Bright side.

[4ever12]

Am I wrong or did the ref say that?

You are aware that wasn't the forward progress call, right?!?

 

[FattyKnuckle]

You are aware that wasn't the forward progress call, right?!?

You are aware that the post I was replying to was discussing the DK catch, right?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Hard to see much of a bright side when you score 34 and lose.

 

[4ever12]

You are aware that the post I was replying to was discussing the DK catch, right?

And yet you keep trying to dance around and not answer anything about the forward progress call. You say you have answered it, but you only keep talking about the DK call, that they took WAY longer than they are supposed to to make the call, and was so ticky tacky and opposite of the call on the field. Again, not how refs are supposed to call it. They did that because? You guessed it. It's a rigged system that is not worth any attention. Feel free to get the last word in, I know your fragile ego needs it. Just remember that pretty much anything you say is BS (as evidenced by everything else you have said in this thread.)

Mic drop, I'm officially out.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

They didn't. The ref explained that he lost control of the ball on his back and didn't regain control until he was out of bounds.

Okay, I’ll say the same thing about that. It would have been virtually impossible for a referee to see that without looking at slow motion video. They have made this the new definition of a “catch” because they have this new toy. As a Bears fan, I recall it dates back to a catch by Calvin Johnson that infamously became called “the Calvin Johnson rule”. It was BS then, and it still is today. He caught that pass and so did DK. If you have the ball with both feet inbounds and on the ground, that’s the old, common sense definition of a “catch” and nobody needs slow motion video to see. This kind of crap is changing the outcomes of games, and it’s ridiculous….just my opinion.

 

[FattyKnuckle]

And yet you keep trying to dance around and not answer anything about the forward progress call. You say you have answered it, but you only keep talking about the DK call, that they took WAY longer than they are supposed to to make the call, and was so ticky tacky and opposite of the call on the field. Again, not how refs are supposed to call it. They did that because? You guessed it. It's a rigged system that is not worth any attention. Feel free to get the last word in, I know your fragile ego needs it. Just remember that pretty much anything you say is BS (as evidenced by everything else you have said in this thread.)

Mic drop, I'm officially out.

Haven't danced around anything. I already answered in one of your many spammed threads. I even told you where to find it. You keep quoting posts about other things thinking they're about something else. Shows how unfocused you are. Sad to see you go. Bye Felicia.

 

[FattyKnuckle]

Okay, I’ll say the same thing about that. It would have been virtually impossible for a referee to see that without looking at slow motion video. They have made this the new definition of a “catch” because they have this new toy. As a Bears fan, I recall it dates back to a catch by Calvin Johnson that infamously became called “the Calvin Johnson rule”. It was BS then, and it still is today. He caught that pass and so did DK. If you have the ball with both feet inbounds and on the ground, that’s the old, common sense definition of a “catch” and nobody needs slow motion video to see. This kind of crap is changing the outcomes of games, and it’s ridiculous….just my opinion.

I 100% agree that the rules defining a catch are absurd. However, as to the rules as they’re written, it was not a catch. Same as the overturned Raiders interception.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

I 100% agree that the rules defining a catch are absurd. However, as to the rules as they’re written, it was not a catch. Same as the overturned Raiders interception.

Agree. Another area is "pass interference". They are VERY arbitrary in how they enforce that rule, and it is decisive in many games. I would like to see that rule rewritten, too, and more in favor of the defensive backs. A clever WR can cause the DB to make contact, and they call the interference on the DB nearly every damn time.

 

[FattyKnuckle]

Agree. Another area is "pass interference". They are VERY arbitrary in how they enforce that rule, and it is decisive in many games. I would like to see that rule rewritten, too, and more in favor of the defensive backs. A clever WR can cause the DB to make contact, and they call the interference on the DB nearly every damn time.

It should at least be reviewable. It’s the most catastrophic penalty in the game and very often is clearly wrong.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

It should at least be reviewable. It’s the most catastrophic penalty in the game and very often is clearly wrong.

Agree again. Another area where the referees favor the WR over the DB is the “pick play.” Send two WRs on short crossing routes over the middle and have one of them “accidentally” bump the DB just enough to not draw the flag but enough to scheme open the other WR. Unless it is blatant blocking, the refs almost never call it, but I see it all the time.

This gets into the economics and sociology of the sport, but I believe the inflation of scoring in the modern NFL is due to the ways referees are operating to favor the offense over the defense. It is simply more entertaining for (some) fans to have a wild 37-34 game than a hard-fought defensive battle. More fan engagement means more money for the NFL owners, but it has gone over the top IMO.

It is still possible to shut down a high-powered offense (like Tampa Bay did to Mahomes in the Super Bowl), but it takes an elite defense to do it these days.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

Agree again. Another area where the referees favor the WR over the DB is the “pick play.” Send two WRs on short crossing routes over the middle and have one of them “accidentally” bump the DB just enough to not draw the flag but enough to scheme open the other WR. Unless it is blatant blocking, the refs almost never call it, but I see it all the time.

This gets into the economics and sociology of the sport, but I believe the inflation of scoring in the modern NFL is due to the ways referees are operating to favor the offense over the defense. It is simply more entertaining for (some) fans to have a wild 37-34 game than a hard-fought defensive battle. More fan engagement means more money for the NFL owners, but it has gone over the top IMO.

It is still possible to shut down a high-powered offense (like Tampa Bay did to Mahomes in the Super Bowl), but it takes an elite defense to do it these days.

Excellent take. I guess I never thought of it quite that way.