Corruption in NFL?

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

The Philly Brown non catch was a really bad call and it preceded the Broncos TD on D, but Denver so thoroughly dominated it's hard to say the refs were at fault. Overall though a pretty boring SB.

It was fun for me because i was hammered! Although those ghost chilis got me poopin fire today

[Kanil 519]

The Philly Brown non catch was a really bad call and it preceded the Broncos TD on D, but Denver so thoroughly dominated it's hard to say the refs were at fault. Overall though a pretty boring SB.

The ball hit the ground and that's when it started moving in his hands. That's an incompletion.

[edjr 5,567]

The ball hit the ground and that's when it started moving in his hands. That's an incompletion.

 

How is it that people can see the same thing differently?

 

everyone on the telecast said it was a catch. I agree.

 

Referee says it wasn't.

 

[RLLD 3,455]

 

How is it that people can see the same thing differently?

 

everyone on the telecast said it was a catch. I agree.

 

Referee says it wasn't.

 

 

The referee is not infallible, and the rules have become inane. It was a catch, and any reasonable person should be able to make that judgement, even within the asinine rules they like to play with and torment.

[MDC 5,895]

The ball hit the ground and that's when it started moving in his hands. That's an incompletion.

From my vantage point the ball didn't hit the ground and it was moving in his hands long before Brown went down. I guess you could argue against conclusive evidence to overturn the call but from every angle I didn't see the ball hit the turf.

[jerryskids 5,209]

 

The referee is not infallible, and the rules have become inane. It was a catch, and any reasonable person should be able to make that judgement, even within the asinine rules they like to play with and torment.

The ref said it stands. Had it been ruled a catch it would have stood as well, by their definition of "stands".

 

That said, if I had to pick one or the other, I'd have said it was a catch. Also I think he got punished by the bobble; without it I'm confident they rule it a catch.

[cbfalcon 824]

 

It also helped that no cheaters were present, just two hard working teams that were fun to watch.

Off the top of my head, the winning QB is linked to HGH, and the MVP has already been suspended for PEDs. That's worse cheating than anything I recall being a topic in recent Super Bowls

[drobeski 3,061]

Off the top of my head, the winning QB is linked to HGH, and the MVP has already been suspended for PEDs. That's worse cheating than anything I recall being a topic in recent Super Bowls

ray has Brady envy, understandably. You'll have to forgive him.

[ROCKFORD 134]

It was fun for me because i was hammered! Although those ghost chilis got me poopin fire today

 

try to eat a breakfast with a lot of fiber on game day. that way the heat gets caught behind a plug and come out clean. trust me.

[southcarolina 166]

Off the top of my head, the winning QB is linked to HGH, and the MVP has already been suspended for PEDs. That's worse cheating than anything I recall being a topic in recent Super Bowls

Derek Wolfe won the MVP?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Derek Wolfe won the MVP?

No, no, no. The other DL from the Broncos suspended for PED's won MVP. I know it is had to tell which one of those druggies is which.

[IGotWorms 3,317]

No, no, no. The other DL from the Broncos suspended for PED's won MVP. I know it is had to tell which one of those druggies is which.

*

[southcarolina 166]

No, no, no. The other DL from the Broncos suspended for PED's won MVP. I know it is had to tell which one of those druggies is which.

My bad. All roidheads just look the same to me.

[DankNuggs 305]

What?

 

True

 

The fallacy is that the temperature goes down both outside and inside the ball. So the pressure wouldn't change.

Growing up in the northeast. If you leave a basketball outside and then it gets cold for a day or two when you go to dribble it, it's flatter. We used to bring them inside by the stove and let them heat up then go out and play

[DankNuggs 305]

From my vantage point the ball didn't hit the ground and it was moving in his hands long before Brown went down. I guess you could argue against conclusive evidence to overturn the call but from every angle I didn't see the ball hit the turf.

Agreed thought it was a bad call and lack of explanation was strange considering it seemed a clear cetch

[vuduchile 1,941]

It looked to me like the nose of the ball touched the ground a little while his hand was mostly under the ball.

[Kanil 519]

No, no, no. The other DL from the Broncos suspended for PED's won MVP. I know it is had to tell which one of those druggies is which.

I thought Von was caught with the weed, not PEDs.

[Reality 2,710]

Von Miller wasn't PED's, it was the weed.

[southcarolina 166]

I thought Von was caught with the weed, not PEDs.

 

 

Von Miller wasn't PED's, it was the weed.

 

Actually it was the weed AND that he tried to subvert the leagues drug testing system by convincing a urine collector to switch his sample. Otherwise known as cheating.

[Reality 2,710]

 

 

 

Actually it was the weed AND that he tried to subvert the leagues drug testing system by convincing a urine collector to switch his sample. Otherwise known as cheating.

 

 

Great.

 

 

I just wouldn't consider weed a PED.

 

HTH, carry on.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

 

Great.

 

 

I just wouldn't consider weed a PED.

 

HTH, carry on.

 

Depends on the type of weed, I guess.

[drobeski 3,061]

Denver's salary cap violations were a much worse cheating scandal than anything we've seen these days. How many super bowl wins did they buy by cheating ?

**

[IGotWorms 3,317]

 

 

 

Actually it was the weed AND that he tried to subvert the leagues drug testing system by convincing a urine collector to switch his sample. Otherwise known as cheating.

Not cheating because it wasn't the Patriots. Don't you understand this yet??

[FeelingMN 273]

Not cheating because it wasn't the Patriots. Don't you understand this yet??

No one has argued he didn't cheat the system. Just that the facts presented were wrong.

[KSB2424 3,083]

Why is this thread 3 pages. Anybody that watches sports knows a game can go all sorts of ways. A football is oblong, it bounces funny. Ref's are human an one call can have a lasting impact on the game. Humans fumble, miss kicks, there is wind, rain and snow.

 

Why did I have to type all this common sense stuff. :facepalm:

[edjr 5,567]

The ref said it stands. Had it been ruled a catch it would have stood as well, by their definition of "stands".

 

That said, if I had to pick one or the other, I'd have said it was a catch. Also I think he got punished by the bobble; without it I'm confident they rule it a catch.

 

so a bobble means no catch now? That's a total copout

[edjr 5,567]

Why is this thread 3 pages. Anybody that watches sports knows a game can go all sorts of ways. A football is oblong, it bounces funny. Ref's are human an one call can have a lasting impact on the game. Humans fumble, miss kicks, there is wind, rain and snow.

 

Why did I have to type all this common sense stuff. :facepalm:

 

If you had to guess., what did most people think? catch 70/30?

[KSB2424 3,083]

 

If you had to guess., what did most people think? catch 70/30?

 

Well I am biased. So not the best person to ask. However to me the ball clearly did not hit the ground. The very last angle (they only showed once) from the endzone magnified showed his arm clearly under the football when he landed and when he rolled over. That football didn't touch the ground until after he handed it to the referee. Hell it may have yet to have touch the ground if the ref walked over and put it in a bag.

 

The bobble means nothing. If the ball never touched the ground and you are in bounds then its a catch. You can bobble it and fall down and then gain control as longs as it never hits the ground which it did not. All the commentators, the majority of non-biased fans, the online and on air former referees agree to this.

 

It was maybe the biggest call of the game. Two plays later, deep in their own territory the sack - fumble happened that totally changed the game. The Broncos Offense could not move the ball. That call changed the whole complexion of the game. The Broncos could now go conservative on offense, the Panthers had to press on offense, etc. It was THE defining play/drive of the game.

 

I'm not taking anything away from the Broncos and that Defense. They are really really good. But that play turned the whole game around on its head.

 

Those teams play 10 times and the Panthers win 6 of them. Everything went wrong. Bad calls, dropped passes, a FG hitting the focking upright. Fumbles lost by Broncos but recovered. The ball simply bouncing the wrong way if you will. It's a game, that happens and you have to accept it. But that call of the non catch that really was.... stings.

[KSB2424 3,083]

The ref said it stands. Had it been ruled a catch it would have stood as well, by their definition of "stands".

 

 

 

I really hate how the NFL defines this in their replay rules. Forget that one play in the Super Bowl, I'm talking in general. I want somebody to tell me why there has to be some sort of UNDISPUTED evidence to over turn a call? We as fans have been conditioned to just accept this as the right way to look at replay.

 

A coach only gets what? Two Challenge Flags a game? By throwing a red flag and challenging the call that should totally reset the play. The refs should go look at the replay and THEN make the best, most correct call they can. Using your two red flags should give you the right to have a second opinion. And that second opinion should have nothing to do with the first, human, real time, flawed with mistakes opinion.

[Kanil 519]

 

Well I am biased. So not the best person to ask. However to me the ball clearly did not hit the ground. The very last angle (they only showed once) from the endzone magnified showed his arm clearly under the football when he landed and when he rolled over. That football didn't touch the ground until after he handed it to the referee. Hell it may have yet to have touch the ground if the ref walked over and put it in a bag.

 

The bobble means nothing. If the ball never touched the ground and you are in bounds then its a catch. You can bobble it and fall down and then gain control as longs as it never hits the ground which it did not. All the commentators, the majority of non-biased fans, the online and on air former referees agree to this.

 

It was maybe the biggest call of the game. Two plays later, deep in their own territory the sack - fumble happened that totally changed the game. The Broncos Offense could not move the ball. That call changed the whole complexion of the game. The Broncos could now go conservative on offense, the Panthers had to press on offense, etc. It was THE defining play/drive of the game.

 

I'm not taking anything away from the Broncos and that Defense. They are really really good. But that play turned the whole game around on its head.

 

Those teams play 10 times and the Panthers win 6 of them. Everything went wrong. Bad calls, dropped passes, a FG hitting the focking upright. Fumbles lost by Broncos but recovered. The ball simply bouncing the wrong way if you will. It's a game, that happens and you have to accept it. But that call of the non catch that really was.... stings.

 

If you look from the other angle before he rolls over (so his back would have been to the endzone cam), that's when it hit the ground. He then bobbled it as he was rolling over to where the endzone cam could see and at that point it did not touch the ground again. The touch to the ground was before (and caused) the bobble.

[KSB2424 3,083]

 

If you look from the other angle before he rolls over (so his back would have been to the endzone cam), that's when it hit the ground. He then bobbled it as he was rolling over to where the endzone cam could see and at that point it did not touch the ground again. The touch to the ground was before (and caused) the bobble.

 

I watched it probably 30 times. You're wrong. Dead wrong.

 

But whatever, its over, the game is over, the Denver Broncos won. Congrats. That is by far the best Defense I've seen all season. Enjoy it.

[Kanil 519]

 

I watched it probably 30 times. You're wrong. Dead wrong.

 

But whatever, its over, the game is over, the Denver Broncos won. Congrats. That is by far the best Defense I've seen all season. Enjoy it.

When he first falls to the ground, the ball hits. If at any point after that he bobbles it, it's incomplete.

[KSB2424 3,083]

When he first falls to the ground, the ball hits. If at any point after that he bobbles it, it's incomplete.

 

I watched it super slow mo from multiple angles. His elbow and hand is under it and it never touches. People think it touches because the ball moved, but it moved while cradled under his hand as he hit and never actually hit ground. You won't believe me but the majority of people, the officials online and on the broadcast all felt the same.

 

But I do understand by the rules of replay that because it wasn't UNDISPUTED!@#! that the call on the field stood.

 

But like I said, whatever. Part of sports is catching breaks, having the ball or calls bounce your way. We've all been on both sides of that coin.

 

Congrats on the win.

[edjr 5,567]

When he first falls to the ground, the ball hits. If at any point after that he bobbles it, it's incomplete.

 

 

whatever helps you sleep at night Broncos fan

[KSB2424 3,083]

Bottom line is the catch rule in the NFL needs a re-look

 

And like I said earlier, not sure where this thought process came to where for a call to be overturned it must be undisputed.

[KSB2424 3,083]

 

 

whatever helps you sleep at night Broncos fan

 

I mean, it is close edjr. I takes like super slow motion at a certain angle.

 

One angle actually does look like it hit. But the others I've seen show it doesn't.

 

Meh, whatever, I'm over it.

[edjr 5,567]

 

I mean, it is close edjr. I takes like super slow motion at a certain angle.

 

One angle actually does look like it hit. But the others I've seen show it doesn't.

 

Meh, whatever, I'm over it.

 

If Cam could have come out throwing like an actual NFL QB this would have been a different game too.

 

Dude was chucking high all over the place and missing wide open dudes

[Kanil 519]

 

 

whatever helps you sleep at night Broncos fan

Didn't sleep well until last night... too excited .

[KSB2424 3,083]

 

If Cam could have come out throwing like an actual NFL QB this would have been a different game too.

 

Dude was chucking high all over the place and missing wide open dudes

 

That first series was he was clearly over-hyped with adrenaline. But he settled down shortly thereafter at which point the WR's started dropping the balls. It just wasn't their night.

 

But I do want to get this off my chest. Penalties.

 

1. Nice on purpose and deliberate full on wrasslin move face mask take down by Talib on Philly Brown. He came out and admitted as much. Dirty focking play, could have hurt somebody. Should have been kicked out.

 

2. Denver DB's use their off hand grabbing and turning receivers before the ball gets there really well. Not sure if that's coached but they are good at it. It's an obvious flag, but they didn't call it. Oh wait, of course they did call that twice.....on the Panthers when it was barely any contact.

 

3. Sports Fans? Guess how many penalties the Denver Broncos had in the second half of this hard nosed defensive big hitting football game? Zero. ZERO. In a game where a flag could be thrown pretty much every play if a ref wanted to, there was zero flags on Denver. Well they did throw a flag on a pivotal 3rd down for holding....but after an official meeting at midfield they randomly picked up the flag and announced there was no penalty. WTF?

 

Anyway, I feel better. Thanks for letting me vent.

[edjr 5,567]

Didn't sleep well until last night... too excited .

 

Yeah, isn't it nice when the refs are on your side. Steelers fans know.