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

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   By the way,  I didn't want this post to end without addressing one of your main points.   Your paragraph that starts with this:   My Point:  There are always good candidates...   same is true for head coaches and coordinators.    I'm sorry,  but I'm going to STRONGLY disagree with that argument.  And I think you'll retract that.    Every so often you'll see an article about how did the class of GM's from a previous year turn out?   Or head coach hires?    I used to tell posters here who hated Pagano that the class of head coaches that included Chuck,  that all of the other coaches got fired before Chuck.    That Chuck was the best of his class.   And that happens with GM's too.   A class gets hired,  and quite often most of them, sometimes all of them don't work out.   I believe my position has far more facts to back that up.    There isn't always a Sean McVey.  There isn't always a Kyle Shannahan.   There isn't always a Josh McDaniels.   There aren't 32 good GM's, or 32 good head coaches,  or 32 good offensive or defensive coordinators.   That's why so many teams struggle for years to get those spots right.   So, no, I absolutely reject the idea that there are always good candidates.    Sorry.   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishing.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.  
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Franklin County

      Franklin County 452

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 7,668

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 9,354

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DaveA1102

      DaveA1102 1,864

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