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

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

55 seconds, 2 timeouts and a knee!

I don't want to ask Blake to make plays downfield

Share this post


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

14-10......Jax....a lot better than I thought they'd be

Yeah I agree but watch what happens now. Lets see how the 3rd Qtr goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

55 secons, 2 timeouts and a knee!

They aren't peyton. Although, we did it in the superbowl against the saints.

Share this post


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

Defenseless receiver....doesn't matter.

Every receiver is defenseless when making a catch doesn’t mean you can’t hit them.

Share this post


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

Its unnecessary roughness to hit the person receiving a pass?

 

Yes, if it is in the head/neck area. A receiver must become a runner before that is allowed. Defenseless Receiver rule... the second call was suspect on the P.I. but it was illegal contact at the minimum as defender made contact well pas the 5 yard line beyond the line of scrimmage.  So it wa sat least a 5 yard penalty and auto 1st down, but they gave them the P.I. instead.

Share this post


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

Every receiver is defenseless when making a catch doesn’t mean you can’t hit them.

You just can't hit them in the head...accident or not.

Share this post


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

Defenseless receiver....doesn't matter.

Shouldn't be considered defenseless. Just a dumb rule by the NFL, IMO. If going to catch a pass makes one defenseless every tackle should be a flag.

Share this post


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

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.

 

2 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Every receiver is defenseless when making a catch doesn’t mean you can’t hit them.

 

Cant hit a receiver in the head / neck area until he is clearly established as a 'runner'

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/defenseless-player/

Share this post


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

Shouldn't be considered defensess. Just a dumb rule by the NFL, IMO. If going to catch a pass makes one defenseless every tackle should be a flag.

Blame it on the NFL getting sued by former players. 

Share this post


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

Shouldn't be considered defenseless. Just a dumb rule by the NFL, IMO. If going to catch a pass makes one defenseless every tackle should be a flag.

If he leads with the other shoulder he probably doesn't get the penalty.  Easy for me to say from my recliner though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, superrep1967 said:

Blame it on the NFL getting sued by former players. 

That's exactly right...The NFL had to do something to limit obvious head shots whether they're intentional or not (and that one was kinda intentional)

Share this post


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

Shouldn't be considered defenseless. Just a dumb rule by the NFL, IMO. If going to catch a pass makes one defenseless every tackle should be a flag.

 

you can hit the receiver, you just can't touch his helmet in any fashion while in a defenseless position, even by 'accident' or it is a penalty.  It is the rule.

Share this post


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

You just can't hit them in the head...accident or not.

I agree but when the receiver falls like that into you and your turning and not leading with the head...that to me is not the spirit of the rule. It only got called because he didn’t get up...but there was no targeting nothing...it’s not the defenders fault Gronks head dropped when he stumbled and the sides hit each other. I can live with that call to protect guys but then to follow it up with PI when the receiver ran his route out of bounds because the defender pinched him that’s just perfect defense...horrible.

Share this post


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

If he leads with the other shoulder he probably doesn't get the penalty.  Easy for me to say from my recliner though.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chrisaaron1023 said:

Gronk will definitely be back lol

That issue is being 'decided' as we speak and I think you know how it will be decided

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bluebombers87 said:

And if that players moves his head/neck into the path of said defender?

 

Still a penalty.  Just bad fortune for the defender, but now a part of the game. It won't be change back, either

Share this post


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

 

Still a penalty.  Just bad fortune for the defender, but now a part of the game. It won't be change back, either

So the point is to deter those hrs. How does one not do something they can’t control?

Share this post


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

That issue is being 'decided' as we speak and I think you know how it will be decided

I'm all about safety first.  If he's showing signs of concussion he should sit.   And I'm not just saying that because I want the Jags to win.    I'm not heartless...   His well being should come first.

Share this post


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

 

you can hit the receiver, you just can't touch his helmet in any fashion while in a defenseless position, even by 'accident' or it is a penalty.  It is the rule.

That’s the rule...that isn’t the spirit of the rule. It’s meant to protect receivers from being targeted and defenders from leading with crown and having head to head collisions. Not a wr who trips and falls into a defender who clearly pulled up and even turned his back to the play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be 17-3 or even 21-3. 3 huge penalties has kept the Pats in this = the delay of game, hit on Gronk, and that Interference on a ball that wasn't catchable.

Share this post


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

I cant get into Justin Timberlake in the Super Bowl

Makes my wife happy lol...that’s about all that matters to NFL is the casual viewer not the hardcore sport fans.

Share this post


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

Makes my wife happy lol...that’s about all that matters to NFL is the casual viewer not the hardcore sport fans.

That's 100 percent totally true

 

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

    • Yep. Up until that neck injury I don’t think manning missed a snap his entire career here.
    • Andrew has had 3 maybe 4 injuries since the beginning of his career, manning only missed one season here. So no worries the bad luck was all Bob's. 
    • that guy is too short, has no wheels, and has to take a time out after every 6 attempts. will never make it.. nice jugs though
    • The facts.. a hung jury (twice) mistrial with most voters having sided for the alleged accuser/victim... both times.     She (prosecution) didn't drop the charges, the school (judge/jury) did.  She wanted round 3.  She wanted a full yes or no vote (4-1 or 5-0) either way, not we're split 3-2 so we'll just call it against the majority vote and designate as "Not Responsible" because it isn't 4 or more votes either way. - 'Case closed'.     There were questions (and other items) from the accuser that were never allowed in or asked in follow up questioning.  I think one of the changes to the Stanford Title IX hearing rules is to also allow an attorney to be not only in attendance but to also perform all duties of representation.  And an outside group determines what is admissible as questions/evidence, follow questions, etc...     At some level, it did, and many things at Stanford were changed after. At the  minimum, it was a mistrial x2, with no conclusive verdict either way. Then school (not prosecution) drops the case.   So she really needed to report this to both the school, and also the Police.  But with what evidence does she have to convince the LEO?  Guess the gals need some hidden body cam w/audio these days, like many folks do with dash cams (like me and my wife's cars...) and be their own TMZ...   Video, apparently the only way things get rectified anymore...     No worries, at least we know each others positions.  All is good.     Except to have (at some level) differing story from a another high achieving Stanford student about another high achieving Stanford student-   https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/california/stanford-university/admission/     We don't even know for certain they ever got the FULL story, but articles I've read suggest that the Stanford Panel repressed/disallowed many/most of her interrogating questions and supplemental follow up inquiries to be asked of the accused.  Unless someone directly asks her directly, how could you answer as to whether her whole story was even heard or not?   If you are not truly interested to fully know those answers, then you don't ask.  At least, that's my perspective.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...