PDA

View Full Version : NFL Week (in honor of) #21 Thread


Andre the Giant
November 27th, 2007, 12:36 AM
That was the worst game ever. Glad I watched Raw instead. Tuned in for the last 2 minutes, saw the whole game ;)

-kev

Rick52
November 27th, 2007, 10:18 AM
Game got more interesting once it set in that it had been decades since a scoreless tie went that long into a game.

I was hoping for a 2-0 finish somehow, but 3-0 is just as good to indicate one of the following:

1) the field sucked
2) something is up with Pittsburgh or
3) Miami has been close to winning for awhile now and may break through next week against the Jets

Andre the Giant
November 27th, 2007, 10:22 AM
I dunno, I think I'd kind of like to see an 0-16 team just to say I saw it.

Green Bay/Dallas is two nights away. I think this game is just as big as Indy/NE was.

-kev

JoetheShow
November 27th, 2007, 11:02 AM
Green Bay/Dallas is two nights away. I think this game is just as big as Indy/NE was.

-kev

I agree. Everyone has been big taking the Cowboys because they have balanace. But I'm not sure that matters when the QB matchup is Favre vs Romo. I'll be rooting for the Packers for sure.

Rick52
November 27th, 2007, 11:05 AM
~Split~ (http://forums.gamewinners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=552783)

Whale Biologist
November 27th, 2007, 01:55 PM
Game got more interesting once it set in that it had been decades since a scoreless tie went that long into a game.

I was hoping for a 2-0 finish somehow, but 3-0 is just as good to indicate one of the following:

1) the field sucked
2) something is up with Pittsburgh or
3) Miami has been close to winning for awhile now and may break through next week against the Jets

It's gonna be set up so that the 0-14 Dolphins beat the 14-0 Pats.

Day Man
November 27th, 2007, 02:35 PM
hahaha I believe that could happen. If THAT happens, football is fixed.

Cyanide
November 27th, 2007, 05:49 PM
Like it did last year? True, the records weren't what they will be this year, but that was quite an upset...

smashbro14
December 2nd, 2007, 02:13 PM
Fred Jackson, the running back for the Bills, is the worst person who ever lived. The Redskins try to honor Sean Taylor by putting out 10 players on defense for a play, and Fred Jackson tries his best to take advantage of this and instead of going out of bounds after 5-10 yards, puts the most effort into a run I've ever seen, then CELEBRATES after getting jacked up by Laron Landry.

Rick52
December 2nd, 2007, 03:06 PM
The Lions suck incredibly bad at basic tackling. Defense, special teams, you name it. Their high turnover margin tries to cover that fact up, but its still very obvious how bad their tackling is.

Edit: throw 'offense' into that mix as well. A def. lineman, after intercepting Kitna, evaded, like, five guys.

Typhon
December 2nd, 2007, 03:18 PM
The Lions suck incredibly bad at basic tackling. Defense, special teams, you name it. Their high turnover margin tries to cover that fact up, but its still very obvious how bad their tackling is.

Edit: throw 'offense' into that mix as well. A def. lineman, after intercepting Kitna, evaded, like, five guys.


Eh... I'll say their Offensive line is the absolute worst. Far worse than their defense. That line crumbles no sooner than the ball is snapped. And Kitna has no ability to evade a rushing defense man... a recipe for failure...

Dr. Doom
December 2nd, 2007, 03:20 PM
yeah... 35 - 10 at half... sorry Rick, but the lions aren't as great as everyone has been saying all year.. they remind me of the vikings about 5 years ago though... they can score a ton of points, but can stop anything on defense unless they get a turnover.

go vikes! ;) :p

Harris
December 2nd, 2007, 03:24 PM
You just can't hide a bad offensive line and a defense that gives up a ton of yards forever. Like Doom said, and like I commented on before they started this losing skid, when the Lions don't get turnovers they can't stop anybody.

Fred Jackson, the running back for the Bills, is the worst person who ever lived. The Redskins try to honor Sean Taylor by putting out 10 players on defense for a play, and Fred Jackson tries his best to take advantage of this and instead of going out of bounds after 5-10 yards, puts the most effort into a run I've ever seen, then CELEBRATES after getting jacked up by Laron Landry.

I thought it was a terrific idea for Washington to only start 10 in honor of Sean Taylor. Very touching. Terry Bradshaw said on FOX's pregame that Buffalo should take a knee on their first play, which also would have been a great gesture. I can't comment on Fred Jackson's run since I didn't see it, but I hope he was just playing hard because it's his first NFL start, instead of taking advantage of one less defender.

Dr. Doom
December 2nd, 2007, 03:28 PM
i think the other problem is that they're just too one dimentional.. gotta run it.. you can run against the vikes D, you just have to attack the outsides. The vikes pass D is underrated, they have the worst pass D because that's all teams do against them since they think they can't run it.

Yeah they lions have a GREAT passing attack, but you can never be one dimentional.

Harris
December 2nd, 2007, 04:26 PM
Anybody else feeling silly for picking Miami?

Rick52
December 2nd, 2007, 04:28 PM
Not me.

I like picking teams that I actually want to lose. Makes me not feel as bad if they actually win.

Velocity
December 2nd, 2007, 04:54 PM
Redskins shot themselves in the foot... called two timeouts back to back, which is against the rules... :-\ Unfortunate for the 'Skins.

smashbro14
December 2nd, 2007, 04:56 PM
The Redskins are the most frustrating franchise in the history of sports. That's the 6th game they've lost in the last minute. This is the worst NFL season I've ever been through. I don't even know why I bother to watch football anymore. I can't imagine a more frustrating team. This is easily the worst I've ever felt after a football game. The only team that can beat the Redskins is the Patriots. The Redskins just lose every f*cking week. Other teams don't beat them.

Patrick!
December 2nd, 2007, 05:00 PM
BUFFALO WINSA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! BUFFFALO WINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TRENT EDWARDS IS JESUS, AND I <3 RIAN LINDELL!!!!

That was the most exciting game yet this season, byyyy far.

btw, RIP Sean Taylor. You will be missed.

smashbro14
December 2nd, 2007, 05:53 PM
I didn't see the Bills win. I saw the Redskins lose... for the 6th time.

And I really hope you're kidding about the excitement in that game. That was the least exciting game the Redskins have been involved in this year aside from the Patriots game... there was one touchdown.

Patrick!
December 2nd, 2007, 05:54 PM
That was the momentum swinging, the obvious attempted fixing of the game the Bills had to overcome, and the last minute drama, and that was the most exciting game of the season so far.

smashbro14
December 2nd, 2007, 06:10 PM
... I guess you haven't watched a lot of football this year. I mean, the Cowboys/Bills game was easily the most exciting, but I guess you don't count that because the Bills lost.

Day Man
December 2nd, 2007, 06:20 PM
Like you don't count anything if the Redskins lose :link:

Patrick!
December 2nd, 2007, 06:42 PM
... I guess you haven't watched a lot of football this year. I mean, the Cowboys/Bills game was easily the most exciting, but I guess you don't count that because the Bills lost.
Uhh. . . yeah, that sounds about right. Seriously.

smashbro14
December 2nd, 2007, 06:46 PM
I said every game they'd played in except the Patriots game was more exciting than this one... that includes the losses. The games against Dallas, the Giants, and Green Bay were 3 of the best games we've seen this year. I don't see how a game with one touchdown and a poor showing by BOTH teams makes this game better than Bills/Cowboys, Colts/Patriots, 49ers/Cardinals, Packers/Broncos, and countless other games this season. I mean it was a pretty good game, but I could probably think of 20 games that were better than this one this season.

Patrick!
December 2nd, 2007, 06:48 PM
Well, by my standards, "most exciting game" means "most exciting Bills win".

Don't you have any "FIRE JOE GIBBS NOW!!!!" threads to make? :P

'Dre
December 2nd, 2007, 06:53 PM
I said every game they'd played in except the Patriots game was more exciting than this one... that includes the losses. The games against Dallas, the Giants, and Green Bay were 3 of the best games we've seen this year. I don't see how a game with one touchdown and a poor showing by BOTH teams makes this game better than Bills/Cowboys, Colts/Patriots, 49ers/Cardinals, Packers/Broncos, and countless other games this season. I mean it was a pretty good game, but I could probably think of 20 games that were better than this one this season.
Sad how they scored more touchdowns that game than they have the past 6 weeks combined :(

Harris
December 2nd, 2007, 08:32 PM
The Bears are the worst f*cking team in the league. Hester has everybody beat by ten yards on a fly and drops a runaway 81 yard touchdown pass, which I guess makes sense since the Bears lead the league in dropping balls. The running game is still sh*t. They finally got turnovers today after being probably last in the league in that category all season, and still couldn't do anything with them. Penalties killed drives again and again. At least Grossman is playing well, sure enough he starts doing it when the rest of the team decides to fall apart.

Captain Haddock
December 2nd, 2007, 11:51 PM
The Redskins are the most frustrating franchise in the history of sports. That's the 6th game they've lost in the last minute. This is the worst NFL season I've ever been through. I don't even know why I bother to watch football anymore. I can't imagine a more frustrating team. This is easily the worst I've ever felt after a football game. The only team that can beat the Redskins is the Patriots. The Redskins just lose every f*cking week. Other teams don't beat them.
Yeah. I've been watching the Raiders do that for four years. (well, last year the coaching staff just beat us)
I know how you feel.
Atleast you guys have players who try/have talent. We hardly used to have that.
(Thank GOD now Kiffin's making a change.)

Sephiroth Strife
December 3rd, 2007, 12:37 AM
Sean Taylor was number 21 correct, explaining all the things on everybody's helmet this week? RIP Taylor.

In other news, Chargers beat the Chiefs and have a chance of finishing the season at 11-5. Not saying anything else because of the one game at a time philosophy. The AFC west is still terrible...

I am hoping the pats lose at least one gamet his season... Wouldn't mind seeing some bones in Randy moss broken in order to make that happen. As terrible as that sounds i get so sick of players with that much talent and that much attitude when there team isn't great. Bugs the Sh*t out of me whenever they get rings.

That whole Starting 10 players by the redskins was a good gesture. Looking at this from purely a football perspective and tosses the human side out the window, the redskins season is done. That guy was huge to there Defence. Least they get a high draft pick.

Looking at the human side now... That guy had turned his life around and had a promising career ahead of him... of all people to get shot why is it always the undeserving?

Day Man
December 3rd, 2007, 12:38 AM
I couldn't really think of anyone who deserves to be shot and killed, but I know what you're saying.

Either way, AP is ridiculous. All I can think about is how bad I wish he was on the Packers. If the Vikings can get some pieces set in the next 2-3 years, I think they are going to be dominant

Dr. Doom
December 3rd, 2007, 12:54 AM
Either way, AP is ridiculous. All I can think about is how bad I wish he was on the Packers. If the Vikings can get some pieces set in the next 2-3 years, I think they are going to be dominant

word... the vikes have their key pieces locked up long term, and their past 2 drafts have been extremely successful... next year may be a breakout year.

Sephiroth Strife
December 3rd, 2007, 01:00 AM
I dont want to take anything away from AP... dont think its possible. But his always give the last hit could really shorten his career. LT did that for a year or to then marhsal faulk told him that he was taking 2 years off his career. Elusive backs are a better long term solution IMO, Parker could easily make that switch though and be someone that his division hates for a long time.

Harris
December 3rd, 2007, 01:21 AM
That and his injury history would scare me. He couldn't stay healthy in college, and he's already missed two games this year. His running style means he's gonna take a beating, so lets hope the Vikings do get some talent around him, otherwise if he's too much of their workhourse, he might wear down pretty quick.

'Dre
December 3rd, 2007, 02:43 AM
I couldn't really think of anyone who deserves to be shot and killed, but I know what you're saying.

Either way, AP is ridiculous. All I can think about is how bad I wish he was on the Packers. If the Vikings can get some pieces set in the next 2-3 years, I think they are going to be dominant
I forgot to start him today :(

Andre the Giant
December 3rd, 2007, 03:05 AM
Green Bay is still the class of the North and will continue to be so. Where we are now is where the Vikings are trying to be. And when they get there, we'll be beyond this point.

By the way, I really enjoyed watching the Lions get run right off the field. That was purely embarassing and I enjoyed every last second.

-kev

Whale Biologist
December 3rd, 2007, 11:44 AM
Fred Jackson, the running back for the Bills, is the worst person who ever lived. The Redskins try to honor Sean Taylor by putting out 10 players on defense for a play, and Fred Jackson tries his best to take advantage of this and instead of going out of bounds after 5-10 yards, puts the most effort into a run I've ever seen, then CELEBRATES after getting jacked up by Laron Landry.

Fred Jackson should have scored a touchdown. I know this is gonna sound insensitive, but there's a line between honoring Sean Taylor and being stupid, and putting yourself at a disadvantage on the field isn't a very smart idea regardless of the circumstances. Yes, I think it's unfortunate what happened to Sean Taylor and they should honor him, but putting yourself at a disadvantage in a game where winning keeps you in the playoff hunt isn't a good idea.

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 12:48 PM
Green Bay is still the class of the North and will continue to be so. Where we are now is where the Vikings are trying to be. And when they get there, we'll be beyond this point.

By the way, I really enjoyed watching the Lions get run right off the field. That was purely embarassing and I enjoyed every last second.

-kev

Once Favre leaves, GB will be basement dwellars in the North.

Velocity
December 3rd, 2007, 01:06 PM
I doubt it, James. Did you happen to see how Green Bay played with Aaron Rodgers at QB in the Dallas game?

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 01:09 PM
I doubt it, James. Did you happen to see how Green Bay played with Aaron Rodgers at QB in the Dallas game?

Flukes happen. Dallas had never seen Aaron Rogers play. Hell no one had. Heck even Michael Vick has passed for 300 yards once. If they do remain contenders, it will be because of the D, not Aaron Rodgers....lol

BigDaddy
December 3rd, 2007, 02:51 PM
If no one has seen him play, how can you say he won't be good? He's never had an oppurtunity yet.

Harris
December 3rd, 2007, 03:03 PM
If no one has seen him play, how can you say he won't be good?

How can you say he will? It works both ways. We haven't seen enough of him to say if he'll be good or bad at this point.

BigDaddy
December 3rd, 2007, 03:08 PM
How can you say he will? It works both ways. We haven't seen enough of him to say if he'll be good or bad at this point.
I didn't say he will. Of course we haven't seen enough of him yet. I was just replying to James' post. I guess I could have replied to both of them with the "we can't tell either way yet," but I didn't.

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 03:18 PM
I didn't say he will. Of course we haven't seen enough of him yet. I was just replying to James' post. I guess I could have replied to both of them with the "we can't tell either way yet," but I didn't.

I will admit he is in the best situation. Getting to sit behind a future HoFer and possilby the greatst to ever play the position. I'm just hoping he doesnt do good. I have my reasons for that....

Andre the Giant
December 3rd, 2007, 03:30 PM
That's absolutely ascinine. We have a fantastic defense and a great offense. Rodgers looked good in the small sample in which we got to see him. Are we 10-2 without Brett? No. But we're probably 8-4. Course those two games really do mean the world. But that doesn't make us basement dwellers like the 49ers.

-kev

BigDaddy
December 3rd, 2007, 03:32 PM
Yeah, Rodgers has a lot going for him. He learned from Brett Favre, he's got a good team around him, and he has looked good in the small amount of time we've seen him play. I think the Packers will remain contenders with him.

Rahul
December 3rd, 2007, 03:53 PM
Fred Jackson should have scored a touchdown. I know this is gonna sound insensitive, but there's a line between honoring Sean Taylor and being stupid, and putting yourself at a disadvantage on the field isn't a very smart idea regardless of the circumstances. Yes, I think it's unfortunate what happened to Sean Taylor and they should honor him, but putting yourself at a disadvantage in a game where winning keeps you in the playoff hunt isn't a good idea.
I read this in some article too. They said he was a type of guy who would never give his opponents an edge, and at this point would be giving it his all. The best way to honour him would be by playing all out and winning, not leaving his position open...

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 04:01 PM
That's absolutely ascinine. We have a fantastic defense and a great offense. Rodgers looked good in the small sample in which we got to see him. Are we 10-2 without Brett? No. But we're probably 8-4. Course those two games really do mean the world. But that doesn't make us basement dwellers like the 49ers.

-kev

Brett makes your offense good. Would these recivers be having the year they are with Rogers instead of Brett? You cant say "yes" or "no", but odds are they wouldnt. Favre has what, two years left at the most? And did you forget what happened to Rodgers last year? I forget if it was in the regular season or last season, but he comes in for Brett, and gets his ankle killed in about 3 plays. Thats not a good sign.

And name the two most important players on your D. Al Harris and Charles Woodson. As long as tose two are healthy, yes, GB has one of the top defenses in the NFL. But, they are 32 and 31 respectively. They have about one or two years before their level of play starts to drop off. You saw what Dallas did do them when Woodson wasnt playing.

GB is going to have a nice little run in the next two years, possibly three, but after that, I dont see them being good. The only way they will be good is if they get two good corners to replace Woodosn and Harris, and if Rodgers pans out. And you cant really count on either of those things happening.

Day Man
December 3rd, 2007, 05:11 PM
Because he got hurt once? Everyone gets hurt sometime, except Favre and P. Manning. I guarentee Driver would be good without Favre. Jennings possibly. So they are old at corners, they have a beasty Dline, and sweet linebackers. I think with all the time Rogers has had to learn and sit on the bench he will be good.

How long did Steve Young sit on the bench before he became a starter, MVP, Superbowl winner, and HoF'er? :link:

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 05:23 PM
Because he got hurt once? Everyone gets hurt sometime, except Favre and P. Manning. I guarentee Driver would be good without Favre. Jennings possibly. So they are old at corners, they have a beasty Dline, and sweet linebackers. I think with all the time Rogers has had to learn and sit on the bench he will be good.

How long did Steve Young sit on the bench before he became a starter, MVP, Superbowl winner, and HoF'er? :link:

First of all I didnt say he would be destined for a career of injuires. I just said its not a good sign that the first time he gets some NFL aciton he breaks his ankle. Also kind of ironic that he did, since Favre is Iron man lol.

But yea, I dont think they will be good because I dont think Rodgers will pan out. Some think he will. We cant definativley say whether he will be good or not because we havent seen enough of him.

smashbro14
December 3rd, 2007, 05:24 PM
James is just mad because the 49ers took Alex Smith over him :P.

James89
December 3rd, 2007, 05:28 PM
James is just mad because the 49ers took Alex Smith over him :P.

You make it sound like I wanted them to drfat Aaron Rodgers. I just wish they had drafted anyone but Smith. I'm still going to support Alex until he either has a great career or gets the boot out of SF cause he sucks, but i cant help to think what might have been had they drafted say Braylon Edwards, Shawn Merriman.

BigDaddy
December 3rd, 2007, 06:11 PM
Brett makes your offense good. Would these recivers be having the year they are with Rogers instead of Brett? You cant say "yes" or "no", but odds are they wouldnt.
A lot of Favre's passes this year have been short passes that have gone for big yards because of the receivers' run after the catch ability. And each receiver is good enough to help the other because the defense can't focus on just one. Sure, it takes a good quarterback to make good decisions and throw it to the open receiver, but the depth of receiving talent has really helped Favre. But yes, the fact that they have Brett Favre throwing them ball is still a plus.

James is just mad because the 49ers took Alex Smith over him :P.
I was going to say that, but I decided to defer to someone else. :D

Captain Haddock
December 3rd, 2007, 07:45 PM
You make it sound like I wanted them to drfat Aaron Rodgers. I just wish they had drafted anyone but Smith. I'm still going to support Alex until he either has a great career or gets the boot out of SF cause he sucks, but i cant help to think what might have been had they drafted say Braylon Edwards, Shawn Merriman.
You do realize Alex Smith can still turn out to be a great QB right? He's only..what? 23? jeez.
you've got an old receiver who can't get seperation, a decent no.2 and a tight end who could not catch ANYTHING.
Get him a decent target, and a good qb coach and you'll see wonders.
Norv leaving possibly KILLEd his development for a while. Nolan's a defensive coach, with no idea whatsoever on how to develop a qb.

smashbro14
December 3rd, 2007, 10:06 PM
After seeing Ray Lewis cry during the moment of silence with 21 written on his face, I had a feeling the Ravens would show up today and that Ray Lewis would have one of the best games of his career. So far, it's looking good. Ray Ray, Ed Reed, and McGahee are pumped. 7-3 at the end of the first.

Harris
December 3rd, 2007, 10:50 PM
Even Boller is playing well. Ed Reed just picked off a Tom Brady pass and returned it all the way to the Pats' 30 yard line... then got hit and fumbled. :( Pats ball.

TheDukeOfBoston
December 3rd, 2007, 10:51 PM
Yeah, I was pissed, but then Ed Reed lost it and I lol'z immensely. The Pats are playing like crap, esp. on defense. They need to step it up in the 2nd half.

Captain Haddock
December 3rd, 2007, 11:44 PM
Interesting.
You would think the Ravens would adopt a Philly style game, attacking through mid-passes..but they're flat out pounding the pats.
Good game, I think the Ravens if they manage a score..have a good chance of securing the W

JoetheShow
December 3rd, 2007, 11:47 PM
The 4th quarter so far has been typical Ravens; Great defense, great special teams... and Kyle Boller.

Andre the Giant
December 3rd, 2007, 11:57 PM
Didn't Joe Montana start on the bench too?

Watching the game now. Just joined in after Raw. Really surprising stuff here, wonder if it can hold.

I offered my brother the Chairman role at Festivus if the Ravens win.

-kev

JoetheShow
December 4th, 2007, 12:34 AM
WOW!

If he could have stayed up an extra second and chuncked the ball back, they could've still won.

F*ck the Pats, its over next week baby! GO STEELERS!!!

Cyanide
December 4th, 2007, 12:42 AM
lol at the kickoff on the 35 yard line after 35 yards of penelties.

Also, I so thought when he caught that ball he was going to snake into the endzone somehow. Damn, thought the season was done.

Harris
December 4th, 2007, 12:50 AM
If there was an emoticon showing somebody shooting themselves in the foot, it would represent the Ravens. Those 4th down plays were ridiculous.

smashbro14
December 4th, 2007, 12:57 AM
If anyone doesn't think that was the game of the year, they're just angry the Pats won.

Yeah, I'm really, really bitter about the sh!t that went on on the last Patriots' drive as well as the Clayton catch, but oh well. At least it was 2 teams I hate. I was vigorously rooting for the Ravens, but now I won't have to hear about how good the Ravens are at school tomorow.


Can't ANYONE honor Sean Taylor? :(

'Dre
December 4th, 2007, 01:43 AM
WOW. Conspiracy theories are gonna start emerging after tonight's game. The ref singlehandedly won the game for the Pats.

• EXTREMELY bad personal foul call on Rolle, considering Moss pushed him up off his feet. What is he supposed to do? Fall flat on his back?
• Bad defensive holding call that gave the Pats 4 more downs to win it.
• Questionable call on the Gaffney touchdown. In the process of switching hands, he didn't have full control of the ball.

Either way, that was a good game that went down to the very last play. Had Clayton miraculously snaked his way through or pitched it back, the Pats would've lost, fair and square.

Zell 17
December 4th, 2007, 02:23 AM
WOW. Conspiracy theories are gonna start emerging after tonight's game. The ref singlehandedly won the game for the Pats.

• EXTREMELY bad personal foul call on Rolle, considering Moss pushed him up off his feet. What is he supposed to do? Fall flat on his back?
• Bad defensive holding call that gave the Pats 4 more downs to win it.
• Questionable call on the Gaffney touchdown. In the process of switching hands, he didn't have full control of the ball.

Either way, that was a good game that went down to the very last play. Had Clayton miraculously snaked his way through or pitched it back, the Pats would've lost, fair and square.

So let's ignore the PHANTOM holding call on the Patriots that killed their drive with 6 minutes to go. Let's ignore the clear offensive pass interference on that last play when Samuel was THROWN to the ground. Let's ignore the fact a defensive player was holding on to a receivers jersey on the holding call in question, which is extremely obvious to an official. While we're at it, let's ignore the fact that the Ravens were mugging the receivers all night, and that's how they managed to get away with rushing 3.

Why do we ignore these facts? Because they go directly contrary to what we WANT, an idiotic notion that the league is trying to fix games for a team they already ousted as having "cheated".

But hey, if ignoring facts helps us make our case, then march on ladies and gents.

'Dre
December 4th, 2007, 02:39 AM
So let's ignore the PHANTOM holding call on the Patriots that killed their drive with 6 minutes to go. Let's ignore the clear offensive pass interference on that last play when Samuel was THROWN to the ground. Let's ignore the fact a defensive player was holding on to a receivers jersey on the holding call in question, which is extremely obvious to an official. While we're at it, let's ignore the fact that the Ravens were mugging the receivers all night, and that's how they managed to get away with rushing 3.

Why do we ignore these facts? Because they go directly contrary to what we WANT, an idiotic notion that the league is trying to fix games for a team they already ousted as having "cheated".

But hey, if ignoring facts helps us make our case, then march on ladies and gents.
1. All the calls I mentioned happened in the last possession that the Patriots had. You know that game winning possession. Had they made any of those calls when the time wasn't so critical, I wouldn't be complaining as I am.
2. You forget to address the Gaffney play. Last time I checked the rule book, if a receiver changes hands, he doesn't have possession of the ball. Gaffney did this... unless he has two left hands.
3. Im willing to bet 100% that had Clayton scored on the last play of the game, the multiple flags would've been thrown.

The problem Im having with the NFL is that some of the games that are the most action packed through 3 and 14/15th quarters are suddenly decided by the Zebras who are throwing flags because something SEEMS to have happened. This isn't the only game. The refs have been costing teams close games for a while now.

Zell 17
December 4th, 2007, 02:42 AM
2. You forget to address the Gaffney play. Last time I checked the rule book, if a receiver changes hands, he doesn't have possession of the ball. Gaffney did this... unless he has two left hands.



What sport do you watch? This is 1000% legal so long as you have control of the ball.

'Dre
December 4th, 2007, 02:49 AM
What sport do you watch? This is 1000% legal so long as you have control of the ball.
As long as you have control of the ball, right. But in the process of changing hands, and the ball is moved, you don't have full possession of the ball. Can you watch the replay and see that Gaffney had full, "1000%" possession of the ball when he was switching hands? From what I saw, while he didn't bobble it, the ball did move around and wasn't securely tucked before he stepped out of bounds. That would be enough evidence to show he didn't have possession.

Shake
December 4th, 2007, 03:09 AM
Gaffney moved the ball to secure it. he had already caught it, its just that it was a fragile catch. So, he was in bounds and had possession.

Zell 17
December 4th, 2007, 03:58 AM
As long as you have control of the ball, right. But in the process of changing hands, and the ball is moved, you don't have full possession of the ball. Can you watch the replay and see that Gaffney had full, "1000%" possession of the ball when he was switching hands? From what I saw, while he didn't bobble it, the ball did move around and wasn't securely tucked before he stepped out of bounds. That would be enough evidence to show he didn't have possession.

But was it 100% indisputable visual evidence to overturn the call on the field? 100% sure it's not a catch?

asterisk
December 4th, 2007, 05:56 AM
That game was so much closer than it should've been, Randy Moss couldn't handle two catches in the endzone (one was a gimme!) and Benjamin Watson couldn't hold on to the ball in the endzone on that first possession.

Man, the Patriots last drive was ****ing intense. So many damn 4th downs... I can't believe the Ravens' D. Coordinator called a time out right before they stopped the Pats on 4th and 1. Heartbreaking.

Andre the Giant
December 4th, 2007, 09:02 AM
Everyone else noticing the Pats are getting a step closer to losing each week? Well I think that this is their last chance to lose one. The Jets and Dolphins at home will be jokes, then you have a trip to the Meadowlands. Only way they lose there is if they play the backups.

By the way, who schedules them for three straight home games exactly?

-kev

Day Man
December 4th, 2007, 10:11 AM
For some reason I think the Pats will blow the Steelers out by 20 points.

Rick52
December 4th, 2007, 10:13 AM
I wanted the Pats to onside kick it when they were gonna kick off on Baltimore's 35. Why the hell not?

Everyone else noticing the Pats are getting a step closer to losing each week? Well I think that this is their last chance to lose one. The Jets and Dolphins at home will be jokes, then you have a trip to the Meadowlands. Only way they lose there is if they play the backups.

By the way, who schedules them for three straight home games exactly?

-kev
Pittsburgh next week will be a challenge. Steelers seem to be over that funk they were in recently and despite the game being in New England I think the Steelers will throw everything they have at the Patriots.

Edit: I got ninja'd, but I still stand by what I say.

JoetheShow
December 4th, 2007, 10:29 AM
Whether he caught the ball was irrelevant as they got 30 yds worth of penalties after the catch. The Pats could have then run more time off the clock and snuck it or gave it to Evans.

That being said, I'm 70% sure it wasn't a catch.

Zell 17
December 4th, 2007, 11:24 AM
I wanted the Pats to onside kick it when they were gonna kick off on Baltimore's 35. Why the hell not?



Because if the ball somehow goes out of bounds the Pats are screwed.

James89
December 4th, 2007, 11:53 AM
You do realize Alex Smith can still turn out to be a great QB right? He's only..what? 23? jeez.

You make it sound like I wanted them to drfat Aaron Rodgers. I just wish they had drafted anyone but Smith. I'm still going to support Alex until he either has a great career or gets the boot out of SF cause he sucks, but i cant help to think what might have been had they drafted say Braylon Edwards, Shawn Merriman.

Yes, I do realize that.

And about last nights game. It was pretty intense. We were pretty slow at my work so I got to see most of it. And its funny how the Ravens were two yards short of getting the TD. Makes them wish Bart Scott didnt go insane after the Pats scored. The refs would have thrown a flag for that ridiculous offensive pass interference anyways, but still.

Dubber Rucky
December 4th, 2007, 01:10 PM
I only saw about the last 8 minutes of the game according to the game clock. I was nervous the whole time I was watching. That last Patriots drive was so intense. Once I saw the timeout on 4th and 1 when the Ravens stopped them short I had a good feeling that the Patriots won but I could still not be sure. All those penalties really screwed the Ravens. That last second bomb at the 2 yard line scared me. But the Patriots had like 97 guys on him so he wasn't going anywhere. I'm a Patriots fan so I am happy that they won but I am still disappointed in how they played. 2 weeks in a row that the Patriots should have had a much easier time winning you would think. I think that they will beat the Steelers, but they will have to step it up big time.

And on a side note: I have Dish Network and when I turned the game on I checked the info..I didn't know the Baltimore Jaguars were 8 - 3. That made me chuckle.. Anyone else notice this?

Velocity
December 4th, 2007, 02:33 PM
No, actually, I had no clue Baltimore had another team called the Jaguars. :P

Also, being a football guy myself - Jabar Gaffney had that ball, there was no way he was going to drop it. It was a clean catch. Last I checked, the fact that a player is merely shifting the ball to his other hand does not mean that he doesn't have possession of the ball. I do the same damn thing when I'm playing football.

JoetheShow
December 4th, 2007, 02:41 PM
But he didn't look like he was actually holding the ball firmly while shifting, as in he was hardly "controlling" it as opposed to "shaping" it.

Velocity
December 4th, 2007, 02:44 PM
"Shaping"? :hmm:

He had complete control of the ball. Trust me. It comes from experience. There are times where a ball is thrown your way, and you may corral it with one hand and shift it to the other, but in the meantime you have no doubt whatsoever in your mind that the ball will be dropped.

That's possession.

JoetheShow
December 4th, 2007, 02:55 PM
Shaping meaning not controlling, but influencing. Best word I could think of. :D Stupid psych class.

Ok, I'm about to watch it again for the first time today...


ugh, I'm less sure now... Camerawork, another reason why ESPN fails..

I guess my rebuttal is:

Say that play was made in the open field and Gaffney had gotten hit and the ball popped out at the same time his foot would have made contact out of bounds. Would you rule that a fumble?

Velocity
December 4th, 2007, 03:01 PM
I don't get where you're going with that. It's a completely different situation. If the ball came out at the same time he stepped out... it'd probably be incomplete - that'd be the way the referees would call it. Why? He never had a chance to make a football move with the ball in his hands. Thus: Incomplete.

James89
December 4th, 2007, 03:08 PM
Why are you trying to argue this Joe? He clearly had possession. There was no doubt. Besides, do you expect them to go back and change it if you convince Velo it wasnt a catch?

JoetheShow
December 4th, 2007, 03:49 PM
I've already stated that it didn't matter what the call was because they would have scored after the penalties were tacked on, so back off. I'm really just trying to get it right because really, I couldn't see because the picture is cut off although it appeared not to be a catch.

I'm just asking him questions and I don't believe either of us are actually bothered by each other. But yea, Velo, if there is a difference in when the "football move" idea can be applied, then I guess I will concede but the Pats are losing next week anyway. Plus, I have a soccer game to watch.

The Eye in the Sky!
December 4th, 2007, 05:45 PM
That was more exciting than it had to be. One three plays, I thought the game was over. The time-out, the false start on the next play, and the defensive holding play. I think those calls are legit and the Gaffney catch was a catch. I don't know all of the reading into what his hands were doing but he had possession and was in no way going to drop it.

I almost died when Clayton caught the ball. Had Mason not tackled Samuel while the ball was coming down, it would have been incomplete, but eh, I'll take it. The Ravens were dominating the line of scrimmage until they decided to slow down completely and try to run out the clock up by one score. It was downright frustrating (last week too) watching every time they threw the ball, it was complete for 15 yards. What the hell, defense? Did you forget how to play or are you just a bunch of idiots? Fix that or the Steelers will destroy us. They have a good quarterback, not these back-ups that are looking like starters.

Fix blitz techniques, they are obviously not working. You constantly blitz outside and get blocked down leaving the quarterback with a great field of vision. Send Harrison or Vrabel flying right up the middle with Wilfork and Seymour pushing the load. Adjustments or we lose next week.

And bench Maroney. He knows how to get 2 yards and fall down. At least Faulk can find holes in the line instead of trying to run through people. As asterisk said, Moss dropped two touchdowns, Watson dropped a ridiculously easy touchdown, and other guys dropped them. Its turning into 2006 all over again.

Insane man
December 4th, 2007, 06:11 PM
My friend who is a Patriots fan thought the Pats should have lost that game. I didn't think Gaffney caught the Ball but after the 2 penalties it wouldn't have mattered. If the Ravens want to blame something blame the offense which was good through 3 quarters then in the 4th they went conservative on some plays. They had 3rd and 2 with a good chance to put the Pats away and tried a stupid screen type play or something.

~Shotgunnova~
December 4th, 2007, 09:39 PM
WOW. Conspiracy theories are gonna start emerging after tonight's game. The ref singlehandedly won the game for the Pats.

• EXTREMELY bad personal foul call on Rolle, considering Moss pushed him up off his feet. What is he supposed to do? Fall flat on his back?
• Bad defensive holding call that gave the Pats 4 more downs to win it.
• Questionable call on the Gaffney touchdown. In the process of switching hands, he didn't have full control of the ball.

Either way, that was a good game that went down to the very last play. Had Clayton miraculously snaked his way through or pitched it back, the Pats would've lost, fair and square.

Not a conspiracy theory. How about a "refs just suck" theory. Seriously, the refs don't cheat, they suck. Horribly. I hate the refs, they always make bad calls. If I was a owner, I would get myself into WAY more trouble than Mark Cuban dissing the crappy refs.

Whale Biologist
December 5th, 2007, 02:57 PM
Redskins shot themselves in the foot... called two timeouts back to back, which is against the rules... :-\ Unfortunate for the 'Skins.

Lindell had already made the 51 yarder when the timeout was called, and I don't think it was likely that he would have missed. Big mistake by Gibbs, though, and I was glad to see that the Bills won after I said all week that they were going to lose because of all the Sean Taylor stuff.

Man I hate Robert Royal a lot this week. The Bills actually get in the Red Zone twice, and the first time, he drops the freakin' ball trying to juke somebody, and the second time, he gets called for holding and they have to settle for a field goal. It sucks to watch a team that can move the ball all day and then can't get into the end zone.

I thought the defense played pretty well too, but they need to stop giving up conversions on third down and ten.

smashbro14
December 6th, 2007, 10:28 PM
So uh Jason Campbell is probably done for the year. And Cooley got hurt too.

This Redskins seasons has officially been one of the biggest disasters in football history. 6 losses in the last minute, tons of huge injuries to Jansen, Randy Thomas, Springs, Randle el, Moss, Sellers, Carlos Rogers, Smoot, Marcus Washington, Daniels, and now Campbell and Cooley... and Sean Taylor...

EDIT: Now Smoot is getting carted off. I hate the Redskins.

'Dre
December 6th, 2007, 10:41 PM
So uh Jason Campbell is probably done for the year. And Cooley got hurt too.

This Redskins seasons has officially been one of the biggest disasters in football history. 6 losses in the last minute, tons of huge injuries to Jansen, Randy Thomas, Springs, Randle el, Moss, Sellers, Carlos Rogers, Smoot, Marcus Washington, Daniels, and now Campbell and Cooley... and Sean Taylor...
Washington is still > 49ers at this point :(

Harris
December 6th, 2007, 11:12 PM
Washington is still > 49ers at this point :(

And the Bears, apparently.

Sucks to see Grossman go down too. He's actually played very well since coming back against Oakland three weeks ago. He just has terrible luck with injuries.

Andre the Giant
December 7th, 2007, 01:43 AM
I do have to see that I believe this takes the Bears' hopes of making the playoffs to somewhere near zero. I don't know if they have any tiebreakers to turn to and they're sitting 1.5 back, and you know one of those teams has to get another win to put the Bears 2 back with 3 to go. This is a team that will be back with a new QB and will be very dangerous next year.

-kev

Harris
December 7th, 2007, 02:39 AM
They're all but done. I'm not sure, but I think it's nearly impossible for them to make the playoffs, with several 6-6 or 5-7 teams left.

It's really disappointing, going from a Superbowl run to last place in the NFC North. I honestly believe the defense this year would be better than last year's team, had they been able to stay healthy. But after they lost two starters in the season opener, it was all down hill. The offensive line was also a letdown, since they returned everybody once again, but weren't near as good as last season. They're an old unit, but this year they were too banged up. Otherwise both sides of the ball were just way too inconsistent, at the worse possible times. So many games were close for a half or three quarters, but eventually the Bears' found some way to fall apart.

Next year, the Bears have to go quarterback first round. It's a must. They do have a lot of extra draft picks they got from trades, so they could even make a trade for McNabb (just a name that's thrown out there) or Derek Anderson for a part-time fix. But they still can't afford not to pick up a passer in this draft that'll be stocked with quarterbacks. I think Brohm or Woodson are the best pro prospects, so if they picked one of them up to develop I'd be very pleased. They also need a second receiver. Mark Bradley and Rashied Davis have looked great at times in their careers in Chicago, but with Muhammad likely to retire after this year, they need to pick up somebody there too. Otherwise offensive line is the only other spot that needs a lot of help. Kreutz will be solid for years to come, but they'll need to develop a tackle and guard to take over. They drafted both in late rounds this past year, but I'd like to see them get more since they need depth at that position. Runningback isn't as much of a concern as it would seem. Benson's stats sucked early on because the Bears were always behind and passing, so he never really got a chance to get his carries in. Otherwise he started to heat up these past few weeks, before he got injured. Peterson is a quality backup, and I love Garrett Wolfe backing them both up. He's a great special team player and he's looking like a great change of pace back too.

They're still not far away from being contenders again. If the defense gets healthy and plays consistently, they'll be tops in the league again soon. The offense will depend on how the young guys on the line they're grooming in play next year, and if they get a quarterback that can hang onto the ball.

Sephiroth Strife
December 7th, 2007, 02:41 AM
They're all but done. I'm not sure, but I think it's nearly impossible for them to make the playoffs, with several 6-6 or 5-7 teams left.

It's really disappointing, going from a Superbowl run to last place in the NFC North. I honestly believe the defense this year would be better than last year's team, had they been able to stay healthy. But after they lost two starters in the season opener, it was all down hill. The offensive line was also a letdown, since they returned everybody once again, but weren't near as good as last season. They're an old unit, but this year they were too banged up. Otherwise both sides of the ball were just way too inconsistent, at the worse possible times. So many games were close for a half or three quarters, but eventually the Bears' found some way to fall apart.

Next year, the Bears have to go quarterback first round. It's a must. They do have a lot of extra draft picks they got from trades, so they could even make a trade for McNabb (just a name that's thrown out there) or Derek Anderson for a part-time fix. But they still can't afford not to pick up a passer in this draft that'll be stocked with quarterbacks. I think Brohm or Woodson are the best pro prospects, so if they picked one of them up to develop I'd be very pleased. They also need a second receiver. Mark Bradley and Rashied Davis have looked great at times in their careers in Chicago, but with Muhammad likely to retire after this year, they need to pick up somebody there too. Otherwise offensive line is the only other spot that needs a lot of help. Kreutz will be solid for years to come, but they'll need to develop a tackle and guard to take over. They drafted both in late rounds this past year, but I'd like to see them get more since they need depth at that position. Runningback isn't as much of a concern as it would seem. Benson's stats sucked early on because the Bears were always behind and passing, so he never really got a chance to get his carries in. Otherwise he started to heat up these past few weeks, before he got injured. Peterson is a quality backup, and I love Garrett Wolfe backing them both up. He's a great special team player and he's looking like a great change of pace back too.

They're still not far away from being contenders again. If the defense gets healthy and plays consistently, they'll be tops in the league again soon. The offense will depend on how the young guys on the line they're grooming in play next year, and if they get a quarterback that can hang onto the ball.

How many draft extra draft picks do they have and from who, i think they got the chargers 3rd rounder... not sure what else.

Zell 17
December 7th, 2007, 03:07 AM
Not a conspiracy theory. How about a "refs just suck" theory. Seriously, the refs don't cheat, they suck. Horribly. I hate the refs, they always make bad calls. If I was a owner, I would get myself into WAY more trouble than Mark Cuban dissing the crappy refs.

Except in this case, all the calls the refs made were perfectly correct.

Vice President of NFL Officiating Mike Pereira explains why the refs ruled the way they did in Pats vs Baltimore (http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d804d7fad)

Day Man
December 7th, 2007, 12:32 PM
I agree with him 100%

EDIT. I change my mind to agree 99% when he said 40 would say it's a catch, 20 wouldn't. I feel 98 people say it's a catch and 2 don't. :link: