the green bay packers vefrsus the detroit loins 2019 MNF (week 5): the return of the incomparable tony brown PART DEUX

[PACKRULE]

1 hour ago, SSG said:

How's it silly?  MVS was our #1 WR for the majority of the game and he was almost useless.  He's a guy who's gotten almost 60% of his season production from 3 catches.  He's leading this team in snaps yet his production this year has been nothing short of terrible.  He's pretty clearly not a WR who's all that capable of moving the chains on a drive.  He'll get you a 40 yard gainer once every 2 games but he's not much more than a decoy for the majority of the game.  We badly needed a WR to step up tonight and MVS had 2 catches.  How is that doing your job?  MVS isn't much more than a decoy.  His massive usage rate is a large reason our passing attack is just mediocre.

This is probably one of your worst assessments to date and you have had a few doozies already. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by PACKRULE

[St Vince]

33 minutes ago, Uffdaswede said:

Without the last penalty on Flowers we still kick a field goal and take the lead— most likely. I don’t understand this fashionable rush by people to denigrate our victory over a good team with our short-handed receiving corps. 
 

I can’t help but think that the NFL will not be pleased with Booger littering the last ten minutes of the broadcast with relentless defaming of their officials over a call that was quite reasonable. Flowers is flirting with the letter and spirit of the rule by throat punching his opponent. 

Exactly! I had to leave the general forum because I was getting a headache reading all the whinny posts. I tried to give that same argument. If we had to punt there was still over 6 minutes left with 3 timeouts plus the two minute warning. That's an eternity in the NFL.  There's still no guarantee they would've won that game with that much football left to be played.

Edited October 15, 2019 by St Vince

[Jameson_Neat]

1 minute ago, Cakeshoppe said:

 

Rule 8, section 1:

ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

1. (a)  secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

2. (b)  touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

3. (c)  after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take

   an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

   Notes:

   1. [...]

   2. (2)  If a player, who satisfied (a) and (b), but has not satisfied (c), contacts the ground and loses control of the ball, it is an

      incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground before he regains control, or if he regains control out of bounds.

The rule is poorly written and imo they should have never removed the language that they did, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that Hockenson satisfied (c) before contacting the ground.

So, what, you agree it probably should have been ruled a TD?

What football move is to be made in the end zone?

[Scoremore]

Contacts the ground and loses control of the ball.  INCOMPLETE PASS  Dude can't you read.  

[Cakeshoppe]

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

So, what, you agree it probably should have been ruled a TD?

What football move is to be made in the end zone?

...no? Please re-read (c). There is a disjunction there. There is no special case for end zones in this rule.

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

So, what, you agree it probably should have been ruled a TD?

What football move is to be made in the end zone?

You can thank your Megatron for this rule change fockery, where you need to maintain possession through the entirety of the catch, blah blah blah.

[Jameson_Neat]

Just now, Cakeshoppe said:

...no? Please re-read (c). There is a disjunction there. There is no special case for end zones in this rule.

Right, but he he clearly has possession, two feet and only loses it when contacting the ground.

It's confusing and should be ruled a TD like fumbles without a whistle IMO

[Jameson_Neat]

2 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

You can thank your Megatron for this rule change fockery, where you need to maintain possession through the entirety of the catch, blah blah blah.

Please, this is the NFL chasing Bert Emanuel for two decades.

[Scoremore]

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Right, but he he clearly has possession, two feet and only loses it when contacting the ground.

It's confusing and should be ruled a TD like fumbles without a whistle IMO

That's the rule whether you agree with it or not.  No exceptions.  Don't know why we are even debating this it's not new.

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Please, this is the NFL chasing Bert Emanuel for two decades.

And it took Megatron’s endzone bumble to create this everlasting question, “WTF is a catch!?”

[Jameson_Neat]

1 minute ago, Scoremore said:

That's the rule whether you agree with it or not.  No exceptions.  Don't know why we are even debating this it's not new.

Actually it is new. 

Honestly, it's hard to keep up.

[Cakeshoppe]

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Right, but he he clearly has possession, two feet and only loses it when contacting the ground.

It's confusing and should be ruled a TD like fumbles without a whistle IMO

...........no again? Two feet in bounds and posession are not enough to establish a completion anywhere on the field. Not between the goal lines, not on the side lines, and not in the end zone. One must maintain possession long enough to perform an act common to the game (one need not actually perform such an act but one must possess the ball long enough to be able to). Absent that last condition, if one loses control of the ball and it touches the ground it is an incompletion.

[Jameson_Neat]

1 minute ago, Sasquatch said:

And it took Megatron’s endzone bumble to create this everlasting question, “WTF is a catch!?”

Actually, that's still the comp committee.

And has been the comp committee.

It started with Bert.

[Cakeshoppe]

8 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

You can thank your Megatron for this rule change fockery, where you need to maintain possession through the entirety of the catch, blah blah blah.

the "Calvin Johnson Rule" actually existed before Calvin Johnson's famous non-catch. That just caused it to be widely known.

[Arthur Penske]

Jk Scott needs to be more carful. Can’t have our playmakers getting hurt celebrating