Kyyle23 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Well, twitter just erupted with "cutler is playing on Dec 1 against the Vikings" and "nuh uh no he is not" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 05:23 PM) His explanation doesn't make any sense. The whole 13% is out the window at that point, it makes no difference where the drive started. If he actually thinks it makes a difference and we're reading it correctly, he's pretty stupid. You're wanting to save time there no matter how they score. You really need it if they scored a td because there aren't any outs like there are if they got a fg. My take was that you needed to really protect yourself against the td there. Well, if he's right that they'd only have 18 seconds (versus 10 or 7 or whatever) while giving the ravens the ability to change their packages and call a wider variety of plays, it makes sense. I just don't know if he's right about the time that'd be left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 06:04 PM) Well, if he's right that they'd only have 18 seconds (versus 10 or 7 or whatever) while giving the ravens the ability to change their packages and call a wider variety of plays, it makes sense. I just don't know if he's right about the time that'd be left. He is, IF they run on 3rd down and the first and second downs were either running plays or completed passes where the player was tackled in bounds. However, if they did get to 3rd down, and they did run, and they've either scored the td and it's pretty much a moot point, or they haven't scored and you've really lost almost nothing. I can buy his argument if the other team has no timeouts, but they had two, and they used two, which allowed them to use whatever packages they wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:04 PM) Well, if he's right that they'd only have 18 seconds (versus 10 or 7 or whatever) while giving the ravens the ability to change their packages and call a wider variety of plays, it makes sense. I just don't know if he's right about the time that'd be left. He would only be right about the time if the Ravens didn't score a touchdown nor throw an incomplete pass nor go out of bounds. Then you would use the 3 timeouts and the Ravens could run down the play clock all 40 seconds before fourth down. However, if they did get to 4th down, they probably kick a field goal and you can go to overtime anyway. I liked his explanation about forcing the Ravens' hand in regards to personnel and play-calling, but had they scored a touchdown, those 30 seconds that ticked off would have been vital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 06:21 PM) He would only be right about the time if the Ravens didn't score a touchdown nor throw an incomplete pass nor go out of bounds. Then you would use the 3 timeouts and the Ravens could run down the play clock all 40 seconds before fourth down. However, if they did get to 4th down, they probably kick a field goal and you can go to overtime anyway. I liked his explanation about forcing the Ravens' hand in regards to personnel and play-calling, but had they scored a touchdown, those 30 seconds that ticked off would have been vital. Plus, the Ravens had the two timeouts to get personnel in on two plays. After he didn't call it at 1:12, there wasn't much point in taking one, but I think he absolutely should have called it then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:04 PM) Well, if he's right that they'd only have 18 seconds (versus 10 or 7 or whatever) while giving the ravens the ability to change their packages and call a wider variety of plays, it makes sense. I just don't know if he's right about the time that'd be left. The guys above me covered it, but his blanket statement of there being 18 seconds left is just a wrong assumption, and very likely not to happen. It's not a tie game either, so Ravens are trying to score a TD on any given play, not run the clock out on their end. QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:21 PM) He would only be right about the time if the Ravens didn't score a touchdown nor throw an incomplete pass nor go out of bounds. Then you would use the 3 timeouts and the Ravens could run down the play clock all 40 seconds before fourth down. However, if they did get to 4th down, they probably kick a field goal and you can go to overtime anyway. I liked his explanation about forcing the Ravens' hand in regards to personnel and play-calling, but had they scored a touchdown, those 30 seconds that ticked off would have been vital. It's an OK explanation, but let's face it, with 2 timeouts left and a minute or so left when they got the first down at the 5, if they really wanted to have certain personnel in the game, they could easily do so either on the first down, after an incompletion, using their own timeout, etc. His talk about 18 seconds and personnel really doesn't add up unless the Ravens had no timeouts there. Edited November 19, 2013 by IlliniKrush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 I like nothing about the Panthers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 That's horses***...that's interference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 12:37 AM) That's horses***...that's interference I dont know what Gerry Austin was smoking during his explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (zenryan @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:40 PM) I dont know what Gerry Austin was smoking during his explanation. He's almost always wrong... I just don't like the refs trying to decide in real time what is catchable and what is not...it should be a penalty irregardless. They don't waive off holding penalties that have no impact on positive plays; why should they do it with pass interference? Edited November 19, 2013 by iamshack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 If he doesn't get pushed back it's very catchable, that's definitely interference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Who is the Espn Ref, Jerry Markbreit? His explanation is just terrible, Gruden looks like he wants to argue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:49 PM) If he doesn't get pushed back it's very catchable, that's definitely interference. I mean it probably gets picked anyways, but who knows for sure? Maybe he whacks the defender as he tries to catch it and it goes flying into the air or something? It's just silly to allow the refs to make a judgment call when an infraction occurs. They need to change that rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 10:53 PM) I mean it probably gets picked anyways, but who knows for sure? Maybe he whacks the defender as he tries to catch it and it goes flying into the air or something? It's just silly to allow the refs to make a judgment call when an infraction occurs. They need to change that rule. Ya I don't think he would have caught it but it was definitely "catchable." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 It was the right call as the ball was under thrown. The defender contacted Gronk but did not impede his path to the ball. It was essentially uncatchable which is why they came together and waved it off. It was a bad pass and brady was fishing for a call. Also the 13% trestman was talking about stands throughout the whole series. In the end the odds are they will not score there. The bend but don't break philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 @MikePereira: You could make a case that the pass might have been uncatachable, but the flag was thrown and you should stay with it. My thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 11:08 PM) It was the right call as the ball was under thrown. The defender contacted Gronk but did not impede his path to the ball. It was essentially uncatchable which is why they came together and waved it off. It was a bad pass and brady was fishing for a call. Also the 13% trestman was talking about stands throughout the whole series. In the end the odds are they will not score there. The bend but don't break philosophy. Um he absolutely impeded his path to the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) . Edited November 19, 2013 by zenryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 11:08 PM) It was the right call as the ball was under thrown. The defender contacted Gronk but did not impede his path to the ball. It was essentially uncatchable which is why they came together and waved it off. It was a bad pass and brady was fishing for a call. Also the 13% trestman was talking about stands throughout the whole series. In the end the odds are they will not score there. The bend but don't break philosophy. That 13% definitely doesn't stand throughout the drive. If you've got first and goal from the one yard line, your chances of sliding aren't going to be determined by where you started the drive at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 There is no way Gronk stops his momentum, turns back and reaches the ball, defender or no defender. (Disclaimer: Panthers W won me my confidence pool) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Is there a qb you'd guys take over Peyton? This year? No. I don't see him having more than 2-3 good years left in him though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 If you put Peyton on the Bears and McCown/Cutler on the Broncos, which team is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 If you put Peyton on the Bears and McCown/Cutler on the Broncos, which team is better? Broncos. Bears defense still sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 07:28 AM) If you put Peyton on the Bears and McCown/Cutler on the Broncos, which team is better? Bears. Both defenses suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Even so, it is incredibly illegal to hold downfield. If it's not pass interference, it's holding . That should have been called. Also, my opinion of Aqib Talib did not change. One of the dirtiest, s***tiest players in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts