NFL Talk

Originally posted by forumcrew

Then we have the legendary running over the holder. First of all WTF? That is a rule? Again I can see if the guy comes in and spears the holder or lowers his shoulder/helmet into him and flattens him, then fine flag him for unsportsmanlike conduct or running over the kicker or whatever. But once again the guy coming in at full speed tried to pull up as best as is humanly possible put his hands out and barely contacted him. A 5 year old would not have been hurt by that "hit". Maybe they called it correct according to the rule, if thats the case change the god damn rule (same as the ones protecting punters) But again another 1st down and half the distance.

I see many people singling out that penalty but that penalty is going to be called everytime. The kick was made long before that collision. He could have made the hit less blatant and i think had he done so, it wouldn't have been called but he didn't even attempt to stop. Now, i agree, i think Refs need to start taking into consideration a players momentum. You see dozens of penalties called through out a season, whether it's pass interference, unnecessary roughness or roughing the passer that came out of not being able to stop. And, it isn't as though the players made a mistake in their targeted tackle but rather, the play usually goes another way, i.e missed reception, a pass being thrown a split second before collision etc. The roughing the holder and kicker penalty is definitely a necessary penalty though. Those guys are relatively fragile and without those penalties they would be extremely vulnerable to injury.

Originally posted by botankus
While they were at it they could review Warner taking his helmet off on the field of play throughout the game. Or Fitzgerald going out of bounds when chasing down Harrison on that INT. I could be wrong on both, but I thought that was the case.

I've just got one little soapbox thing to say about complaining about officiating, and I think it's a product of the way our society has evolved. I'm 33, and when I was growing up (no I didn't walk 5 miles to school in bare feet), when there were penalties, spectators and fans usually got on the player, not the official. It was more like "Ah, that bum" or "son of a ***** holds every play." Now it's automatically the result of mentally **tarded officials, it seems.

Kind of reminds me of prissy parents nowadays. When the principal calls and says Little Johnny sprayed graffiti in the bathroom, the parents are quick to say that their precious little child would never do anything like that and the principal and teachers are liars and here comes the lawsuit. Ditto for youth soccer.

p.s. I know it's different, but my point is the "It's not my fault, it's your fault" mindset of people and how it's evolved. And I'm guilty on occasions too (like the beginning of this post).

I understand where your coming from and you can't go through the whole game with a fine tooth comb picking out bad calls and I didn't say that the Steelers won, or the Arizona lost on bad calls and you shouldn't expect that I mean Steelers don't deserve the SB.

But I find completely strange that on the second last play of the game, a fumble, which in my opinion should of been looked at, was not reviewed. Would it make much of a difference? Probably not because it probably wouldn't be overturned anyways, or resulted in a hail mary TD pass but that's not the point. The rules are there and it was a questionable call and it should of been reviewed.

I'm also surprised no sports writer or the announcers noticed that it wasn't reviewed and made a stink about it.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I understand where your coming from and you can't go through the whole game with a fine tooth comb picking out bad calls and I didn't say that the Steelers won, or the Arizona lost on bad calls and you shouldn't expect that I mean Steelers don't deserve the SB.

But I find completely strange that on the second last play of the game, a fumble, which in my opinion should of been looked at, was not reviewed. Would it make much of a difference? Probably not because it probably wouldn't be overturned anyways, or resulted in a hail mary TD pass but that's not the point. The rules are there and it was a questionable call and it should of been reviewed.

I'm also surprised no sports writer or the announcers noticed that it wasn't reviewed and made a stink about it.

On around the horn they were making a stink about it. Also with the 15 yard penalty that was called AZ would have had it on the 29 not to mention time would have been put back on the clock for an incomplete pass vs a fumble. So they would be looking at 8-9 seconds from the 29. Could potentially throw 2 passes. But again thats only if it was over turned which I doubt it would have been.

Couple funny lines from a page 2 article about the game:

"The result is that the Steelers can now be considered the greatest franchise in NFL history.

The Cardinals can now be considered an NFL franchise."

"Their first drive (effectively) ended on a touchdown run by Ben Roethlisberger on third-and-short. But Ken Whisenhunt challenged it. Or at least we were told that he did. I never saw him throw the flag. I am convinced Mike Holmgren ran off the NBC set, ripped the red flag out of Whisenhunt's pocket and hurled it off of referee Terry McAulay's face. Either way, the touchdown was overturned, and Mike Tomlin settled for a field goal, becoming the youngest coach to settle for a field goal in Super Bowl history."

"His pick, which he got only because he'd dropped into coverage, proved defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau right. Let that be an example, kids -- listen to your coaches. Especially if you are a freakishly muscled 6-feet, 242 pounds and can outrun an entire NFL team's offense over 100 yards."

"Santonio Holmes made all the plays he had to, with the Cardinals learning the painful lesson that it probably would have been more effective to put two guys on him than Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie -- one guy with two names."

"If you're worried this is going to turn into a Brett Favre situation, don't. Kurt Warner is not Brett Favre. Warner will likely pray to God and then make a decision. (I guess the problem is that Favre will have to spend all of his time now hearing Warner's prayers before he can make a decision of his own. So we're probably looking at a mid-summer announcement again from Favre.)"

"I'll admit that I was disturbed a bit by Springsteen's sliding across the stage until his crotch slammed into a camera. I'll take a shot of a 38-year-old woman's partially covered breast over getting rammed by a 59-year-old man's crotch any day. But then I'm not in charge of the FCC."

Oh, Page 2. Damn funny.

I want to see what TMQ will say about the game. He always has interesting things to say.

Actually, I agree with nearly all of you guys' comments.

Here's another thing we can agree on:

Hate to get all Glory Days again, but remember the days when a big play was made and you just went apesh!t and jumped up and down and cheered? Those days have been taken away due to replay and the overwhelming amount of penalties. Now after a big play is made, both sides still must sit on pins and needles worrying that replay is going to take it away from them or the penalty is calling it back.

Now penalties have always taken big plays away, but now they flash the "FLAG" button on your TV screen as soon as the laundry hits the carpet. Like on the Harrison INT return. The whole time I'm just sitting there knowing it's going to be a roughing the passer penalty, and even when he's tackled, I just knew that the ball was going to be placed at the 1-inch line with the half ending. 10 minutes later when the TD was confirmed, the moment was long gone and I was just sitting there trying to think how I should have felt during the runback.

I can see where your coming from.

There was an article or something about how if they had replay back than, a few of those "great" plays would of been overturned.

I like the system that they have now. I like it better than college, where every play can be reviewed.

Originally posted by Smasandian
There was an article or something about how if they had replay back than, a few of those "great" plays would of been overturned.

Watch any of those NFL Films Super Bowl 30 minute specials, and nearly all of them make mention of one or two controversial plays where the call on the field was the final verdict. Especially on deep passes.

Except for the ones where the Bills were getting blown out, of course. The only controversy was why they kept showing up.

Hahaha, oh the Bills.

Anyone else listen to ellis cannon ? If not you should, dude is gold lol

I've heard TJ Hous wants to be an Eagle, and the Eagles are interested in Brandon Jacobs. pray

Why the hell do they need Jacobs?

They have Westbrook and you can easily get a goal line back in the draft for alot cheaper than Jacobs.

Originally posted by DanZeke25
I've heard TJ Hous wants to be an Eagle, and the Eagles are interested in Brandon Jacobs. pray

If they sign with the Eagles, McNabb and Reid will stay..

That would also make them better and you can put Westbrook in the slot a lot

Originally posted by Smasandian
Why the hell do they need Jacobs?

They have Westbrook and you can easily get a goal line back in the draft for alot cheaper than Jacobs.

Yea the short yardage game there is terrible but Jacobs price will be too high. Look at the big retard TJ Duckett he is nothing special but the man can fall forward for a yard and on the cheap.

TJ would be good for McNabb. TJ/Jackson with Curtis in the slot and westbrook is a real nice offense to have around you. Although I would rather have Boldin if I was them.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Why the hell do they need Jacobs?

They have Westbrook and you can easily get a goal line back in the draft for alot cheaper than Jacobs.

The Eagles do not have a good running game, not just bad at short yardage running, but the whole running game itself is not that good. Half Westbrook's yards come from screen passes, not actual running plays. Jacobs would help a lot, but I agree the price would be too high. The rumor is they want Jacobs or Ward because one of them will most likely be leaving.

Yeah, TJ Houswhathisface would be a really good fit for Philly (well any team would have a spot for TJ.

As for Jacobs, yeah, the running game wasn't the greatest, but again, Westbrook is a still a damn good RB and even if he gets alot of yards on screens (which if they work are just like sweeps, or pitches in the run game) while Jacobs would undoutable be a good choice for Philly, I think they would waste a ton of money on him when you can get a good, young RB in the draft, or a guy like Ward for example.

Heck, you can have one of Dallas RB's, we have three good ones.

why do people watch the pro bowel?

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
why do people watch the pro bowel?

Because they love football and know that after that its over for a while. 🙁

I have never seen the Pro Bowl.

I just lose interest. I hate All-Star games. Near this time of the year I get football crazy, which means I get footballed out. I'm done until the draft.

I watched it in the background while doing some other things. It is kinda interesting what goofy things they try to do on offense. We saw the fumbleroosky today. Peyton also creatively broke a rule. You can only use pretty basic sets so you cant go trips with WR's most you can do is 2 split out on each side. So he puts Gonzales as a FB next to him that runs the same route as he would if he were split out as a 3rd WR anyway lol.

Unfortunately I did not think the year could get worse for Seattle but our Pro Bowl rep Julian Peterson was the AFC's ***** all day. (I really want to trade him for some picks)