tucker1989
Banned
- 55
- 12
Show down . Da boys vs G men.
NFL Discussion Thread - Hall of Fame Game: August 3rd
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by 651akathepaul,
- Start date
- Status
mmg
Banned
- 8,261
- 842
Gmen gonna take it.
shatterkneesinc
Banned
- 22,524
- 2,383
Cowboys stadium
A real home game
A real home game
- 21,784
- 2,957
Jay Cutler is going to eat turf.
- 20,396
- 14,184
Someone explain something to me (regarding the Saints/Bucs game)...
So the rationale from the league as to why the Mike Williams catch didn't count was that Josh Freeman was out of the pocket and b/c of that, Williams couldn't be the first person to touch the ball after establishing himself back on the field. Or something to that effect.
That being said, shouldn't illegal contact have been called on the Saints DB who shoved him out of bounds in the first place?
Bottom line, Bucs got hosed.
So the rationale from the league as to why the Mike Williams catch didn't count was that Josh Freeman was out of the pocket and b/c of that, Williams couldn't be the first person to touch the ball after establishing himself back on the field. Or something to that effect.
That being said, shouldn't illegal contact have been called on the Saints DB who shoved him out of bounds in the first place?
Bottom line, Bucs got hosed.
- 29,014
- 4,130
I think the Illegal Contact gets tossed out with Freeman out of the pocket too.
- 21,951
- 1,398
Yup, if Freeman stays in the pocket, its an illegal contact penalty no questions asked.
Once Freeman ran out of the pocket, all bets were off.
mmg
Banned
- 8,261
- 842
There's no way illegal contact gets tossed with Freeman leaving the pocket, that makes no sense and we would see WR get mugged everytime a QB started moving.
- 29,014
- 4,130
DB's aren't looking in the backfield like that though so most of the time they don't even know the QB is out of the pocket.
- 20,396
- 14,184
MMG is thinking the same thing I am.
What's stopping a DB from flat out mugging a WR if a QB is out of the pocket? If the QB is past the LOS, I can understand a lot of contact...but what happened to Freeman and the Bucs yesterday made no sense (from a rules perspective).
mmg
Banned
- 8,261
- 842
When a play breaks down and as a DB you know Big Ben / Vick / RG3 is gonna extend that, not saying your wrong but it doesn't make sense.
- 21,951
- 1,398
Whether you agree with it or not is one thing, but it's not illegal contact because the QB was out of the pocket and you can't come back in and be the first to touch the ball.
Once Freeman was out of the pocket, the shove per say was not exactly illegal.
Once Freeman was out of the pocket, the shove per say was not exactly illegal.
- 20,396
- 14,184
I just dont think the rule makes any sense. If a QB rolls out and is still behind the LOS, DBs can put hands all over a WRs body w/ no penalty? Dude was SHOVED out of bounds while the QB was behind the LOS. This is why I'm really confused at the rule and believe the Bucs got hosed on a BS technicality.
- 21,951
- 1,398
i feel that in that specific circumstance in the endzone, a WR should be allowed to touch the ball regardless if the QB is in the pocket or not. Not saying a WR can just run out of bounds if they want, but with replays and such, if there is a clear shove it should be negated.
I don't agree with the call, just trying to explain an out-dated technicality.
I don't agree with the call, just trying to explain an out-dated technicality.
Last edited:
mmg
Banned
- 8,261
- 842
I was gonna bring that up also
The Bucs got packered.
Also your boy RG3 is the goods double
- 29,630
- 1,863
The rule doesn't make sense. But that's the explanation they gave all afternoon. They didn't get packered. Buti would be very upset
Last edited:
mmg
Banned
- 8,261
- 842
So was illegal contact made when freeman was still in the box? That's the question? And I'm sorry a play like this should be challengeable , penalties and everything.
- 3,176
- 1,332
Panthers fire GM...
- 21,951
- 1,398
They did NOTHING to improve the offense around Cam this off-season.
Last edited:
- 43,657
- 8,659
Panthers brass needed to have a come to Jesus meeting w/ the OC moreso than Fire the GM.
- 12,209
- 277
And that's them reading between the lines of Cam's post game conference. "Something needs to change"....we all knew he was talking about something
My first guess was the playcalling...but the GM was responsible for bringing in zero help this past offseason. I thought Carolina was only going to draft defense. Guess not.
My first guess was the playcalling...but the GM was responsible for bringing in zero help this past offseason. I thought Carolina was only going to draft defense. Guess not.
knightlovesqueen
Banned
- 3,123
- 398
LOL at firing the GM.
Maybe Cam isnt what we thought he was.
Talking about I dont know but something needs to change.
Maybe he shoud stop crying and get to work.
Someone post up the quote A Rodgers said earlier this season about him changing things.
This Diva QB pulling a dwight howard
Maybe Cam isnt what we thought he was.
Talking about I dont know but something needs to change.
Maybe he shoud stop crying and get to work.
Someone post up the quote A Rodgers said earlier this season about him changing things.
This Diva QB pulling a dwight howard
MIKE LOWERY
formerly chuck finster
- 7,574
- 4,690
This
Cam ran the ball one time in the second half. He had 64 rushing yards in the second quarter and ran it once in the second half.
And the illegal contact when out of the pocket isn't the problem. You can legally chuck receivers when the QB leaves the pocket Primarily due to the threat of the running QB puts the defense in a conundrum. The problem is receiver eligibility. The receiver should be able to reestablish himself back in bounds but since the QB out of the pocket it's still illegal touching. That's ******** considering he was forced out. Technically if the QB leaves the pocket in the redzone you can push out any and all receivers and the noone can catch the ball.
- Status
