Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Eagles vs Packers - TNF - Week 4


Insein

Recommended Posts

I get the argument that the defender was there maybe a split second early, and maybe there is a tendency to let bang bang split second things go

BUT

That split second is the difference between a TD and an interception.   The still image in that tweet makes that clear. The receiver had no chance to catch the ball.  Split second or not, the entire reason that play resulted in an interception was because the defender wrapped up the receiver before the ball got there.  

This is DPI....period

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MooversShakers said:
2 hours ago, Insein said:

To be fair though, that could have just been this referee. Others might reverse all the ticky tack stuff. Who knows. It's like an Umpire with a strike zone like I said.

I don't think the NFL wants to go there.

I don't thing the NFL wants that either. They showed the challenged/overturned numbers last night and it was less than one-third (forget the actual numbers). I'm sure each coach thought they had a good chance to overturn. Probably has to be play-altering to change the call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Rove! said:

I get the argument that the defender was there maybe a split second early, and maybe there is a tendency to let bang bang split second things go

BUT

That split second is the difference between a TD and an interception.   The still image in that tweet makes that clear. The receiver had no chance to catch the ball.  Split second or not, the entire reason that play resulted in an interception was because the defender wrapped up the receiver before the ball got there.  

This is DPI....period

And the Eagles had one earlier on Jeffery where the defender moved Jeffery's hand before the ball got there. Play stood as called. As I mentioned, less than 1/3rd of the PI reviews have been overturned - and that was before last night. They're just not overturning close calls. If it was called PI I wouldn't argue it either.

Edited by Amused to Death
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Frankman said:

egregious.

Shouldn't matter 0.1 second / bang-bang / however you try to spin it.

Defender illegally prevented the WR from having a chance to catch the pass by BEAR HUGGING the guy from behind. Pinned one arm that we can see and likely both arms.

lol ... the ball bounced off the WR's chest FCS. He had perfect position to make the catch. Boxed out the defender. Ball was on target. The only reason that wasn't a completed pass is because the defender was their early illegally. 

How about if the timing is exactly the same but the defender is Bear Hugging the WR from the front? Would that justify a flag? Same infraction. Why does it matter?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

The eagles get all the calls 

Plus for some reason offensive play callers brains turn to mush when they get inside the 10 against them too

New England wants a word with them.

Darell ####in' Bevell

Still can't say that guy's name. Nor spell it, really.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rove! said:

I get the argument that the defender was there maybe a split second early, and maybe there is a tendency to let bang bang split second things go

BUT

That split second is the difference between a TD and an interception.   The still image in that tweet makes that clear. The receiver had no chance to catch the ball.  Split second or not, the entire reason that play resulted in an interception was because the defender wrapped up the receiver before the ball got there.  

This is DPI....period

Agree

As I fan, I hate the PI reviews, but it's there so why wasn't this last play reviewed?  What am I missing?  DB obviously got there early and wrapped both arms around MVS.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another way to look at it.

... if the play was reviewed (are we saying they didn't even bother to review it? Yikes) and they called PI ... would anyone have argued?

Never mind the non-calls earlier in the game, or in previous games. That play, standing alone, how could anyone argue if they called PI after replay?

Had they called PI on review, we all would have looked at it and said "yeah, defender got there a hair too early. They got it right."

PHI fan would have argued ..."but what about the other plays ...". but not even PHI fan can say this play was a clean play by the defender.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bossman said:

Here's another way to look at it.

... if the play was reviewed (are we saying they didn't even bother to review it? Yikes) and they called PI ... would anyone have argued?

Never mind the non-calls earlier in the game, or in previous games. That play, standing alone, how could anyone argue if they called PI after replay?

Had they called PI on review, we all would have looked at it and said "yeah, defender got there a hair too early. They got it right."

PHI fan would have argued ..."but what about the other plays ...". but not even PHI fan can say this play was a clean play by the defender.

I would have. If we are going to review every bang bang play, we’re going to have five hour games and pass interference called almost every time. I think the replay rule is stupid, not thought out, and ineffectual.

Also, you can’t look at one play in a vacuum. You have to look at it in context with other calls of the same degree. There were two far more flagrant pass interference non-calls that were upheld earlier last night.  If you aren’t calling those, you simply can’t call this.

just my opinion.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bossman said:

Here's another way to look at it.

... if the play was reviewed (are we saying they didn't even bother to review it? Yikes) and they called PI ... would anyone have argued?

Never mind the non-calls earlier in the game, or in previous games. That play, standing alone, how could anyone argue if they called PI after replay?

Had they called PI on review, we all would have looked at it and said "yeah, defender got there a hair too early. They got it right."

PHI fan would have argued ..."but what about the other plays ...". but not even PHI fan can say this play was a clean play by the defender.

Had they called PI on the field and reviewed it, it would not have been overturned. Since they didn't call it on the field, that too was not overturned. 

It was by definition pass interference but like I've said, based on the way they called the previous two reviews, last night it was not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Insein said:

Had they called PI on the field and reviewed it, it would not have been overturned. Since they didn't call it on the field, that too was not overturned. 

It was by definition pass interference but like I've said, based on the way they called the previous two reviews, last night it was not.

at least they were consistent.  which is all you can really ask for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Bossman said:

Here's another way to look at it.

... if the play was reviewed (are we saying they didn't even bother to review it? Yikes) and they called PI ... would anyone have argued?

Never mind the non-calls earlier in the game, or in previous games. That play, standing alone, how could anyone argue if they called PI after replay?

Had they called PI on review, we all would have looked at it and said "yeah, defender got there a hair too early. They got it right."

PHI fan would have argued ..."but what about the other plays ...". but not even PHI fan can say this play was a clean play by the defender.

Even Philly fans aren't saying that wasn't PI.  It was.  But ya, so were others in the game and not called.  They missed a few of them all game.  This review thing has opened up a huge can of worms that now every fan is wanting every play reviewed for PI.  Add that to the fact that they seem almost completely unwilling to change the call on the field, and this new rule has created a lot of anger at the refs, and rightfully so.  They need to just get rid of the review rule since they're rarely ever overturning anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Deamon said:

Even Philly fans aren't saying that wasn't PI.  It was.  But ya, so were others in the game and not called.  They missed a few of them all game.  This review thing has opened up a huge can of worms that now every fan is wanting every play reviewed for PI.  Add that to the fact that they seem almost completely unwilling to change the call on the field, and this new rule has created a lot of anger at the refs, and rightfully so.  They need to just get rid of the review rule since they're rarely ever overturning anything.

 

4 minutes ago, MooversShakers said:

Stop all the whining, no NFL fan wants those calls called PI. I mean seriously, PI could be called on almost every play. Give it up already.

Completely agree.

Just thought that EXACT scenario is why they made PI reviewable. If you're not going to use it there then lets just get rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bossman said:

 

Completely agree.

Just thought that EXACT scenario is why they made PI reviewable. If you're not going to use it there then lets just get rid of it.

Use it for instances where you dont have to break the tape down frame by frame in order to find the smoking gun. Doesn't matter if it happens in the first quarter or the last play of the game, DON'T CHANGE THE CALL, it will ruin the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was shocked the play was not reviewed as it appeared like the defender was clearly there early, especially after seeing the replay.  With being a turnover I thought for sure they would take a look at it.  I did not really expect it to be changed though since they did not change any of the earlier defensive PI reviews.  The PI reviews are not good for the game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Go Pack said:

I was shocked the play was not reviewed as it appeared like the defender was clearly there early, especially after seeing the replay.  With being a turnover I thought for sure they would take a look at it.  I did not really expect it to be changed though since they did not change any of the earlier defensive PI reviews.  The PI reviews are not good for the game

First thing I thought of was wow an extra timeout. Coaches will use this tool I would think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the call consistent with the way the refs called the game? 

 

That being said, I'm surprised it wasn't PI.

 

This new rule is going to suck more of the spontaneous enjoyment out of the NFL. The fan used to take TDs as they occurred.  Now, we have to wait for the replay.  Now, big Defensive plays are going to follow suit; we'll be holding back enjoyment for fear of the idea that a play like that, with no flag on the field can be called a penalty on replay.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, unckeyherb said:

I would have. If we are going to review every bang bang play, we’re going to have five hour games and pass interference called almost every time. I think the replay rule is stupid, not thought out, and ineffectual.

Also, you can’t look at one play in a vacuum. You have to look at it in context with other calls of the same degree. There were two far more flagrant pass interference non-calls that were upheld earlier last night.  If you aren’t calling those, you simply can’t call this.

just my opinion.

I completely disagree with this....why even have replay and review things if we are going to base it on previous plays....the whole point of having replay is avoid exactly what you are saying happens...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree,  The NFL is close to becoming unwatchable.  They had an egregious error on a pass interference play in the rams saints game but that was more the exception than the norm.  And now they are using the exception to the norm to make  policy.  They should have just left it alone.  Nobody wants to watch the penalty fests.  theyve also put DBs at a competitive disadvantage with the tweaks to the PI rules over the years to spur offense so now its DBs  basically have to risk PI on every pass play or give up big plays.  This situation is the NFLs fault.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, need2know said:

at least they were consistent.  which is all you can really ask for

Wrong. All we can ask for is that they get the calls right. Just because they got the other two wrong doesn't mean they should let this one be wrong as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kajaet said:

They've also put DBs at a competitive disadvantage with the tweaks to the PI rules over the years to spur offense so now its DBs  basically have to risk PI on every pass play or give up big plays.  

This is an excellent point. Roll some of that back and encourage how pass defense was played in the 1980s-90s. Seemed to be a nice balance then.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

Wrong. All we can ask for is that they get the calls right. Just because they got the other two wrong doesn't mean they should let this one be wrong as well.

We all know different crews have different definitions of PI in each and every game. Unless you start having robots as refs, it's always going to vary. This crew called it consistent the whole night. Every call was text book PI but not every crew calls text book PI on the field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Insein said:

We all know different crews have different definitions of PI in each and every game. Unless you start having robots as refs, it's always going to vary. This crew called it consistent the whole night. Every call was text book PI but not every crew calls text book PI on the field. 

Analogous to MLB umpires. Some expand the corners, others do not. Just call it the same for both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly if they're gonna allow DPI challenges then allow the DBs to make contact past 5 yards again. 

Also, this has probably been mentioned but in real time things are different than being able to dissect it from every angle in slow motion. Instant replay really changed things for the worst for the NFL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2019 at 4:20 AM, cobalt_27 said:

As a neuropsychologist, I can attest from clinical experience that every single 40+ year old patient I see complains of memory loss.  Which fighters are slurring their words?

Riddick Bowe, Shane Moseley and Evander Holyfield are three that come to mind.  They call it "punch drunk".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stinkin Ref said:

I completely disagree with this....why even have replay and review things if we are going to base it on previous plays....the whole point of having replay is avoid exactly what you are saying happens...

For the same reason you don’t establish a strike zone then change it in the 8th inning.  I care more about consistency with application of rules.  Even if they are letting things go. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to ##### about the reffing but when you give the opponent three short fields, two on special teams and one on a turnover things are going to go bad.  When you don't convert in the red zone things are going to go bad.  The Eagles gouged the Packer on the ground.  The Packers, gouged the Eagles through the air.  The Packers had better long drives than the Eagles but when the Eagles are stopped by the goal one maybe that is a partial explanation for that.  Average starting field position was a big story in the game.

I was surprised by how few possessions each team had but the Eagles running the ball really ran the clock.

Going back to the long drives Denver had, and they had several, the Packers D is not getting off of the field.  Seems they turn the ball over or they get scored on.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I'd like to ##### about the reffing but when you give the opponent three short fields, two on special teams and one on a turnover things are going to go bad.  When you don't convert in the red zone things are going to go bad.  The Eagles gouged the Packer on the ground.  The Packers, gouged the Eagles through the air.  The Packers had better long drives than the Eagles but when the Eagles are stopped by the goal one maybe that is a partial explanation for that.  Average starting field position was a big story in the game.

I was surprised by how few possessions each team had but the Eagles running the ball really ran the clock.

Going back to the long drives Denver had, and they had several, the Packers D is not getting off of the field.  Seems they turn the ball over or they get scored on.  

 

 

Very similar to the Eagles loss to the Lions last week. Could the Eagles have won? Yes. Did the refs shaft them on some calls? Yes. But ultimately the Eagles put themselves in that spot by playing poorly on offense and defense AND special teams. Hard to win when you make so many mistakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just find it so hard to have genuine interest in the NFL these days.  It is literally every single game that has real issues.  Not issues that are just guys griping because it's their team or they had money or ff on the line, but real issues that cause us to question the outcomes of games.  

I'm going down memory lane and I know I shouldn't but, geez, back in the day, things happened in games and we just cried for a minute and said bad call and let out a boo or whatever but we didn't seem to be how we are these days and just nit-pick every play to death to the point we don't know what we are looking at.  Maybe it's because we now have the technology to get it right..but don't that bothers us.  Is there any REAL reason why a ball can't be chipped and then use it to know where it should be spotted or if it broke the plane or got theyardage needed?  

The game has been attempted to be legislated to the point of sheer boredom and arrest deal of it is under the guise of safety, which should be what they should do except it has two major problems.

1-the shield is hypocritical.  They talk safety but then they trot out pre-season games that are sheer garbage to turn a buck and they fly players to Europe to play to get more market but never consider how utterly terrible that has to feel for a player trying to recoup or injured.  We have TNF which 90 percent of the time would be 100 percent unwatched if it weren't solely for the gambling aspect.

2-the sport is, by nature, violent.  It simply isn't a sport that is conducive to being an activity that can be played safely now that we have the information and medical knowledge we now have.  

I truly see this sport as one that identifies with us in America so strongly that we are becoming a "reluctant lover" of the game.  We don't truly want to love football..the sport of football, like we once did.  We are now just caught up in all the peripheral things that are attached to it and the younger generation, IF they can avoid getting hooked on the gambling side of it like a lot of us are, will demonstrate much less interest in it going forward.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone always talking about putting a chip in the ball for spotting....but no way that works. The spot isn't the furthest the ball goes, but the furthest the ball goes BEFORE THE KNEE (hip, whatever) is down.

Putting a chip in the ball will do little to help, outside of a very small hanfull of goal line plays...and it would be small

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, renesauz said:

Everyone always talking about putting a chip in the ball for spotting....but no way that works. The spot isn't the furthest the ball goes, but the furthest the ball goes BEFORE THE KNEE (hip, whatever) is down.

Putting a chip in the ball will do little to help, outside of a very small hanfull of goal line plays...and it would be small

If the knee (hip, whatever) is down and the ball is chipped you have your spot. If you are looking at it on replay I am not sure how that equates to now working?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MooversShakers said:

If the knee (hip, whatever) is down and the ball is chipped you have your spot. If you are looking at it on replay I am not sure how that equates to now working?

because you still have to use replay. People speak as if a chip would be a panacea, but it wouldn't be. The chip would only make a difference to determine a matter of inches if/when the ball isn't visible on the replay. IN the middle of the field, watch how the INITIAL sticks are set....by eye. IN order to use a chip ANYWHERE but the goal-line, you'd have to use it on EVERY play, because what difference is a few inches to determine 1st down if it's lined up by eye on the previous first down. It isn't practical.

The one and ONLY place it would matter (AND BE BOTH PRACTICAL AND FAIR) would be on certain goal line plays, most of which they get right on replay anyway. It wouldn't work and solve things like you expect. It would add a replay nightmare that would dwarf what we have now

Edited by renesauz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, renesauz said:

because you still have to use replay. People speak as if a chip would be a panacea, but it wouldn't be. The chip would only make a difference to determine a matter of inches if/when the ball isn't visible on the replay. IN the middle of the field, watch how the INITIAL sticks are set....by eye. IN order to use a chip ANYWHERE but the goal-line, you'd have to use it on EVERY play, because what difference is a few inches to determine 1st down if it's lined up by eye on the previous first down. It isn't practical.

The one and ONLY place it would matter (AND BE BOTH PRACTICAL AND FAIR) would be on certain goal line plays, most of which they get right on replay anyway. It wouldn't work and solve things like you expect. It would add a replay nightmare that would dwarf what we have now

I have no idea what you are talking about. If a chip were used in the ball it would be able to determine the exact spot of the ball during the replay, definitively. You wouldn't  use it other then to determine first downs and touchdowns. The sticks and end zone are where they are, as long as the chipped ball shows the spot as being behind/over either then you have your spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, modogg said:

Funny people in here are still complaining that the 7th DB on the Eagles may have been there a split second too early. Honestly, should be more concerned you have 4 chances from 1st and goal from the 1 and you can't punch it in. That is what most would be talking about

Who’s still complaining aboug it? The last post about it here was well over 24 hours ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s drop this already. We lost, end of story. As BB says, we are on to Dallas. Philly won the game, we both had calls go are way. Glad to get that loss outta the way so we don’t have to worry about that undefeated season. :)

 

Hopefully the NFL will re-evaluate the PI challenge as it stands now and fine tune it. No penalty ever should based on previous good or bad calls, they should be based on the current play and whether it’s a penalty or not. Clearly it’s messed up now and doing more harm then good. 

Again, good game Eagles, the lines were the difference in this game as your D line man-handled our O line again the run and your O-line kicked our D lines ### as well. It won’t be easier in Dallas that’s for sure.

Good luck the rest of the way. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, The Claymaker said:

Let’s drop this already. We lost, end of story. As BB says, we are on to Dallas. Philly won the game, we both had calls go are way. Glad to get that loss outta the way so we don’t have to worry about that undefeated season. :)

 

Hopefully the NFL will re-evaluate the PI challenge as it stands now and fine tune it. No penalty ever should based on previous good or bad calls, they should be based on the current play and whether it’s a penalty or not. Clearly it’s messed up now and doing more harm then good. 

Again, good game Eagles, the lines were the difference in this game as your D line man-handled our O line again the run and your O-line kicked our D lines ### as well. It won’t be easier in Dallas that’s for sure.

Good luck the rest of the way. 

Sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, modogg said:

Funny people in here are still complaining that the 7th DB on the Eagles may have been there a split second too early. Honestly, should be more concerned you have 4 chances from 1st and goal from the 1 and you can't punch it in. That is what most would be talking about

Perhaps the Packers would have run it in, or tried, had not their power back been but out on an unnecessary shot by a guy who was not ejected for it, a guy who caused the critical turnover before half.  Still, what ifs.  The Eagles won.  They did so on a short week, traveling, and overcoming injuries.  They needed that.  They also needed Dallas to lose tonight, which they did.  Next week Eagle fans will be Packer fans as well since they will need Green Bay to hand Dallas another loss to help the Eagles chances.   I know I will appreciate your good will and best wishes next week.  Say, maybe you can lend us Fletcher Cox for the week.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...