National Football League

[Nomad]

Just when you think Patriots (and in particular Brady) can't get even more luck stuff like that happens. Every time it looks like he might lose an important game his defense interecepts it to win the game for him.

Yeah...and they even have great luck with the replay officials.

 

[The Hitch]

Just when you think Patriots (and in particular Brady) can't get even more luck stuff like that happens. Every time it looks like he might lose an important game his defense interecepts it to win the game for him.

The last Super Bowl has to be one of the best escapes ever.......or one of the best chokes........

How many times has Brady done enough to lose the game and then plays very well to come back BUT gets ALL the bounces and wins a super tight game.

The superbowl was all of that. He threw the pick six. His pass to Edleman should have been intercepted, game over, fail, instead Edleman does the GOAT catch. Superbowl 2014 bailed out by Butler. Yesterday he did not deserve the win. His defense got the 3 and out on the steelers. He throws an interecption the Steelers drop. THen the drive was all Gronk (some not great throws even). Steelers still come back and forget the controversial play for a moment, they catch a lucky bounce.

This game was important. Now Pats have HFA. With HFA they are almost certain for the superbowl. Without it they usually lose

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I'm not 100% sure the Pats can beat the NFC's top team, whomever that team is.

That game had one heck of a wild ending. I'm not saying it was the wrong call to overturn the TD, or the wrong team won, but the rules just suck. As I said before, for some 60 years a catch was clear possession of the ball, with both feet or a body part down. Then, for some unknown reason, after the Calvin Johnson "not a football play catch", we've had call after call like this where the ball moves a micron, and on super slow motion replay it's overturned as not a catch. This is the second week in a row Brady looked iffy. Slightly better this week than last. He at least made some clutch throws when it mattered this week, but some sloppy ones as well. Will be interesting when these teams presumably meet again in Jan, probably in Foxboro.

Somewhere Jacksonville has something to say about that I'm sure. They keep winning while no one pays attention.

The end in Oakland was almost as wild as the one in Pittsburgh. That whole "folded index card width means it's close enough to be a first down", huh? But Carr blew it. He had the first down, but went for the impossible play for a TD.

Aaron Rodgers: 3 INT says it all for GB.

Great win for the Rams. They really needed that one.

Excellent game for Nick Foles, who needed that as well. I was surprised that the Eagles defense was as off as they were.

Vikings keep steamrolling.

Really solid win for the Saints.

 

[jmdirt]

I HATE: the catch rule, and the fumble out of the end zone rules!

I wanted the Steelers and Raiders to lose, but I still hate those rules. Why is it a touch back if the ball fumbles out of the end zone? What a stupid rule, how has it stayed on the books? The team should retain possession where they last had possession. James' put the ball across the line, what happened after that shouldn't matter. Two dumb rules.

Can the Vikings win a Superbowl at home? I wouldn't bet against them.

EDIT: "Larry Fitzgerald suggested there should be the new rule two years ago. If a receiver catches the ball and gets two feet, a knee, an elbow or a cheek on the ground, it's a catch. If he stays upright and the ball is stripped out of his hands or he bobbles it, the ball becomes a live fumble."

"Runners can score touchdowns just by flashing the ball over the plane of the goal line, but receivers currently need to complete their catch to the ground to become runners and qualify for touchdowns. "

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re:

I HATE: the catch rule, and the fumble out of the end zone rule!

I wanted the Steelers and Raiders to lose, but I still hate those rules. Why is it a touch back if the ball fumbles out of the end zone? What a stupid rule, how has it stayed on the books? The team should retain possession where they last had possession. James' put the ball across the line, what happened after that shouldn't matter. Two dumb rules.

Can the Vikings win a Superbowl at home? I wouldn't bet against them.

Goes back to the rugby roots of the game, kick to touch in goal, a downed kick into the goal area is defender ball (though a 22 dropout rather than a set of downs)

No idea why it hasn't bee changed, I guess there hasn't been a priority to do so.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

I HATE: the catch rule, and the fumble out of the end zone rules!

I wanted the Steelers and Raiders to lose, but I still hate those rules. Why is it a touch back if the ball fumbles out of the end zone? What a stupid rule, how has it stayed on the books? The team should retain possession where they last had possession. James' put the ball across the line, what happened after that shouldn't matter. Two dumb rules.

Can the Vikings win a Superbowl at home? I wouldn't bet against them.

EDIT: "Larry Fitzgerald suggested there should be the new rule two years ago. If a receiver catches the ball and gets two feet, a knee, an elbow or a cheek on the ground, it's a catch. If he stays upright and the ball is stripped out of his hands or he bobbles it, the ball becomes a live fumble."

"Runners can score touchdowns just by flashing the ball over the plane of the goal line, but receivers currently need to complete their catch to the ground to become runners and qualify for touchdowns. "

Both ridiculous rules I agree. Fitzgerald's idea is a good one.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

I'm not 100% sure the Pats can beat the NFC's top team, whomever that team is.

That game had one heck of a wild ending. I'm not saying it was the wrong call to overturn the TD, or the wrong team won, but the rules just suck. As I said before, for some 60 years a catch was clear possession of the ball, with both feet or a body part down. Then, for some unknown reason, after the Calvin Johnson "not a football play catch", we've had call after call like this where the ball moves a micron, and on super slow motion replay it's overturned as not a catch. This is the second week in a row Brady looked iffy. Slightly better this week than last. He at least made some clutch throws when it mattered this week, but some sloppy ones as well. Will be interesting when these teams presumably meet again in Jan, probably in Foxboro.

Somewhere Jacksonville has something to say about that I'm sure. They keep winning while no one pays attention.

The end in Oakland was almost as wild as the one in Pittsburgh. That whole "folded index card width means it's close enough to be a first down", huh? But Carr blew it. He had the first down, but went for the impossible play for a TD.

Aaron Rodgers: 3 INT says it all for GB.

Great win for the Rams. They really needed that one.

Excellent game for Nick Foles, who needed that as well. I was surprised that the Eagles defense was as off as they were.

Vikings keep steamrolling.

Really solid win for the Saints.

Good wins for the Vikings and Jags. 49ers have won four of their past five but will probably hit the wall in their last two games against the Jags and the Rams. The late season revival can only be good for the 49ers going into next season and Jimmy Garoppolo has been able to do what Hoyer couldn't do early in the season with the multiple close losses. He can game manage and run the offense more effectively.

The Seattle loss will signal changes for the Hawks next season surely. The Giants did better than I expected. How long before the hapless Browns take on a new QB, coach and GM ? Can't be much longer. Panthers team up for sale.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBEmlMvliyo&t=284s

Colin Cowherd on Seattle and Packers

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Seattle is just too banged up to really gauge them. But they do have too much money stacked onto just a few players. They rolled the dice that in 2014-2017 they could win another SB. Similar to what Elway did in Denver. These teams won, but the dividends have to be paid, making the future tough.

It seems to me that the Browns have a lot of good young players with potential, plus 2 first round draft picks coming, and plenty of cap space. Fire Hugh Jackson so he can go to Cincy? Maybe. Likely if they go 0-16. Owner Haslem has said no, but the GM won't comment. But the team hasn't given up on Hugh. And I'd say don't do it until you have a damned good idea you have an idea who you are going to replace him with. There was talk the Browns were interested in Broncos coach Vance Joseph last year. If he's fired in Denver, do the Browns can Jackson to hire him? They are stacked with defensive potential. So would Matt Patrician be the guy for the job? Jim Bob Cooter, Detroit's OC is credited with Stafford's success. So, if the Browns give up on Kizer (a second rounder) for Josh Rosen or Lamar Jackson as the top pick in the draft...? But fire the GM, John Dorsey? I'm not ready to pull that trigger just yet. And it's Paul DePodesta who used sabermetrics (of sorts) saying all along it would take a few years to rebuild, and most people nodded their heads in agreement. Do you can him anyway? I don't think so.

Agree with Larry Fitzgerald. Again, just go back and watch any NFL game before the Calvin Johnson catch that was overturned. Possession, two feet in, or a body part down, it's a catch.

If anyone thought Cousins was going to head to SF, I really doubt it now. It seems like Garrapolo is their guy, and I'd look to sign him to a 4 year deal at $10+ mil per year. Cousins is going to get double that, in Washington, or elsewhere.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Re:

Seattle is just too banged up to really gauge them. But they do have too much money stacked onto just a few players. They rolled the dice that in 2014-2017 they could win another SB. Similar to what Elway did in Denver. These teams won, but the dividends have to be paid, making the future tough.

It seems to me that the Browns have a lot of good young players with potential, plus 2 first round draft picks coming, and plenty of cap space. Fire Hugh Jackson so he can go to Cincy? Maybe. Likely if they go 0-16. Owner Haslem has said no, but the GM won't comment. But the team hasn't given up on Hugh. And I'd say don't do it until you have a damned good idea you have an idea who you are going to replace him with. There was talk the Browns were interested in Broncos coach Vance Joseph last year. If he's fired in Denver, do the Browns can Jackson to hire him? They are stacked with defensive potential. So would Matt Patrician be the guy for the job? Jim Bob Cooter, Detroit's OC is credited with Stafford's success. So, if the Browns give up on Kizer (a second rounder) for Josh Rosen or Lamar Jackson as the top pick in the draft...? But fire the GM, John Dorsey? I'm not ready to pull that trigger just yet. And it's Paul DePodesta who used sabermetrics (of sorts) saying all along it would take a few years to rebuild, and most people nodded their heads in agreement. Do you can him anyway? I don't think so.

Agree with Larry Fitzgerald. Again, just go back and watch any NFL game before the Calvin Johnson catch that was overturned. Possession, two feet in, or a body part down, it's a catch.

If anyone thought Cousins was going to head to SF, I really doubt it now. It seems like Garrapolo is their guy, and I'd look to sign him to a 4 year deal at $10+ mil per year. Cousins is going to get double that, in Washington, or elsewhere.

First, agree the catch rules are a mess. If it looks like a catch it's a catch. Most of the time.

Second, I have no idea what is going on in Cleveland. It's so bad I gave up on trying to figure them out.

Hats off to the Rams and SF lately. I really like what McVey is doing in LA, and not just the transformation of Goff and the team. For example, in the Seattle game when things got chippy, McVey (not DC Wade Phillips mind you) pulled his entire defense together on the sideline and gave them a rough verbal reminder he does not want to see that chippy crap. He wants to see poise. None of the players looked away from him (indicating they were not ignoring him) as he delivered that message. They all looked right at him.

As for Seattle, the defense is far too banged up and not having LBs Bobby Wagner and KJ Wright able to practice hurt that week as far as being able to stop the run. Part of the game-time performance was an abberation, such as:
- Pro Bowl players (Wagner & Earl Thomas) each missing tackles by leaving their feet. Wagner was playing hurt anyway, taking away his signature explosiveness to the ball. Funny, commentators said Wagner had not missed a tackle all season. Oops. Spoke too soon.
- Others missing tackles by taking wrong containment leverage on the outside (not playing outside-in), allowing Gurley to get outside for big yards.
Seattle will not make playoffs with Wagner and Wright less than 100%. Their backups just cannot make up for what those 2 guys bring.
Other than poor play, the biggest thing that has me and a host of other Seattle fans angry is the fact that Seattle waived Guard Mark Glowinski just before the game. Okay, Glow was not a great player, maybe just barely serviceable. But this is Tom Cable's draft pick who I guess he finally gave up on. Glow was claimed by the Colts. The jury is out on RT Ifedi, and center Britt is serviceable, but the rest of Cable's moves have been horrible. Enough trading down to reach for a projected 3rd to 5th rounders in earlier rounds. O-Line coach Tom Cable has had enough kicks at the cat. Seattle needs to cut ties with him at the end of the season. Lots of call-ins today into John Clayton's show complaining about both Cable and OC Bevel.

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

Seattle is just too banged up to really gauge them. But they do have too much money stacked onto just a few players. They rolled the dice that in 2014-2017 they could win another SB. Similar to what Elway did in Denver. These teams won, but the dividends have to be paid, making the future tough.

It seems to me that the Browns have a lot of good young players with potential, plus 2 first round draft picks coming, and plenty of cap space. Fire Hugh Jackson so he can go to Cincy? Maybe. Likely if they go 0-16. Owner Haslem has said no, but the GM won't comment. But the team hasn't given up on Hugh. And I'd say don't do it until you have a damned good idea you have an idea who you are going to replace him with. There was talk the Browns were interested in Broncos coach Vance Joseph last year. If he's fired in Denver, do the Browns can Jackson to hire him? They are stacked with defensive potential. So would Matt Patrician be the guy for the job? Jim Bob Cooter, Detroit's OC is credited with Stafford's success. So, if the Browns give up on Kizer (a second rounder) for Josh Rosen or Lamar Jackson as the top pick in the draft...? But fire the GM, John Dorsey? I'm not ready to pull that trigger just yet. And it's Paul DePodesta who used sabermetrics (of sorts) saying all along it would take a few years to rebuild, and most people nodded their heads in agreement. Do you can him anyway? I don't think so.

Agree with Larry Fitzgerald. Again, just go back and watch any NFL game before the Calvin Johnson catch that was overturned. Possession, two feet in, or a body part down, it's a catch.

If anyone thought Cousins was going to head to SF, I really doubt it now. It seems like Garrapolo is their guy, and I'd look to sign him to a 4 year deal at $10+ mil per year. Cousins is going to get double that, in Washington, or elsewhere.

First, agree the catch rules are a mess. If it looks like a catch it's a catch. Most of the time.

Second, I have no idea what is going on in Cleveland. It's so bad I gave up on trying to figure them out.

Hats off to the Rams and SF lately. I really like what McVey is doing in LA, and not just the transformation of Goff and the team. For example, in the Seattle game when things got chippy, McVey (not DC Wade Phillips mind you) pulled his entire defense together on the sideline and gave them a rough verbal reminder he does not want to see that chippy crap. He wants to see poise. None of the players looked away from him (indicating they were not ignoring him) as he delivered that message. They all looked right at him.

As for Seattle, the defense is far too banged up and not having LBs Bobby Wagner and KJ Wright able to practice hurt that week as far as being able to stop the run. Part of the game-time performance was an abberation, such as:
- Pro Bowl players (Wagner & Earl Thomas) each missing tackles by leaving their feet. Wagner was playing hurt anyway, taking away his signature explosiveness to the ball. Funny, commentators said Wagner had not missed a tackle all season. Oops. Spoke too soon.
- Others missing tackles by taking wrong containment leverage on the outside (not playing outside-in), allowing Gurley to get outside for big yards.
Seattle will not make playoffs with Wagner and Wright less than 100%. Their backups just cannot make up for what those 2 guys bring.
Other than poor play, the biggest thing that has me and a host of other Seattle fans angry is the fact that Seattle waived Guard Mark Glowinski just before the game. Okay, Glow was not a great player, maybe just barely serviceable. But this is Tom Cable's draft pick who I guess he finally gave up on. Glow was claimed by the Colts. The jury is out on RT Ifedi, and center Britt is serviceable, but the rest of Cable's moves have been horrible. Enough trading down to reach for a projected 3rd to 5th rounders in earlier rounds. O-Line coach Tom Cable has had enough kicks at the cat. Seattle needs to cut ties with him at the end of the season. Lots of call-ins today into John Clayton's show complaining about both Cable and OC Bevel.

When you consider what Seattle and the Cardinals were doing two years ago it seems the NFC West is going to be much more competitive from now on. Having two of the younger coaches in the division who are both offensive minded and with Seattle and the Cardinals at different stages of making changes to their squad, the next few seasons should be interesting. The 49ers are still working on their rebuild but moving in the right direction especially with the offense. Robbie Gould and Garrapolo were great pickups and they got Jimmy for a bargain price. Some of the younger players are already showing a lot of promise. McVey has coach of the season sewn up and Gurley is back to his best.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

Seattle is just too banged up to really gauge them. But they do have too much money stacked onto just a few players. They rolled the dice that in 2014-2017 they could win another SB. Similar to what Elway did in Denver. These teams won, but the dividends have to be paid, making the future tough.

It seems to me that the Browns have a lot of good young players with potential, plus 2 first round draft picks coming, and plenty of cap space. Fire Hugh Jackson so he can go to Cincy? Maybe. Likely if they go 0-16. Owner Haslem has said no, but the GM won't comment. But the team hasn't given up on Hugh. And I'd say don't do it until you have a damned good idea you have an idea who you are going to replace him with. There was talk the Browns were interested in Broncos coach Vance Joseph last year. If he's fired in Denver, do the Browns can Jackson to hire him? They are stacked with defensive potential. So would Matt Patrician be the guy for the job? Jim Bob Cooter, Detroit's OC is credited with Stafford's success. So, if the Browns give up on Kizer (a second rounder) for Josh Rosen or Lamar Jackson as the top pick in the draft...? But fire the GM, John Dorsey? I'm not ready to pull that trigger just yet. And it's Paul DePodesta who used sabermetrics (of sorts) saying all along it would take a few years to rebuild, and most people nodded their heads in agreement. Do you can him anyway? I don't think so.

Agree with Larry Fitzgerald. Again, just go back and watch any NFL game before the Calvin Johnson catch that was overturned. Possession, two feet in, or a body part down, it's a catch.

If anyone thought Cousins was going to head to SF, I really doubt it now. It seems like Garrapolo is their guy, and I'd look to sign him to a 4 year deal at $10+ mil per year. Cousins is going to get double that, in Washington, or elsewhere.

Yes I think the Browns will go another year with the same GM and coach but expect some improvement although the non lodgement of paperwork and missed trade deadline for a trade from a few months ago probably doesn't reflect too well on the GM.

Would the 49ers use Jimmy as a carrot for a trade to the Browns and then pick up Cousins ? Some people think so, at least they did a few weeks ago but I can't see it happening now and the Browns would not get the bargain that the 49ers had with the Patriots. If the Browns go this season and the next without a win or with maybe one win I expect multiple heads to roll especially in the NFL. Even Bill B wouldn't be given that amount of time to make a difference.

 

[movingtarget]

Why doesn't the NFL use tracking technology ?

http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=pMJKdIFVI6pghfX2HXfSzxRpdoyDWYNWftnS2EhDhGaP58r4VEW4nCNWinYTn9919khmqMi5ohHpB2hTFopWAYmKju0z5jWyYx/IomRxCxYGTAMd1/anmEj/K/izfvEzo4h7sujGYvQorC+R5Q1ZmLAJiKJr+NNH&campaign_id=129&instance_id=108255&segment_id=117745&user_id=12d98412e3bcc0522f6cfbf4c21c54e6&regi_id=42685115

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Re:

Why doesn't the NFL use tracking technology ?

http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=pMJKdIFVI6pghfX2HXfSzxRpdoyDWYNWftnS2EhDhGaP58r4VEW4nCNWinYTn9919khmqMi5ohHpB2hTFopWAYmKju0z5jWyYx/IomRxCxYGTAMd1/anmEj/K/izfvEzo4h7sujGYvQorC+R5Q1ZmLAJiKJr+NNH&campaign_id=129&instance_id=108255&segment_id=117745&user_id=12d98412e3bcc0522f6cfbf4c21c54e6&regi_id=42685115

Chips won't work because the Leading Edge of the ball needs to be tracked which means there has to be some device that accurately tracks the perimeter of the ball at all angles. And even if that was possible, the officials still have to determine if some part of the ball carrier's body has touched down and where the ball was when that happened. In a jumble of bodies it would still be a crap shoot. I am fine with the way it is currently done. If teams don't like the idea of a first down coming down to millimeters then play better on downs 1, 2, and 3.

 

[jmdirt]

RE: Tech for yardage: spotting the ball is really imperfect so it would be nice if there was a better way to determine that, but as already stated there is more to it than just were the tip of the ball is. The "sticks" are even less exact, and seem like the easiest to fix. Wouldn't a simple laser system be more precise/accurate? How about a video system that the booth official operates. Honestly, this is less of an issue to me than the catch rule, and the rugby rule.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

I'll bet here is one thing nobody has really given much thought to when it comes to technology and spotting the ball: big money exists in the NFL and college, but how do we expect pee wee football leagues & small middle schools and high schools to pay for all this stuff? Is it really that big of a deal? It is just a game. Let it be that.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Tomlin on the catch rule:
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/943179531598344192

 

[jmdirt]

I'll bet here is one thing nobody has really given much thought to when it comes to technology and spotting the ball: big money exists in the NFL and college, but how do we expect pee wee football leagues & small middle schools and high schools to pay for all this stuff? Is it really that big of a deal? It is just a game. Let it be that.

How dare you! :lol: In all honesty though NFL and NCAA are big money as you said so its not just about the game. Below that can keep using the old sticks.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

I'll bet here is one thing nobody has really given much thought to when it comes to technology and spotting the ball: big money exists in the NFL and college, but how do we expect pee wee football leagues & small middle schools and high schools to pay for all this stuff? Is it really that big of a deal? It is just a game. Let it be that.

How dare you! :lol: In all honesty though NFL and NCAA are big money as you said so its not just about the game. Below that can keep using the old sticks.

Glad you got a chuckle out of that. I guess I'd be okay with new technology as long as one thing: it does not slow down the game. If it slows the game down, I'd be opposed to it. They could always try "it" in preseason on a trial basis, and use that experience to make a decision. Question is, what is "it"?

 

[jmdirt]

I'll bet here is one thing nobody has really given much thought to when it comes to technology and spotting the ball: big money exists in the NFL and college, but how do we expect pee wee football leagues & small middle schools and high schools to pay for all this stuff? Is it really that big of a deal? It is just a game. Let it be that.

How dare you! :lol: In all honesty though NFL and NCAA are big money as you said so its not just about the game. Below that can keep using the old sticks.

Glad you got a chuckle out of that. I guess I'd be okay with new technology as long as one thing: it does not slow down the game. If it slows the game down, I'd be opposed to it. They could always try "it" in preseason on a trial basis, and use that experience to make a decision. Question is, what is "it"?

In the case of not having to measure anymore, or take time to move the sticks, it should be faster.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

The biggest thing slowing games down, without question, are replays. I am pro-replays though, so don't think that means I favor getting rid of them. I have posted on this before, but here is what I believe:

• All reviews should be from upstairs not the referees on the field. No referee should ever be looking at a Surface, or "under the hood".

• There should be a centralized staff of reviewers somewhere like New York or Los Angeles who review plays. On-field referees should rotate in and out of this group for training purposes.

• If the upstairs staff cannot make a decision to overturn a play on replay in 60 seconds, the play on the field stands. This one is a real killer. We watch from home and 95% of the time the first or second time you see a play on replay we know what the call really should be. Why they go over it so many times is overkill.

• Challenges should remain the same.

• Eventually, I think every play should be free game to challenge, this includes simple ones like off-sides, but also tricky ones like pass interference, holding, personal fouls, etc. I realize this make take a while, like, the year 2025 or so. But it should be considered and prepared for. If we implement the 60 second rule above, this challenge would rarely, rarely change outcomes of games.

 

[jmdirt]

Re:

The biggest thing slowing games down, without question, are replays. I am pro-replays though, so don't think that means I favor getting rid of them. I have posted on this before, but here is what I believe:

• All reviews should be from upstairs not the referees on the field. No referee should ever be looking at a Surface, or "under the hood".

• There should be a centralized staff of reviewers somewhere like New York or Los Angeles who review plays. On-field referees should rotate in and out of this group for training purposes.

• If the upstairs staff cannot make a decision to overturn a play on replay in 60 seconds, the play on the field stands. This one is a real killer. We watch from home and 95% of the time the first or second time you see a play on replay we know what the call really should be. Why they go over it so many times is overkill.

• Challenges should remain the same.

• Eventually, I think every play should be free game to challenge, this includes simple ones like off-sides, but also tricky ones like pass interference, holding, personal fouls, etc. I realize this make take a while, like, the year 2025 or so. But it should be considered and prepared for. If we implement the 60 second rule above, this challenge would rarely, rarely change outcomes of games.

Well actually the biggest thing slowing games down is the commercial break between nearly every play now.

I like all of your points.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

The biggest thing slowing games down, without question, are replays. I am pro-replays though, so don't think that means I favor getting rid of them. I have posted on this before, but here is what I believe:

• All reviews should be from upstairs not the referees on the field. No referee should ever be looking at a Surface, or "under the hood".

• There should be a centralized staff of reviewers somewhere like New York or Los Angeles who review plays. On-field referees should rotate in and out of this group for training purposes.

• If the upstairs staff cannot make a decision to overturn a play on replay in 60 seconds, the play on the field stands. This one is a real killer. We watch from home and 95% of the time the first or second time you see a play on replay we know what the call really should be. Why they go over it so many times is overkill.

• Challenges should remain the same.

• Eventually, I think every play should be free game to challenge, this includes simple ones like off-sides, but also tricky ones like pass interference, holding, personal fouls, etc. I realize this make take a while, like, the year 2025 or so. But it should be considered and prepared for. If we implement the 60 second rule above, this challenge would rarely, rarely change outcomes of games.

Yeah sometimes the games seem to take forever with the stop start going on. Centralized replays are best I agree. if the ball is unsighted and it's impossible to change the the ref's call and it's been viewed from all possible camera angles it should be much quicker than it is. Sometimes those ones seem to take 10 minutes. With changes to the fair catch rule the game speeds up even more.

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

The biggest thing slowing games down, without question, are replays. I am pro-replays though, so don't think that means I favor getting rid of them. I have posted on this before, but here is what I believe:

• All reviews should be from upstairs not the referees on the field. No referee should ever be looking at a Surface, or "under the hood".

• There should be a centralized staff of reviewers somewhere like New York or Los Angeles who review plays. On-field referees should rotate in and out of this group for training purposes.

• If the upstairs staff cannot make a decision to overturn a play on replay in 60 seconds, the play on the field stands. This one is a real killer. We watch from home and 95% of the time the first or second time you see a play on replay we know what the call really should be. Why they go over it so many times is overkill.

• Challenges should remain the same.

• Eventually, I think every play should be free game to challenge, this includes simple ones like off-sides, but also tricky ones like pass interference, holding, personal fouls, etc. I realize this make take a while, like, the year 2025 or so. But it should be considered and prepared for. If we implement the 60 second rule above, this challenge would rarely, rarely change outcomes of games.

Well actually the biggest thing slowing games down is the commercial break between nearly every play now.

I like all of your points.

Little wonder many people prefer to watch the You Tube replays without ads.

 

[jmdirt]

Re: Re:

The biggest thing slowing games down, without question, are replays. I am pro-replays though, so don't think that means I favor getting rid of them. I have posted on this before, but here is what I believe:

• All reviews should be from upstairs not the referees on the field. No referee should ever be looking at a Surface, or "under the hood".

• There should be a centralized staff of reviewers somewhere like New York or Los Angeles who review plays. On-field referees should rotate in and out of this group for training purposes.

• If the upstairs staff cannot make a decision to overturn a play on replay in 60 seconds, the play on the field stands. This one is a real killer. We watch from home and 95% of the time the first or second time you see a play on replay we know what the call really should be. Why they go over it so many times is overkill.

• Challenges should remain the same.

• Eventually, I think every play should be free game to challenge, this includes simple ones like off-sides, but also tricky ones like pass interference, holding, personal fouls, etc. I realize this make take a while, like, the year 2025 or so. But it should be considered and prepared for. If we implement the 60 second rule above, this challenge would rarely, rarely change outcomes of games.

Well actually the biggest thing slowing games down is the commercial break between nearly every play now.

I like all of your points.

Little wonder many people prefer to watch the You Tube replays without ads.

Sometimes I get lucky and can watch another game while one is on commercial break.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

HO HO HO. JEFF FISHER WANTS CREDIT FOR RAMS SUCCESS.
Or, "Hey, I'm available".
Or, "The Rams are my roster (I just can't coach)".
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...in-pretty-good-shape-after-firing?share=other