iamshack

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 27, 2012 -> 05:50 PM) I'll be moving to Austin next summer. Thanks for the help/advice guys. Hey Hey! Congrats! Great place to go!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 27, 2012 -> 02:17 PM) the playing field is already a giant ruler Hah, this is the best thing I have read in days...thanks for the laugh!

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 27, 2012 -> 11:28 AM) They wouldn't, but if throwing the flag makes the play unreviewable, then that's what they should do. I thought you have to have a legitimate issue to challenge though...they pick up challenge flags all the time because the rules do not permit a coach to challenge something he threw the flag on.

What would the team scoring the td be challenging, anyway?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 27, 2012 -> 02:05 AM) Before I forget, and something that is generally pretty subjective (as opposed to Bryant's pinkie clearly being out of bounds), I just want to say that the final play of the Colts-Bills game (besides Luck kneeling) was a total and bulls*** ticky-tack PI call given the circumstances. http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/v...d8-b9c977fda043 The play starts at 2:58. There is clearly contact made by the cornerback, but as I see it, he simply had his arm on the left side of Reggie Wayne's body and his placement does not effect the ability for Wayne to make the catch whatsoever (unlike Randy Moss's obvious non-call in the Saints-49ers game, which, as I recall, led to a score, if not a touchdown). I'm obviously biased, and can see how it would be called, but you would think that, given the circumstances of the game, they would let the guys play a little bit towards the end of the game. The Colts made a risky move, Wayne didn't run a great route (and actually pushes off of Gilmore on the intial move in the route), and Luck didn't make a great pass...yet the PI call is made based upon Gilmore putting his hand on Wayne's side, knocking down the pass (which, it can be argued he used the hand contact as leverage, which I wouldn't deny either), and then the two falling at the end of the play. I just think that one is so close that you let it go, which is why I was as frustrated as I was with the call. In all likelihood, the Bills don't drive down the field and score, but I think, given the circumstances, that call was unnecessary. PI calls are basically impossible to objectively discuss these days...they've swung the pendulum too far in the other direction now, which I am not sure they dislike, considering fans seem to appreciate more passing and more scoring, but it has become damn hard to be a DB or linebacker in this league these days.

Does it annoy anyone else how these defensive players will let a team drive all the way down the field or already give up 35 points and then they make 1 stinking play and act as though they are freaking amazing? Some of these pro athletes are just such huge jag offs.

Turner also was the OC for a few of the Cowboys' SB titles...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 09:31 PM) I don't know I'd ever have described that SD team under him as great. The offense maybe, but now their line is terrible and they've lost all their playmakers. Well offense is clearly his thing... The 2007 and 2009 teams were pretty great.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 09:18 PM) Norv Turner appears to suck the life out of everything. IDK man... He is a brilliant offensive mind, IMO. He's just not NFL head coaching material. Did an incredible job with the SF offense before taking the SD job.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 09:11 PM) The Eagles are so f***ing bad. Remember when they signed 3 of the best defensive FAs two years ago? Asomugha sucks. Where the hell is Cullen Jenkins? Only Jason Babin gets noted here or there when you watch their games. You can't buy yourself a championship in football. I have no clue what the hell happened to Asomugha...

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 09:09 PM) This has to be the end of Norv Turner and Andy Reid right? If Bengals miss playoffs maybe Marvin Lewis too? A lot of people already speculating Reid will be the next coach in SD. Apparently he just had a home built there. The Bengals are playing very well recently. Would love to bring Turner in as OC once he gets axed.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 07:26 PM) Yep. You nailed it, Doctor. And I didn't even have to pay for this session, what a deal! Move on. That's merely an accurate recitation of the facts as they occurred instead of the version of events you would have us believe.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 07:01 PM) Who sent me a warning about this? I have no private messages. Anyway, I've learned my lesson. Don't disagree with Bears fans over a close play, or suffer the wrath of being labeled "unanimously" as a troll, because no one in their right mind would have a differing opinion, so it must be trolling. Loud and clear. I'll stick to just talking about my Cowboys and Rams, if that's not considered trolling, of course. Joe, this is simply not what happened. You complained or "thought out loud" about a play that happened in the Cowboys game a few weeks ago. Several people mocked you, my guess is partially because you are a Cowboys' fan, partially because the play involved Dez Bryant, and partially because posts of yours in the past have rubbed folks the wrong way. This made you angry. Yesterday, a close play occurred in the end zone involving the Bears' Matt Spaeth. You found this play to be somehow analogous to the Bryant play, and felt like you could get a point across to those who mocked you the previous week. You made a snarky reference to the play in question, before any Bears fan or any poster whatsoever had commented on it. There was no one to disagree with yet. Who were you disagreeing with? The referees who called it a touchdown? Some Bears fans saw your attempt to compare the Bryant play and the Spaeth play and further mocked you. This made you more angry. Last night and this morning some Bears fans were having a discussion on the worth of Cutler and some measures of value articulated by well-known ESPN analysts. You enter the discussion not with any kind of observation or substantive point, but instead with another snarky rhetorical question designed to inflame the participants of the discussion. I accused you of trolling. This made you even more angry, and you began arguing with myself and Kyyle, among others.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 04:44 PM) One thing I'm not seeing in your lists is "Growth/long term prospects" in terms of your specific job? Otherwise, you make a pretty convincing case for Austin, if the money is generally the same between the two. But if you could say, move upwards quickly in the smaller company or have a shot at stock options/something like that, then you could balance the cost of living more quickly. Oh, unless you're an actual musician, you'll do fine with the Chicago Music Scene. And don't discount Austin being genuinely too bleeping hot for a portion of the year. Yeah, I like the Chicago job unless you are confident you can really move up quickly in the larger Austin company.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 04:41 PM) Ouch. The Chiefs aren't that far away, honestly. They just need a QB and a new coaching staff.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 03:40 PM) It would take a total failure of their offense and many more plays run by the opposition. It COULD happen, but unlikely unless the matchup is just bad for ND. If something flukey was to happen and they got down big fast, they could lose by a lot...but so could Alabama...

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 03:09 PM) The rule was clarified recently to eliminate what you are noting. The gray area was what you are saying happens toe inbound heel then comes down out of bound) how is this compared to dragging a toe in bound? That was the issue and the entire foot or hand when coming to the ground need to be inbound. The hands basically don't help you establish possession in bounds, they can only establish that you're out of bounds.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 04:07 PM) lol@this thread. what the hell happened? This has become worse than last year's nba thread. joe/obama vs bears fans. It's what happens when you troll...people get tired of it and pick on you.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 02:51 PM) that's a different rule than completions, otherwise foot-dragging wouldn't count. Yeah, he's citing the down-by-contact rule.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 02:50 PM) For those interested, these are potential lines from Vegas ND vs Bame (-8.5) Georgia (-4) Florida (-1.5) LSU (Pick) A&M (-3.5) So. Carolina (+1) They list Bovada beneath and he has Bama (-9.5) I am truly reaching degenerate status...

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) Then that's all that had to be said. Not some bulls*** about trolling. I did not know it was interpreted that your ENTIRE appendage must come down in bounds, regardless of whether parts of it landed at different times. I have seen a play in which a receiver caught a ball on the tips of his toes, and then his heel landed on the line out of bounds when he completely came to rest and it was ruled a catch because he toes were in bounds first. It must have been the wrong call and I was referencing that call when thinking about the Bryant catch because it was a similar instance in which part of his hand was down before all of it. If what you say is how it's interpreted, then fine, that makes sense considering w/ Spaeth it occurred on different parts of his body, meaning the same rule doesn't apply. Iamshack said that needed to be said. Now it's done. They will give you part of your foot or hand if that is the only part that touches the ground (at that moment). But you see receivers in the back of the end zone or against the sideline oftentimes get their heel in bounds first but then the front of their foot comes down out of bounds as they complete their step and that does not count as having a foot in bounds.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 03:36 PM) I'M NOT f***ING TROLLING. Jesus, that is the thing. I get threatened to stop trolling when I am not even trolling, but then can't argue that I am not trolling? Again, disagreeing with a call that went for the Bears is NOT TROLLING. You are an Admin and you can't even decipher between a disagreeing opinion and trolling? You came into the thread and referred to a call without even mentioning the name of the player or the team. It is clear you knew who your target was and what your intention was. The play was not being discussed yet by Bears fans, and yet you commented on it in the way that you did (which implies that you did it almost immediately after it happened) merely for the sake of starting some sort of argument about it. You certainly did not say "Ok fellas, how is that different then the Bryant play?" Or "Guys, don't you think that is the same sort of thing that happened with Bryant?" No, you clearly went after some folks you were angry at because they razzed you about your silly comments from the Cowboys game.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 03:25 PM) Both had instances where the player came down in bounds, a split second before landing out of bounds. Spaeth had his foot come down a couple milliseconds before his knee did. Bryant had the side of his hand come down a millisecond before his pinky finger did. Both were very similar plays. I saw it one, you guys saw it the other way. If I called people out for trolling everytime they said Notre Dame shouldn't be in the National Championship game, or they don't deserve it, or whatever, I could rack up a list too. It's clear that you an whoever else that are accusing me of disagreeing, I mean trolling, do no spend time on any other forums because then you would see what actual trolling is. Disagreeing with Bears fans is NOT trolling, sorry. The way the current rules are interpreted is that if any part of your hand or foot hits down on the ground immediately after you make the catch, your entire hand or foot (that hits the ground) needs to be in bounds. This is not up for debate. Every week you see a player get part of his second foot in bounds but the rest of it comes down out of bounds and that does not count as the second foot being in bounds. Basically, the entire appendage that touches the ground must be in bounds. This is not at all a controversial rule or interpretation of the rule. Not sure why you seem to be so upset about it.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 03:23 PM) The Spaeth TD was clearly a touchdown. His foot was clearly in bounds before his knee was out. You can't say that about the Bryant play. I know what you're getting at. That being in bounds by so little or being out of bounds by so little and having two different results is somewhat unfair. But those are the rules and if we're gonna bend the rules for things that are borderline, then why the hell do we even have rules? And I tried to sympathize with this when the Bryant catch occurred. However, the Spaeth play was not similar in any way to the Bryant catch. The only reason he made the comment when he did was to try and get back at people for mocking his silly Cowboys' commentary.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 02:13 PM) The Apple stuff I post could easily be considered trolling, I don't deny that. But saying the Spaeth TD should not have been ruled one based off a similar call earlier in the year is NOT trolling. This is the NFL thread, not the Bears thread. Just because it's dominated by mostly Bears fans doesn't mean I have to see things in favor of the Bears. I'm not even a Packers and Lions or Vikings fan, I have no reason to try and disagree with Bears fans either. NOT trolling. The Spaeth play was a matter of whether his second foot came down in the end zone prior to his knee being down out of bounds...there was one angle which very clearly showed his second foot came down in the end zone before the knee hit down out of bounds. The question was not whether the touchdown should count regardless of whether the second foot came down first, as you seemed to imply in the Dez Bryant catch, where it was entirely clear and obvious that his right hand came down out of bounds first. The two catches were not at all similar except for the fact that they both occurred in or around the end zone. I don't have a clue why you would bring up the Dez Bryant situation as a result of seeing the Spaeth play, if not just for the sake of trolling, which about six other people seem to think you were. One was a clear touchdown, one was clearly not a touchdown, both were ruled upon conclusively by the referees without controversy.