time Goodell didn't see the tape. :)

I love football, but the NFL has become a cringe-worthy organization. I miss the days when football didn't stretch for six days. The best thing that can happen to the NFL is a big revenue hit, and snap it into reality.

Little chance of that.

eddhead
September 12th, 2014, 12:17 PM
Yep.

ZippyTheChimp
September 22nd, 2014, 04:00 PM
Timing is everything.

Just a few hours after Roger Goodell broke a week long "Where's Waldo" impersonation and held a press conference - stating that he believed NFL officials had not seen the 2nd Rice video, ESPN dropped a major report, one that came to the opposite conclusion.


Just hours after running back Ray Rice knocked out his then-fiancťe with a left hook at the Revel Casino Hotel in Atlantic City, New Jersey, the Baltimore Ravens' director of security, Darren Sanders, reached an Atlantic City police officer by phone. While watching surveillance video -- shot from inside the elevator where Rice's punch knocked his fiancťe unconscious -- the officer, who told Sanders he just happened to be a Ravens fan, described in detail to Sanders what he was seeing.

Sanders quickly relayed the damning video's play-by-play to team executives in Baltimore, unknowingly starting a seven-month odyssey that has mushroomed into the biggest crisis confronting a commissioner in the NFL's 94-year history.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/11551518/how-ray-rice-scandal-unfolded-baltimore-ravens-roger-goodell-nfl

The Ravens have scheduled a response to the ESPN allegations at 4PM:

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2014/09/22/ravens-to-address-espn-allegations-on-the-handling-of-ray-rice/

The face of the Ravens during this entire affair, coach John Harbaugh, who had to get up in front of the media and give two different press conferences, seems to be the only one who wanted to do the right thing:
But Harbaugh's recommendation to cut the six-year veteran running back was quickly rejected by Ravens management: owner Bisciotti, team president Cass and GM Newsome. Ironically, he's the one most at risk if Rice is cut.

eddhead
January 12th, 2015, 10:27 AM
Let me start out by explaining that next to New England, who I hate on general principal, the Cowboys are my least favorite NFL franchise.. The owner is a self important, egocentric jerk, their stadium is as ostentatious as their brand, and I always felt the NFL favors them.

But they got screwed yesterday.

I realize conventional wisdom is that the ruling on the field was the correct interpretation of a bad rule- that Bryant needed to maintain control of the football through hitting the ground for the catch to be completed, but I do not believe that rule interpretation is correct.

Here is the actual rule



If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

The bold section is the key part of this to me. Did Bryant go to the ground in the act of catching the pass, or was the pass completed before he went to the ground. One way to answer that question is to establish weather or not Bryant made a "football move" before going to the ground. I believe he did.

In my opinion, Bryant did not go to the ground in the act of making the catch, but rather made the catch, than made a "football move" THAN went to the ground. In my view, rather than diving, in the act of making the catch and hitting the ground, he actually took a stride, and extended his arm toward the goal line before going to the ground. That, to me, is a football move. and as such, the act of going to the ground did not appear to me to be connected to the act of catching the pass.


I believe in order to be considered a catch, the receiver has to make a "football move" while in possession of the ball before fumbling. It seems to me Bryant caught the ball took a step and extended his arm to the end zone before fumbling all while in full possession of the football, and lost possession after he hit the ground - by that time the catch had already been established. The act of taking that stride, and in the next moment, extending his arm while maintaining possession throughout makes this a catch. His lunge to the ground followed that football move and was not a part of the act of catching the ball which to me makes it a completed pass.

In my estimation this is not the correct interpretation of a bad rule, but the wrong interpretation of the rule.

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2015, 11:14 AM
The bold section isn't the key part. There really isn't a key part. You have to interpret the rule in its entirety. If you don't, you change the rule.

Mike Pereira, the former director of officiating, who is almost always correct in his analysis, made the call before the ref announced the decision.

From what I've heard (not from just this incident), the rule isn't liked, but the booth officials can't ignore it. If they do ignore it or reinvent it, and try to be "reasonable," that's when they get into trouble. They have nothing official to base their call on.

eddhead
January 12th, 2015, 02:01 PM
The bold section isn't the key part. There really isn't a key part. You have to interpret the rule in its entirety. If you don't, you change the rule.

Mike Pereira, the former director of officiating, who is almost always correct in his analysis, made the call before the ref announced the decision.

From what I've heard (not from just this incident), the rule isn't liked, but the booth officials can't ignore it. If they do ignore it or reinvent it, and try to be "reasonable," that's when they get into trouble. They have nothing official to base their call on.


Well, as I mentioned previously, yours is the conventional wisdom.

And while I normally agree with Pereira, after listening to his analysis of this play,I came away with the impression that his assessment did not match his conclusion.

It seemed like he conceded that Bryant did make a football move by stretching to the goal line before falling to the ground, but it was not enough of a football move - not enough of a stretch. I thought it was curious that the official not only had to discern if a move was made, but if it was enough of a move. I don't believe that is the intent of the rule.

This is why the bold section is important although I should have bolded the fist part of the sentence as well - i.e. the question for me is, did he fall to the ground while in the act of catching the ball, or did he catch the ball, make a football move, than fall to the ground and fumble after the catch was completed.

To illustrate using a hypothetical, does a player who lunges for a ball in the act of catching it while stumbling forward, who than braces himself with his hand, regains his footing, and takes several sturdy steps, before falling forward and fumbling, have possession of the football before fumbling? In my estimation, he does because he completed the task of possessing the football and making football moves - taking several steps- before falling to the ground.

To me, this is an extreme example of what Bryant did. Bryant did not take brace himself or "several steps" but he did land on his feet and he did stretch to the goal line - both football moves in my estimation.

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2015, 02:59 PM
And while I normally agree with Pereira, after listening to his analysis of this play,I came away with the impression that his assessment did not match his conclusion.

It seemed like he conceded that Bryant did make a football move by stretching to the goal line before falling to the ground, but it was not enough of a football move - not enough of a stretch. I thought it was curious that the official not only had to discern if a move was made, but if it was enough of a move. I don't believe that is the intent of the rule.Actually, if he did not make "enough of a football move," then by rule, he did not make a football move.


To me, this is an extreme example of what Bryant did.Saying that an act is connected to a more obvious act by some imaginary scale illustrates the rule problem. Vice president of officiating Dean Blandino:
I think thatís a fair point. I think people look at that and say thatís a catch.

But I think itís about consistency and itís about, OK, if we make that a catch, then we have to look at all these other plays where receivers go to the ground, and where do we draw the line?Ē Blandino said. ďCurrently we have a line where itís control, both feet, and do something with it. If we make this a catch, where do we draw the line with a lot of other plays where itís clearly incomplete by rule and it will become even more inconsistent. Itís something that weíll review with the Competition Committee. We review it every year. I can understand the people that say that looks like a catch, and I donít think thatís that far-fetched, but in order to be consistent, we have to draw the line somewhere, and thatís where the current line is.Ē

There has been an ongoing problem with the concept of this rule, but now it appeared at a crucial point in a playoff game.

eddhead
January 12th, 2015, 03:08 PM
I think one of the NFL's problems is that in their desire to achieve consistent results , they tend to gravitate toward being overly prescriptive removing any semblance of discretion from the officials.

The rules committee tends to try to account for every conceivable circumstance, but I just don't think the plays on the field fit that tidily into neat boxes or are that predictable. You get the sense that they do not trust the judgment of the officials.

I wonder if the influence of big money gambling plays into this. Is it possible that the lack of comfort on subjectivity is the a response to the need to protect the league against the perception of fixing the games?

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2015, 04:10 PM
This stuff sure interferes with the flow of the game, but once you allow challenges and reviews, you're forced to make rulings that often overturn on field judgements. Sometimes it works well. There was a terrible ball spot on a Witten catch (by like two yards) that was called a first down, challenged, and reversed.

The Bryant play was more like splitting hairs. You can't be sure that he was making any sort of football move with his arm to the end zone. If you watch it frame by frame, he was falling toward the ground. Both his arms were bent with the ball cradled in his left, consistent with how a player would hold his arms to brace for hitting the ground. At the last split second, the left arm begins to move, but at no time is it extended out.

You can look at this as a football move, or the process of securing the ball as you are contracting the ground.

I've heard some arguments that Bryant was starting to make a football move, but hit the ground before the move became obvious. Now that's really splitting hairs; you would have to know his intent.

This whole thing becomes silly when you consider that a few links of chain can be the difference between 1st and 4th down, when the nose of the ball is determined by a linesman, often looking through a mass of tangled bodies.

The betting line was sort of weird, considering that Rodgers admitted (unlike the Broncos and Manning) that he had an injury that would normally require a couple of weeks to heal. Yet the Packers were laying 5.5 points. Spot on. However the conspiracy theory last week was that the NFL and TV wanted the Cowboys in the Super Bowl.

That blew up.

TREPYE
January 12th, 2015, 04:30 PM
Can someone effectively elaborate on what exactly a football move is? Is it a controlled effort to move the ball forward rather than maintain one's balance during and uncontrollable fall?

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2015, 09:44 PM
It's hard to know exactly, since the wording has an "i.e" and an "etc" in it.

https://twitter.com/AP_NFL/status/554385136591314944

What's lost in the debate over "was it a catch" is the decision that Coach Garrett made. The Cowboys were down 5 and needed a TD, but there was 4:41 remaining and they were on the GB 32. Plenty of time.

However, it was 4th down and 2. I don't care who the receiver is, that's a 50-50 throw, a big gamble with so much time on the clock.

A TD and assuming a 2-pt converging would have left the Packers down a FG with about 4:30 left. Their last three drives resulted in a FG, TD, and TD.

eddhead
January 13th, 2015, 09:57 AM
I know it is arguable, but I thought it was a heck of a call by Garrett - and a very courageous one.

Sure it was a huge gamble, but they've got Bryant 1:1 against a smaller less physical corner. He has been money in these situations all year long. I agree that , 4:41 is a lot of time, but I sometimes think it is harder to score touchdowns inside the 20 than it is from inside the 40. I believe Garret may have concluded that this was the Cowboys' best opportunity for a TD, plus even if the Pack followed with a score, they likely would have left some time on the clock for the Cowboys to mount another drive.

On the other hand, If they burn 2:30 more minutes off, and settle for a field goal, they give Rodgers the ball back at close to the 2 minute warning up by 2. I don't like the Cowboys' chances under those circumstances.

eddhead
February 2nd, 2015, 12:52 PM
Second down (3 plays left) .. inside the 1 (they burned one needlessly on a previous play on the drive because they could not get the play off which stunned me under the circumstances) ... one time out left... Seattle takes it time breaking the huddle... clock winds down to 40 or so seconds... Beastmode in the backfield... and they... pass???

inexplicable.

IrishInNYC
February 4th, 2015, 08:07 AM
Second down (3 plays left) .. inside the 1 (they burned one needlessly on a previous play on the drive because they could not get the play off which stunned me under the circumstances) ... one time out left... Seattle takes it time breaking the huddle... clock winds down to 40 or so seconds... Beastmode in the backfield... and they... pass???

inexplicable.

Was in Ireland for the weekend and the timezone and fatigue defeated me staying up for the end. When I saw the replays the next morning it just makes no sense what they did. None. The most feared and in form RB in the league has 3 shots at falling 1 yard into the endzone? And you throw?

Wilson, as a young QB, followed orders I'm sure. Would a Brady or Rodgers or Manning have followed that direction? Wilson should have turned to the sideline and feigned that his earpiece wasn't working.

Shocking. And entertaining for the rest of us.

eddhead
February 4th, 2015, 10:59 AM
To IrishNYC's point...



Of course the geniuses on his sideline had given him a play that really had no second option unless he pulled the ball down and ran with it. Only Wilson had given no thought to running, not on a bang-bang play like this. He was going to turn and throw the ball to Lockette the first chance he got because that is what he had been told to do.


Maybe a veteran quarterback would have known enough to check off a boneheaded play call like this, to understand that if you are going to throw it, one yard from winning the Super Bowl, you donít throw a pass into the middle of the field that might get picked off, not when the only way your team can lose in that moment is because of an interception.
.....

More here from Lupica.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/lupica-give-russell-wilson-pass-super-bowl-int-article-1.2102516

GordonGecko
February 4th, 2015, 11:20 AM
Conspiracy theory floating around, based on an anonymous quote from the locker room, is that they wanted the good guy Russ Wilson to make the winning play and be MVP and not bad boy Marshawn Lynch.


Looking forward, it's interesting how they're dropping the roman numerals for next year's fiftieth super bowl. I guess "Super Bowl L" didn't fit their marketing strategy

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a8/Super_Bowl_50_logo.png/240px-Super_Bowl_50_logo.png

TREPYE
February 4th, 2015, 12:40 PM
Second down (3 plays left) .. inside the 1 (they burned one needlessly on a previous play on the drive because they could not get the play off which stunned me under the circumstances) ... one time out left... Seattle takes it time breaking the huddle... clock winds down to 40 or so seconds... Beastmode in the backfield... and they... pass???

inexplicable.

Appalling level of stupidity demonstrated by a supposed professional head coaching staff on that play call. I must say in some small measure it is gratifying because I always though P. Carroll was an overrated coach and was quite surprised with the recent success he's had. Under that prism, maybe not so appalling now. :rolleyes:

Classic Francesa:
http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2015/02/listen_mike_francesass_rips_seahawks_super_bowl_ca ll_single_worst_big_moment_call_ever.html

Or as the "Franceser" hilariously puts:

https://twitter.com/mikefrancesany

ZippyTheChimp
February 4th, 2015, 04:16 PM
I don't agree with Lupica's point.


With all that, you cannot throw an interception on that play.

Maybe Wilson didn't throw the perfect pass, but Carroll shouldn't have put the QB in that position. A slant-in inside the five is a dangerous play. The field is compressed, bad things can happen - a lineman tips the ball. Looking at a repeat Super Bowl, there is no way a 3rd year QB is going to check-off the play, which is what Wilson should have done. Football smarts isn't relevant; it's the self-assurance of a veteran to override the coach.

I think two things may have clouded Carroll's thinking.

One seems to be a tendency for coaches to try and out-think Belichick in big games. The other may have been the timeout taken as the play clock was winding down. Carroll may have gotten it into his head that he didn't have enough time for three running plays; he would have to throw at least once, and 2nd down was the best chance. Some analysts and retired QBs mentioned this, but I think they were just trying to be kind to Carroll, give him a way out.

Of course it's backwards thinking, that with the best short yardage running game in the NFL, you were going to need three shots to move the ball one yard. Lynch had a good game - over 4 yards/carry. He almost got in from the five on first down. Wilson is mobile, at the least play-action to Lynch and roll out. If you have the end-zone, run it in. If the pass isn't there throw it out of bounds.

Coming off the Green Bay game, Carroll should have been in the mindset that anything can happen. That should have been reinforced by the play that got them to first and goal. They got their big break; time for basic football. If you can't punch it in, tip your hat to the defense.

GordonGecko
February 4th, 2015, 04:35 PM
Carroll was definitely trying to run down the clock, and Belichik out dueled him mentally by by not taking a timeout himself to stop the clock so Brady would have SOME time to mount a last ditch drive for a game winning field goal. He let the clock tick and really messed with the Seahawks coaches

IrishInNYC
February 5th, 2015, 08:23 AM
Belichik was obviously content and comfortable with the defensive match-up he had out there and (unlike against the Giants a couple of years ago) was prepared to stop Seattle getting the TD.

I have heard several people mention the 'fix' or plan to not allow Lynch to score the winner but I don't believe it for a second. Wilson would have been revered for the drive...no undue praise would have been given to Lynch for getting the final yard. Nor would he have ever whooped it up publicly.

While bulldozing with Lynch should have been the primary call; not taking the timeout and going with a quick option run - even a triple if you're so worried about what Belichik is doing - and let Wilson do the honors himself would obviously have been much more desirable.

ZippyTheChimp
February 5th, 2015, 12:49 PM
I'm sure both coaches were aware of the statistical realities before the game.

The Seahawks were #2 in the NFL in short yardage offense; the Patriots were #31 in short yardage defense.

When the game clock is under 30 seconds, it makes no sense to worry about how much time you leave the other team when you are trailing and need the score. That makes more sense if you are leading and want to make it a 2 two possession game. The Patriots would have gotten the ball with 25 seconds left in the game. The best realistic chance they would have had is a tying field goal. Scoring isn't so easy. The top team (Green Bay) had 48% of their drives resulting in a score; the league average is about a third. You could say that it's four-down territory, but then you have to subtract the clock pressure.

We never had a chance to see if Belichick intended to allow a (running) TD, figuring his best chance was to get the ball back with at least some time on the clock and two timeouts.

When the Seahawks huddled for 2nd down, they had three wideouts. The Patriot original defensive set had LB Akeem Ayers. They reacted and substituted CB Malcolm Butler for Ayers. Wilson was left with the unlikely decision to overrule his coach and run the ball.

eddhead
February 6th, 2015, 01:23 PM
I don't agree with Lupica's point.



Maybe Wilson didn't throw the perfect pass, but Carroll shouldn't have put the QB in that position. A slant-in inside the five is a dangerous play. The field is compressed, bad things can happen - a lineman tips the ball. Looking at a repeat Super Bowl, there is no way a 3rd year QB is going to check-off the play, which is what Wilson should have done. Football smarts isn't relevant; it's the self-assurance of a veteran to override the coach.

I agree Carroll was wrong headed. But ask yourself this: If McDaniel had called the same play, would Brady have complied, or would he have changed it? Would Peyton Manning have audibled the play call?

I am not excusing Carroll by any stretch. A pass play call was bad enough but a slant atthe goal line is at best risky -and in my mind wrongheaded. Still, Wilson did have the opportunity to change the call. My bet is Manning would have.

ZippyTheChimp
February 6th, 2015, 02:02 PM
I agree Carroll was wrong headed. But ask yourself this: If McDaniel had called the same play, would Brady have complied, or would he have changed it? Would Peyton Manning have audibled the play call?
I previously addressed it:

Maybe Wilson didn't throw the perfect pass, but Carroll shouldn't have put the QB in that position. A slant-in inside the five is a dangerous play. The field is compressed, bad things can happen - a lineman tips the ball. Looking at a repeat Super Bowl, there is no way a 3rd year QB is going to check-off the play, which is what Wilson should have done. Football smarts isn't relevant; it's the self-assurance of a veteran to override the coach.Wilson isn't Brady or Manning. He was drafted in 2012.

The question of Wilson changing the play was asked of Steve Young on Monday. He said - not in that situation.

eddhead
February 6th, 2015, 04:23 PM
I previously addressed it:

I know. I was agreeing with point on the riskiness of throwing a slant inside the 1 yd line


Wilson isn't Brady or Manning. He was drafted in 2012.


I think that was Lupica's point. It is a lot to ask a young QB to change a superbowl game-critical play at the line of scrimmage, but a more experienced QB with more established game day 'creds' might not have been as reluctant to do so. Wilson is a major talent and shows many leadership attributes but he is still just a second year QB

Hence the bold section of the following paragraph.


Maybe a veteran quarterback would have known enough to check off a boneheaded play call like this, to understand that if you are going to throw it, one yard from winning the Super Bowl, you don’t throw a pass into the middle of the field that might get picked off, not when the only way your team can lose in that moment is because of an interception. .....

I think the argument is that as good as Wilson is, the Seahawks may have been disadvantaged by having a younger, less experienced QB at the helm. That doesn't negate the fact that the root cause was a really stupid call by Carroll or whomever.

ZippyTheChimp
February 7th, 2015, 11:24 AM
I didn't read it that way.

While Lupica acknowledged Wilson's inexperience, he still said:


It is why this is on Wilson as much as any of them

I think the Seahawks were disadvantaged by Wilson's inexperience only because Carroll put him in that position. This is looking backwards, but what he did was call a stupid play and expect his QB to fix it by ignoring him.

If you take away the great catches by Matthews and the lucky bounce to Kearse, Wilson didn't have a particularly good passing game from the pocket. What he was good at was avoiding tackles when he rolled. Even when defenders had him squared up, he avoided sacks. The only big sack I remember was when he stood in the pocket in the 4th quarter.

If Carroll thought that the Patriots were going to jam the box and stop the run, why did he run a play into the box, and for a wideout with 18 catches in three years? If he was intent on a 2nd down pass play, he could have run play action to Lynch to hold the defense, and had Wilson rollout. Execute the pass if it's there, or take the end zone. If neither is there, throw it out of bounds.

The play that was called was bang-bang.

If you want to share blame, I think a better case can be made for Lockette. Key on Lockette and Butler as the ball is snapped. Lockette makes a poor non-fake to the outside that only wastes a step, as Butler stays squared up. He's got good sight lines to both the QB and the WR.

Video can't be embedded: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rPIg7ZNQ8

To his credit, Carroll put it all on himself, while the OC Bevell said Lockette "could have been stronger to the ball."

eddhead
February 9th, 2015, 11:44 AM
One other comment on Wilson. I realize this was a semi bang-bang play and as such may not have presented a lot of opportunity for Wilson to 'look off' Lockette, but he seemed locked in on his primary from the time the ball as snapped. Butler made a good play,breaking hard on the ball. It seems he followed Wilson's eyes to the receiver and made a hard break.

I think Wilson is an outstanding young QB, but like many young QB's he sometimes has trouble looking of his primary. Again, this was kind of bang-bang, but I think he did have a brief opportunity to look off. Had he taken it, he likely would have frozen Butler for an instance which is all he really needed.

Still a dumb call though. On second and goal from the 1 with the best power running back in the league you have to commit to punching it in.