Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

oldunclemark

Jacksonville (+7.5) at New England (1-21-18)

Recommended Posts

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That ball wasn't even catchable, ok REFS here we go.

It wasn’t even that it’s the fact that the wr was out of bounds...he isn’t even eligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BOTT said:

Just throw it it up....get penalty

I know, that thing wasn't even catchable, what a joke lmao 14-10 now. I have a feeling the 2nd Half Jacks will collapse!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL to 48 yards out of that 80 yard drive coming from penalties, here we go again with the refs at Gillette, that ball was uncatchable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dgambill said:

That’s a horrible two calls. Horrible.

The hit on Gronk?  That was obvious helmet to helmet 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

 Disaster series for Jax but they still lead at the half

That the most important and they get the ball to start the second half. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Its unnecessary roughness to hit the person receiving a pass?

Right he didn't lead with his helmet or anything gronk dove and his head hit his shoulder such a b.s. call

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a pretty clean game as far as the refs but the reaction by the announcers still sells the ref bias. Every time the Pats throw an incomplete pass they go "noooooooo flag!" Not no flag, which isn't something they say after every incomplete pass in other games, but noooooo flag. Then when they got the flag just now was all YES FLAG! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Good penalty if he doesn’t come back.

Why the NFL doesn't have the college rule of ejection for a game makes no sense .  You could theoretically do this every week to the opposition's best player with little recourse.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"well they have got Tom Brady, I think we know how special he is, that's why they score at the end of every half."

 

Tony Romo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dgambill said:

It wasn’t even that it’s the fact that the wr was out of bounds...he isn’t even eligible.

 

Exactly. These refs are helping the Pats win. Not a surprise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Its unnecessary roughness to hit the person receiving a pass?

I normally am all for protecting a wr but the defender didn’t lead with his head and even turned his body. Gronk was falling so that is why they hit heads. Gronk is 6’7....church is like 6 inches below. That is just unlucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

The hit on Gronk?  That was obvious helmet to helmet 

I might need to look at it again but I don't think he led with his helmet. Gronk put his head down it looked like to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RockThatBlue said:

I might need to look at it again but I don't think he led with his helmet. Gronk put his head down it looked like to me.

Defiantly didn't lead with his helmet even turned his body 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RockThatBlue said:

I might need to look at it again but I don't think he led with his helmet. Gronk put his head down it looked like to me.

Correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

LOL to 48 yards out of that 80 yard drive coming from penalties, here we go again with the refs at Gillette, that ball was uncatchable

 

Yep, that is just ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RockThatBlue said:

I might need to look at it again but I don't think he led with his helmet. Gronk put his head down it looked like to me.

Defenseless receiver....doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BOTT said:

The hit on Gronk?  That was obvious helmet to helmet 

He turned his body to avoid targeting him. Gronk just stumbled down to him. There was nothing he could do to avoid it he even pulled up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • As I said, it's never about "can you fit under the cap?", or "do you spend all your cap space?" Because you can fit under the cap certainly. Actually, you have to, that's the rule. And most teams do spend their cap space. That's the point. Use it all if possible. The Patriots use it all usually, the Steelers use it all usually, etc. Most teams do. Actually, the Colts do use almost all of their 2019 cap space too. (The 2019 total sum of contracts is a bit over 184 million, just a few mills under the cap. That "40ish cap space" is already nothing else but the rollovers from previous years.)   But, even with spending all the cap space, there is good cap management, and there is bad cap management. The Patriots spend all of their cap space, and they manage it very effectively. The Colts (now) spend all of their (excluding rollover), and I belive Ballard manages the cap very effectively. But the Jags didn't. They went over the line, and sacrifized their future effectiveness by getting into bidding wars and signing pricey free agents one after another. The problem wasn't Norwell. If it was only him, that would be ok. The problem was, that they also signed Moncrief for 10M, Jenkins for 6M, Church for 7M, traded for Hyde and payed him 4M and he barely saw the field, etc, etc. The list is very long.      I never said that having elite talents heading into their second contract is a burden. You are right, that is a blessing. Actually, that is the best that can happen to a team. That's what Ballard want's to do! The problem is, that the Jaguars got into a situation, when there is a very good chance that they cannot sign their own guys. And their roster got thin, because they could not refill it this offseason enough. They got worse. And they will become even worse in 2020, because they won't be able to retain their talent level. Yes, they can cut Campbell, they can cut Bouye, and they can trade Ngakogue, and fit under the cap. And then? Who will play at CB, who will play at DE? A mediocre somebody. So, instead of improving their team, they actually made it worse. That's the bad management. Cap wise and talent wise as well. (However, I do agree, that they kinda draft OK recently - one year exceptionally well, but still OK since then, so their talent infusion is somewhat OK. What they screwed up big time is cap management.)   Btw, this is an old story repeating itself. Coughlin has been with the Jags before. And he drove them into cap hell before. It was bad, it cost them years to recover. He's just doing it all over again. He is (was) a very good coach, but terrible at managing the cap.
    • https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/colts-say-no-trade-offers-sticking-jacoby-brissett-backup?fbclid=IwAR0IGDgC2r_pBbt7tUzbQjxiBv0zfXiUyxQtxziGhcsvuaRHI3Or6xVIT74   I like Reich's quotes here:  “It’s impossible for me to have a higher opinion of Jacoby than I do,” Reich says. “I said it last year, I think he’s a top 20 quarterback. I still say that. After watching him for a year, this guy’s really good.   “I tell Chris all the time, ‘Please don’t let him go. I don’t care what anybody offers him. Don’t let him go.’ I love Jacoby. The problem is now I’ve gotten to know Jacoby and, at some point, I hope that it works out for Jacoby. But not now.”
    • How is the number of UDFAs significant to anything?     For the record, the Colts actually signed 11 UDFAs...JAC signed 21.    BTW, here are some of the "better teams" and the number of UDFAs this year:   HOU - 20 KC - 23 CHI - 22 NO -17 LAR - 19 LAC - 19   I see no clear correlation between "better teams", thin rosters and UDFAs. There is more of a correlation between the number of draft picks and UDFAs, if anything. Those teams typically had less draft picks...and therefore...more roster spots to give to UDFAs. And UDFAs understand this as well...and see a better path to making a roster if a draft pick is not in their way.   In 2018, the Colts...in the first year of a new offensive and defensive scheme...coming off a 4-win season...signed only 10 UDFAs...because they had 11 draft picks...which makes sense. But that roster was by no means deep.  
  • Members

    • Shepman

      Shepman 220

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • That Guy

      That Guy 806

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 2,807

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 261

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Boiler_Colt

      Boiler_Colt 3,716

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • csmopar

      csmopar 7,226

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsGermany

      ColtsGermany 139

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CurBeatElite

      CurBeatElite 214

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jmac_48

      jmac_48 400

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsLegacy

      ColtsLegacy 3,881

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...