[quote]MattyXL wrote:
I want the Giants to win and all, but wow those were 2 shit calls. Steel Nation probably is getting an ulcer with these calls[/quote]
3 shit calls resulting in 14 points. Fucking disgusting. I hope Roger Goodell’s cancer (that I wished on him 2 years ago) metastasizes into his cunt.[/quote]
I thought the fumble/interception (tuck rule) call on Roethlisberger was a good call. [/quote]
It’s your right as an American to be wrong.[/quote]
For the record, I don’t have any bias towards the Giants or Steelers. But I’m wondering how it was a bad call? From what I saw, the ball dislodged from Ben’s palm before he started the forward throwing motion.[/quote]
The ball moved in his hand but was still under his control when his arm was moving forward.[/quote]
how can you say under control when the ball is kind of rotating sideways in his hand as he is throwing it forward? My point is you can’t really overturn that call given the whole ‘sufficient evidence’ thing.[/quote]
How is it not sufficient evidence when he’s still grabbing the ball with all 5 fingers before the end of the throwing motion when it comes out?
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
actually this whole argument is moot. The tuck rule says:
NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.[1]
So under the wording here, I guess it is the wrong call and Steel is right simply because my ‘ball dislodged from palm’ argument doesn’t even matter. In short, the tuck rule is god damn retarded IMO.[/quote]
All praise Tom Brady and his 3 rings… Thank you.[/quote]
I think is issue is that the ball was jarred lose before the forward motion. It looks like he’s not quite moving forward when the ball becomes loose to me.
Like I said it’s not a big deal since they won.
Also they might as well just make it so QBs can’t fumble the ball, that’s pretty much where the rule is anyway, which is stupid in my opinion. The ball should at least have to pass the line of scrimmage for the tuck rule to be in effect. Shit’s weak…
Holy fucking balls is there anything more resemblent of spinning down the rabbit hole than splitting hairs over the fucking tuck rule?
Maybe if Dan Dierdorf and Greg Gumbel were hashing it out could it be more effective in providing the appropriate motivation to cut oneself with intent to do harm.
I have to say the announcers for the Saints-Eagles game last night was the worst I have ever heard. The consistent praise of the Saints, the undying love for Vilma was extremely annoying. Those two idiots need to be fired. Praising Vilma after all the crap he did?
I had no dog in the fight so I really noticed the bias last night and it was ridiculous.
[quote]pat wrote:
I have to say the announcers for the Saints-Eagles game last night was the worst I have ever heard. The consistent praise of the Saints, the undying love for Vilma was extremely annoying. Those two idiots need to be fired. Praising Vilma after all the crap he did?
I had no dog in the fight so I really noticed the bias last night and it was ridiculous. [/quote]
I believe an equal amount of blame goes to the producers of the show Pat. I’ve always wanted to be in on a pre-production show to prove my theory that they are coached on what to push in a broadcast way more than we may think.
[quote]pat wrote:
I have to say the announcers for the Saints-Eagles game last night was the worst I have ever heard. The consistent praise of the Saints, the undying love for Vilma was extremely annoying. Those two idiots need to be fired. Praising Vilma after all the crap he did?
I had no dog in the fight so I really noticed the bias last night and it was ridiculous. [/quote]
I believe an equal amount of blame goes to the producers of the show Pat. I’ve always wanted to be in on a pre-production show to prove my theory that they are coached on what to push in a broadcast way more than we may think.
Well, it’s the halfway point. After 8 games who do you guys like better at QB so far, Luck or Griffin?
I’ll take Luck any day of the week and twice on Sundays over Griffin. I think there’s a certain handicap that comes with being such a good runner like RG3. The fact is that the QB needs to be a threat with his arm, even as he moves outside of the pocket looking to run.
The best example I’ve ever seen of this is Joe Montana, which is to be expected since he was the perfect QB. His field vision was second to none, which is why he was so fucking great at making three, four, five reads on a single play. But watch when he moves around in and out of the pocket. He ALWAYS runs with the ball up in the air pump faking and looking downfield. So even as he’s looking to run, he’s actually just looking to run to get into better throwing position.
What this does is two-fold. First, it gives him the opportunity to keep defenders from just running at him full speed since they have to be aware of the pass the whole time. Secondly, it also keeps defensive backs on the receivers longer rather than abandon them in order to pursue a Qb who just took off running across the line of scrimmage.
I think when a QB is as good a runner as someone like Vick or Griffin or Steve Young early in his career was, it can be detrimental in this respect. The escapability is good, but what’s even better is the ability to move the ball downfield with the pass since passes typically go for more yards than a QB run does.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Well, it’s the halfway point. After 8 games who do you guys like better at QB so far, Luck or Griffin?[/quote]
To be fair, Griffin’s lack of receiving help is muddying the waters of comparison.
Also, using (obviously) different criteria, I would call Marino “the perfect QB” as well.
[/quote]
The perfect QB? C’mon! He didn’t win any rings. Like it or not, the nature of the game is to win rings.
There’s Montana and there’s everybody else.[/quote]
[/quote]
I hate to say this, but I saw Aikman fuck the Niners too many times to deny it: the guy was a REALLY underrated QB. His name never comes up amongst the great QBs of all-time, and he’s definitely a notch below guys like Montana or Starr, but fuck he won a lot of big games. Seems like most of them were against the Niners.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
The fact that Trent Dilfer won a ring, and Dan Marino never did should negate that whole argument. [/quote]
Haha, so true. Even Big Bens first ring was mainly won by the defense. He deserves a lot of credit for the second one though.
If the 49ers won a Super Bowl this year would you say Alex Smith is better than Dan Marino DB?
It’s Henne time in Jacksonville. I don’t see anything in Gabbert. His name is still stampped into the turf at the GA dome from last year, from all the sacks.
They should have traded for Tebow while they had the chance. If nothing else the stadium would have been full.
[quote]pat wrote:
It’s Henne time in Jacksonville. I don’t see anything in Gabbert. His name is still stampped into the turf at the GA dome from last year, from all the sacks.
They should have traded for Tebow while they had the chance. If nothing else the stadium would have been full.[/quote]
LOL you think they’d have no chance of trading for him now?
