Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

supremecoltsfan300

Senior Member
  • Posts

    1,362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by supremecoltsfan300

  1. I think I can. I'm genuinely interested in watching Thursday game. When was the last time you heard anyone even willing to watch a Cardinals/Rams game.

    The only reason I watch NFC East divisional games is when I'm in need of a good laugh. That used to be the NFC West's job.

    The rams are garbage though. And the cardinals are a nice story, but they won't do anything in the playoffs if they even get there.

    The nfc east has 4 of the top 16 qbs in the nfl, the nfc west has none in the top 16. The 49ers are a great team, but all the others will fade come playoff time.

  2. true but Brees going for breaking Johnny U's 50 something year record easily trumps the brady manning duo . . . I think SNF wanted that game starting last year once people started to do the numbers to figure out which game in 2012 he would be able to break the record . . .

    I don't really think Brees going for the record trumps the manning/brady match-up. In my opinion, most of the country would be more interested in seeing 2 hof qbs go at it, rather than whether brees can throw a td.

    They probably didnt imagine the saints being 0-4 though. The saints current record makes brees throwing tds quite meaningless since it isn't resulting in wins.

    Of course I'm biased though :)

    Plus, part of me doesnt like seeing unitas' record get broken in that manner (brees throwing it seemingly 60 times every game).

  3. Joe is a solid QB. He is the victim of way too much unfounded hate.

    I wouldn't say he's hated. He's just an average qb, who the media likes to hype up as something more.

    And by average, I mean he falls in that qb ranking of #17-15.

  4. Ok. First of all, this a Football forum about a football game. Not a hospital. I'm glad no one died. I really am. But if every fan out there is gonna feel good about their team being screwed out of a win because no one died or ended up in the hospital, then what will the game come to? We're talking about football here.

    Have you seen some of the reaction on here by posters and even in the media??? People are quickly losing perspective and acting like something criminal took place. When in reality, one it may have been the right call depending on the interpretation of the rule. Two, the regular refs could have screwed that up too. three, bad calls throughout for both teams. It balances out. Four, don't put yourself in a position to lose the game (meaning score more points and hold onto the ball after you intercept it)

  5. so what you're saying is, even though the Packers got screwed, it doesn't matter. They flew 6000 miles and should've won a hard fought game.. Stupid call at the end. A game shouldn't be decided on pathetic ref-ing.

    Yes I'm saying that it doesn't matter. No one died. No one ended up in the hospital. It's a game. Yes the players get way overpaid for playing what is just a game, but it still is just a game.

    And for the record, the game was more than just one play at the very end. Pack blew a ton of chances to win it earlier. and there were many "bad" calls for both sides throughout the game, including one imporant one that let the packers sustain the drive for the lead.

  6. Honestly, people are taking everything too seriously. Football is a game. Football is meant as entertainment, and that is exactly what we're getting. Entertainment in ways we didn't quite expect? Sure, but it's still entertainment. Just try to remember that at the end of the day, what happened on the field doesn't actually matter. It's what happens off the field that's important

  7. people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

    This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

    so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

    the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

    so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

    I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

    I'm probably one of the few, but I agree. I thought it was a bad call at first, but after looking at it over and over again, they got it right

×
×
  • Create New...