NFL 2010 Regular Season Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Scott Merryfield]

I do not have a problem with the rule. Otherwise, the refs are being asked to make a judgment on the intent of the receiver -- whether he is starting a new act or completing the initial act of the catch. Under the current rule, all judgment is removed from the process.

 

This is similar to the rule change a couple of years ago where the NFL eliminated the force-out rule for catches in or out of bounds. It removed judgment from the refs on whether the receiver would have come down in bounds.

 

[Ockeghem]

On a sports radio program I was listening to this morning, they were saying how this rule seemed to conflict with the example whereby a quarterback crosses the plane by hitting (and in some cases knocking over) the pylon. He stumbles, knocks the pylon over, and drops the ball as he rolls out of bounds. But it's still a touchdown. I think the sports announcers in this case didn't think their position through enough though, as it's a running, rather than a passing, play. There are different rules for each.

 

I thought the explanation yesterday -- which looked like it was staged for such an eventuality and was begging to be aired -- was quite inadequate. I think the NFL will be looking at this one a bit more closely, but probably not during the season.

 

[Dheiner]

So, what, exactly, is "The Rule"?

 

According to NFL.com:

1. A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

 

I know/think this is out of date, but, I'd like to know the proper current wording.

 

During the game there was some discussion of a "second act." I could argue that the receiver started his "second act" when he attempted to use the ball to help himself stand up.

 

[mattCR]

On a side note, Randy Moss' press conference is a thing of beauty.. an absolute laugh riot

 

[Dheiner]

Sorry, double post.

 

[Ockeghem]

I found this a few moments ago:

 

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.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/16142/like-it-or-not-megatron-call-was-right

 

[Dheiner]

And he had control until the ball touched the ground.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Dheiner

And he had control until the ball touched the ground.

This isn't a fumble, where the ground cannot cause a fumble. The ground can cause an incomplete pass.

 

[Johnny Angell]

When I've watched the replay, what I see is a player who is more concerned about celebrating the completion and TD than he is about anything else. How many times do you see a player complete, or nearly complete a play, and a micro-second later he is moving in some form to celebrate.

 

Players today enter a Twilight Zone where they are more concerned about celebrating than they are about winning.

 

[Nathan_F]

Sorry, but I don't agree that the rule is as clear cut as it seems. There have been cases (e.g., Lance Moore in the SB) where this rule was applied differently due to a judgement based on a "second act."

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell

When I've watched the replay, what I see is a player who is more concerned about celebrating the completion and TD than he is about anything else. How many times do you see a player complete, or nearly complete a play, and a micro-second later he is moving in some form to celebrate.

 

Players today enter a Twilight Zone where they are more concerned about celebrating than they are about winning.

Johnny,

 

This is what I was thinking when I saw the Redskins player return the fumble for a touchdown before the first half ended last night. After he got into the endzone, he did a flip in celebrating the touchdown. Had he dropped the ball, I'm not certain that it would have been a touchdown.

 

On another sports program today, I heard the host say that umpires (or zebras in general) ought to be held accountable for making bad decisions. (This particular host asserted that the call was wrong, and that the umpire ought to have been reprimanded.) All I know is that I really don't like the rule as it stands at present.
 

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell

When I've watched the replay, what I see is a player who is more concerned about celebrating the completion and TD than he is about anything else. How many times do you see a player complete, or nearly complete a play, and a micro-second later he is moving in some form to celebrate.

 

Players today enter a Twilight Zone where they are more concerned about celebrating than they are about winning.

Exactly, Johnny. There is no reason that Calvin Johnson couldn't have secured that pass if he had been doing his main job, which was to make sure he made the catch. It's hard to get up in arms over the call when the player makes such a silly mistake.

 

[Steve_Tk]

There's just some things you can't teach, and being a great QB is one of those things. Sanchez is not a great QB. He's not even good. You can't teach a guy pocket awarness and how to move in the pocket, or step outside it and make a throw on the run. Sanchez has shown that he doesn't have that ability, and probably never will. Even Romo, with all of his issues, showed he can do that very early as a starting QB. The thing about Sanchez, he doesn't need to be great. All those blunders on defense and the Jets held them to only 10 points. I think we will see Brunnel in a game soon.

 

[mattCR]

I think Sanchez will be fine. He played one of the best defenses in the league, and he didn't make any big mistakes..


Sanchez' biggest problem is that he is not mobile enough. He is almost no threat to pick up a first down on his own if he has to. I'm not saying you have to be a Vince Young.. certainly Tom Brady isn't.. but you have to be able to get the defense to respect that you are willing to run if you need to. And Sanchez basically doesn't... in part because damn is he slow on his feet.

 

Pretty happy with KC's defense last night.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Ah yes. Another typical start to a charger season. The game started after 9pm for me and I decided not to watch it. I recorded it and deleted it without watching it. Norv Turner cannot get his teams ready to play early in the season. It's ridiculous. A 50+ yard run for a TD and a 90+ yard punt return for a TD? Gimme a break.

 

Turner has been saying this could be the best charger team he's coached. Let's see, they are missing three critical players: McNeil, Jackson, and Merrimen. Yeah, I know Merrimen is on the team but I don't think he played last night and I think he's finished as an impact player. Maybe he can get back to just good. Thanks to hard-nosed, cut-off-your-nose tactics, the chargers don't have one of the best left tackles playing for them this season. I think if they'd shown a little flexibility, McNeil might have joined the team for his original salary. Instead, the chargers take every chance they can to make it a bitter pill to swallow to play.

 

I'm not too upset about Jackson, he has character issues and just may not be worth the trouble. However, from what I read, the chargers are taking every opportunity to scotch any trade for Jackson. Of course Jackson is also pricing himself out of the market.

 

The first year Turner coached the chargers, 2 playoff wins. The second, 1 win. The third, zero wins. Do I detect a trend?

 

They missed a golden opportunity to take a 1 game lead over every team in the division, but noooooo, not the chargers.

 

Ah well, I'm used to it. Takes the pressure off of an undefeated season.

 

[Johnny Angell]

I think the Jet's game validated the chargers dumping Cromartie. Lots of talent, but no skill. That last penalty on him was a ticky tack call, though. The best offensive play they had was LT. I still don't understand why you get rid of a 1400 yard runner.

 

Oh man, if the Jets don't live up to the coach's hype, it's going to be a long year for them. Except for their defense, I just didn't see anything special about them. I know, things can change.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

The Jets offense looked brutal. As Johnny said above, LT looked like their only decent player on that side of the ball. Sanchez reminds me of Joey Harrington -- always checking down to the underneath receiver instead of throwing down field. If he played anywhere except New York, he wouldn't get any hype, as he's shown nothing so far to deserve the attention he receives. A few more performances like last night, though, and the NY fans and media will eat him alive.

 

Between their lackluster offense and complete lack of discipline on defense, this could turn out to be a very disappointing season for the Jets. Maybe they should have spent more time in the preseason working on execution instead of mugging for the media?

 

The biggest surprises to me over the weekend were the Seahawks beating up on San Fran and the Chargers losing to the Chiefs. I know it's a Norv Turner team, but San Diego should not be losing to a poor team like KC. Houston beating the Colts did not surprise me at all -- I think the Texans are going to be very good this year.

 

[Ockeghem]

I picked the Texans to defeat the Colts, and the Ravens to defeat the Jets. But I lost the Chargers - Chiefs pick. That KC defense was good. But I was more impressed with the first half of the Patriots defense on Sunday -- they looked (and are) much younger than recent teams they have fielded, and it was nice to see some quickness back there for a change. They get the Jets in New York next week, and the Dolphins get to lose to the Vikings.

 

Johnny,

 

I didn't realize that Cromartie could be that bad. Sure, that interception was fun, but those penalties were a bit silly. Heck, I think I could have grabbed a receiver and mauled him before the ball left the QB's hands. I'm now pleased the Patriots didn't show any interest in him, especially since I have seen their 'new' secondary over the weekend, and I like what I see.

 

BTW, side note: I like the Lions defense, and especially their front four. It may have only been the Bears, but stopping any team four times from five or less yards out is in my book very impressive.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem

 

BTW, side note: I like the Lions defense, and especially their front four. It may have only been the Bears, but stopping any team four times from five or less yards out is in my book very impressive.

The defensive line is definitely much improved. Unfortunately, the linebackers and secondary are still quite bad. It's a start, though, since last season all three units of the defense were bad.

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield




The defensive line is definitely much improved. Unfortunately, the linebackers and secondary are still quite bad. It's a start, though, since last season all three units of the defense were bad.

Yes, the secondary is suspect. I've thought this about the secondary of the Patriots for a few years (even when they won two of their three Super Bowls). Still, the Patriots are improved in this area. Perhaps the Lions have a rookie or two that we don't know all that much about whom will shine in the secondary?