NFL VI

[Swordfish]

Uh, yeah. Sorry, but I'll buy FO's explanation over Bill Simmons. Really, Rock - stop using Bill Simmons as a source. Half the time he's flat out wrong.

just read the article. typical of what a blatant homer the guy has become. it's a shame too, because he used to be a must read for me every week. Over the past couple years, his column has become mostly unreadable on most days to anyone but the most rampant and myopic new england sports fans.

[Rockroi]

As I said before, Pereira has come on the NFL network and said "We fucked up" to Hobbs before. He's had no problems saying when they made the wrong decision before, and he's even done so to the specific person in question. I don't see why it would be different here.

1) I think it says a lot about somebody that he goes on a television network at least twice. I mean, when was the last time you saw the head of baseball umpires go on TV? How about the NBA? And they had amajor scandal. As anyone who knows, Pereira is a media whore. They did a peice on him on HBO Inside the NFL and Marino and Collinsworth were laughing hysperically when Costas asked if he liked being on TV. Collinsowrth answered, "Oh, he might say he hates the attaention, but he loves it" followed by Marino almost doubling over in laughter. So, take this for what its worth: it was a chance to be on the TV.

2) Do you REALLY think the NFL would appologioze twice to the same corner back in two consecutive games against the same opponent? If you really think so, you have much greater faith in your fellow man than I do. I think the NFL KNOWS how absoluitely craptacularly that game was called and cannot under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES allow the game to be seen like that. It has to be 100% on the up and up. If they say, "Yeah, man, in two straight games we absolutely fucked you and your team over. But you specifically. Yup- and one of those games was the AFC Championship game wherein the team we always wanted to be crowned "Champions" was finally crowned champions. Our bad" it basically is a confession that "We are not officiating your games properly."

3) Simmons' input is as great as any other media persons. Period. He gives a good list and then, you know, backs it up. The call was horse shit; I've seen the play- Hobbs looks at the ball PRIOR to touching Wayne (and by "touching" I mean "Getting tackled by"). What's amazing would have been if the OPPOSITE had happened: if Hobbs had done to Wayne what Wayne did to Hobbs. Could you IMAGINE Wayne getting the call? Again, if your answer is "yes" I really have no response. You are living on another level than me (not exactly a complament).

And again, I like how it takes us THIS long to get an honest-to-God debate going. Seriously- this week you will all miss the Pats. You want us on that Wall, you need us on that Wall... (life is so boring without us).

[Swordfish]

And again, I like how it takes us THIS long to get an honest-to-God debate going. Seriously- this week you will all miss the Pats. You want us on that Wall, you need us on that Wall... (life is so boring without us).

the real question is what all the pats fans will cry about in the off week. I guess still the officiating for another week?

You guys want them on that cross, you need them on that cross........

[Kalbear]

3) Simmons' input is as great as any other media persons. Period. He gives a good list and then, you know, backs it up. The call was horse shit; I've seen the play- Hobbs looks at the ball PRIOR to touching Wayne (and by "touching" I mean "Getting tackled by").

You don't understand the rule of PI then in this case. Hobbs doesn't actually have to touch Wayne. All he has to do is make him slow down his route. He does this before he looks for the ball but after the ball is thrown.

And saying Simmons input is as great as any other media person is like saying Ann Coulter's input is as great as Anderson Cooper's. Seriously, Bill Simmons is the Rush Limbaugh of the sports world right now.

If Hobbs had done to Wayne what Wayne did to Hobbs, Wayne would've dusted him. The reason Wayne ran into Hobbs was because Hobbs slowed him up so much. That's the reason the PI was called.

There were plenty of shit calls out there, but that wasn't one of them. If you think it is, it's because you've been trained to believe that contact = PI. That isn't the case in all events.

[DanteGabriel]

the real question is what all the pats fans will cry about in the off week. I guess still the officiating for another week?

You guys want them on that cross, you need them on that cross........

With all the time you spend trying to bait Pats fans, I think it's you that needs them on the cross.

[Bronn Stone]

You cannot impede the receiver's path to the ball in any way. Any more than they can impede your path. I don't see how this is at all arguable; if you remove this, you basically are allowing tackling of receivers. "Oops, sorry, didn't mean to get right in your route and hip check you...you should've gone around me". Whatever.

If by 'hip check' you mean actively stick out a hip, then that should be a penalty. If you mean 'be moving slow and get trampled', I don't think it should.

And 'tackling' is a misleading term in this context. It isn't tackling if it is totally passive. And if it is active tackling, then it doesn't have any connection with anything else in this sub-discussion.

The receiver absolutely can impede the path of the defender. That is one of the reasons that it is pass interference if the defender tramples the receiver in the course of 'playing the ball'. The defender has a right to the ball, but not if his route to the ball goes straight through the receiver. Using his body to shield off the defender is about 50% of Tony Gonzalez's game. And a perfectly valid and legitimate strategy.

The defender has the right to play the ball, but not if it means going straight through the receiver and NOBODY would claim the receiver has any obligation to get out of the defender's way. The opposite should be equally true.

[Kalbear]

So you're saying this, Bronn:

If Hobbs just got in front of Wayne and stops, Wayne flies over him, that's not a penalty? Because it's 'passive'?

The receiver absolutely can impede the path of the defender. That is one of the reasons that it is pass interference if the defender tramples the receiver in the course of 'playing the ball'.

The receiver can get position to catch the ball. So can the defender. What they can't do is get in the way of the other person before they have position.

It's really a judgment call but in this case it was clear what happens.

The PI rules absolutely need to be overhauled because no one understand what PI is consistently and the penalty is huge.

[Rockroi]

Kal:

You don't understand the rule of PI then in this case. Hobbs doesn't actually have to touch Wayne. All he has to do is make him slow down his route. He does this before he looks for the ball but after the ball is thrown.

Oh, I see, I wonder hwat ever gave me the idea that CONTACT was important here... OH WAIT THAT'S RIGHT:

(psst: from the post you put up)

“When the contact first occurred, and that’s where you look at the cut-off, when the contact first occurred between the receiver and the defender, has the defender turned around, and is he making a legitimate play on the ball? No, he’s not until after this contact occurs,â€

According to Simmons and my viewing of the play itself, this 100% crap. I Think I understand the rule fine. I think it was a really really bad call.

[Bronn Stone]

So you're saying this, Bronn:

If Hobbs just got in front of Wayne and stops, Wayne flies over him, that's not a penalty? Because it's 'passive'?

Though obviously not so under existing rules, yes, I believe that should be a legal play.

The defender should have a right to space he has physically established. Under no circumstances should a defender in any sport have an obligation to 'get out of the way' of an offensive player. Now I'm not saying that Wayne trampling Hobbs in that situation should be a penalty on Wayne - I think it should be a non-foul.

The receiver can get position to catch the ball. So can the defender. What they can't do is get in the way of the other person before they have position.

You've contradicted yourself here. How can the defender not have 'position' if he's in the path of the receiver?

[Kalbear]

Rock, watch the video again..

At 34 seconds, Hobbs goes towards Wayne (and isn't looking for the ball). First contact is 35 seconds in. His head is not around at this point. He then turns around at 36 seconds in.

That's PI.

You've contradicted yourself here. How can the defender not have 'position' if he's in the path of the receiver?

Just because I'm in the way of the receiver does not mean I'm in a position to catch the ball. By "position" I thought my meaning was clear, but just in case it's not: position means "Position to catch the ball". When Hobbs went out and contacted Wayne, he was not in position to catch the ball because he wasn't even looking for it.

[Bronn Stone]

I am with you 100% on this call. Rock is smoking discarded hoodie tatters. Again.

[Heal]

I am well aware that Peter Griffin is wearing a Pats jersey but I represent Family Guy not the Patriots. The Patriots are not a NFL team they need to disband this team. I call Patriot fans devil worshipers because they are how could you like a team that cheats at everything they do. And enough of this jealousy Adrian Peterson will not get injured this year, thats the thing he got injured in college thats why he dropped tot he number 7 pick in the draft. He is not that injured prone running back he was trust me I've seen some hits hes taken he would of already gotten injured if he was still like this also, MINNESOTA VIKINGS ARE GOING TO THE PLAYOFFS JUST WAIT FOR THEM TO KICK THE PACKERS ASS!!!

[Heal]

Exactly my sentiment in blunter terms.

BTW, the Lions beat the Vikings by a TD. Their only two losses are Philly and Washington.

It was by a field goal it was 20-17 OT so don't say such blaspmy again please.

[Chuck Klingbeil]

I am well aware that Peter Griffin is wearing a Pats jersey but I represent Family Guy not the Patriots. The Patriots are not a NFL team they need to disband this team. I call Patriot fans devil worshipers because they are how could you like a team that cheats at everything they do. And enough of this jealousy Adrian Peterson will not get injured this year, thats the thing he got injured in college thats why he dropped tot he number 7 pick in the draft. He is not that injured prone running back he was trust me I've seen some hits hes taken he would of already gotten injured if he was still like this also, MINNESOTA VIKINGS ARE GOING TO THE PLAYOFFS JUST WAIT FOR THEM TO KICK THE PACKERS ASS!!!

Well, as long as your representing.

[aeu]

The situation of Bill Simmons saddens me. His stuff on Page 2 is like an old friend you have known for a long time and had some great times together. You can see he's changing slowly, doing ridiculous stuff and often wonder yourself "Whatever hapenned to this guy? When did he become such a jackass?" Still, you continue hanging out with him (albeit less and less frequently), thinking "Maybe he'll realize what he's doing and get his act back together."

So, yeah, I know he was going in this direction for some time and has written some embarraingly pathetic shit before (some of his columns after Pats lose to Colts come to mind, particularly the one he ranted oon and on saying "Admit it, you want to be in our place! You are just jelous!") But this last one....I just don't know what to say.

I also think he's doing a disservice to Boston fans at this point. He has great influence. Like it or not, he's being perceived as their voice, representative, whatever you want to call it. He's also clearly shaping them, either conciously or subconciously, as we see his arguments and pet peeves slipping into arguments of many Boston fans. (For example, the hatred of many Boston fans toward Payton Manning. I find it quite inexplicable. How much does it have to do with Simmon's completely irretional hatred for the guy and his harping on the issue again and again for many years?)

And he definitely is not presenting that fandom in a positive manner.

[Swordfish]

The situation of Bill Simmons saddens me. His stuff on Page 2 is like an old friend you have known for a long time and had some great times together. You can see he's changing slowly, doing ridiculous stuff and often wonder yourself "Whatever hapenned to this guy? When did he become such a jackass?" Still, you continue hanging out with him (albeit less and less frequently), thinking "Maybe he'll realize what he's doing and get his act back together."

So, yeah, I know he was going in this direction for some time and has written some embarraingly pathetic shit before (some of his columns after Pats lose to Colts come to mind, particularly the one he ranted oon and on saying "Admit it, you want to be in our place! You are just jelous!") But this last one....I just don't know what to say.

I also think he's doing a disservice to Boston fans at this point. He has great influence. Like it or not, he's being perceived as their voice, representative, whatever you want to call it. He's also clearly shaping them, either conciously or subconciously, as we see his arguments and pet peeves slipping into arguments of many Boston fans. (For example, the hatred of many Boston fans toward Payton Manning. I find it quite inexplicable. How much does it have to do with Simmon's completely irretional hatred for the guy and his harping on the issue again and again for many years?)

And he definitely is not presenting that fandom in a positive manner.

To be fair, I'm not a new england fan, and i still hate peyton.

[aeu]

lol, maybe it's just me then...

Seriously, I understand if people find him not particularly likable (I'm in that group as well). And yeah he makes way too many commercials, but why would you HATE him?

[Swordfish]

lol, maybe it's just me then...

Seriously, I understand if people find him not particularly likable (I'm in that group as well). And yeah he makes way too many commercials, but why would you HATE him?

Because he makes the baby jesus cry.

[Jaime L]

The situation of Bill Simmons saddens me. His stuff on Page 2 is like an old friend you have known for a long time and had some great times together. You can see he's changing slowly, doing ridiculous stuff and often wonder yourself "Whatever hapenned to this guy? When did he become such a jackass?" Still, you continue hanging out with him (albeit less and less frequently), thinking "Maybe he'll realize what he's doing and get his act back together."

Agreed.

The irony is that he would loathe himself if he was able to slip outside of his skin for a moment. This last article was basically unreadable. Sad state that I just don't care what he has to say anymore. Even when I disagreed he was entertaining. This wasn't.

[Young Wolf]

Agreed.

The irony is that he would loathe himself if he was able to slip outside of his skin for a moment. This last article was basically unreadable. Sad state that I just don't care what he has to say anymore. Even when I disagreed he was entertaining. This wasn't.

Kind of shocking to hear you say that since Ive hated him for quite a long time and I know we've discussed your being a fan of his.

Seriously, they should just give you and I a column and we'd come up with some far more creative bullshit than Simmons.

YW