# [2015] NFL Fans?



## Carta (Dec 19, 2014)

This is a BIG weekend....I'm focused on my COWBOYS...How 'bout U?

GO COWBOYS!!!!!!!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Dec 19, 2014)

Seahawks all the way!!!

If they win their last 2 games they're highly likely to get the #1 seed and have the road to the Super Bowl run through Seattle!

I have a good friend that lives 7 miles from the Cardinals stadium where the SB will be held.  If the Seahawks make it I'm seriously thinking about going to the SB.


----------



## pedro47 (Dec 19, 2014)

I am a Seahawks fans.


----------



## cissy (Dec 20, 2014)

Patriots all the way!


----------



## Passepartout (Dec 20, 2014)

Go Seahawks!


----------



## LannyPC (Dec 29, 2014)

*Wild Card Weekend Set*

Well, WC weekend is finally set after the late Bengals-Steelers game:

Saturday January 3
Cardinals @ Panthers
Ravens @ Steelers

Sunday January 4
Bengals @ Colts
Lions @ Cowboys

FWIW, my predictions are:
Panthers
Ravens
Colts
Cowboys


----------



## Karen G (Dec 29, 2014)

Yay! Seahawks!


----------



## Makai Guy (Dec 29, 2014)

​Keeping fingers crossed re Le'veon Bell.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Dec 29, 2014)

It's now a fact that the Seahawks defense is one of the best in NFL history!  This is the 3rd consecutive year they've led the NFL in points allowed which has only hapenned one other time in NFL history!  It's also the 2nd consecutive year they've led the NFL in total defense of yards allowed which is only the 3rd time that's hapenned in NFL history!


----------



## Glynda (Dec 29, 2014)

*Carolina Girl*

This Carolina girl has to be a Panthers' fan!


----------



## DaveNV (Dec 29, 2014)

Seahawks. 

Dave


----------



## Kal (Dec 30, 2014)

The Seahawks will play Detroit, Carolina or Arizona.  Not much of a challenge with any of them.  It will be nice to beat Arizona 3 times in this season but they probably won't make it past the first game.  Detroit won't make it out of Dallas so that leaves Carolina.

 Bring it!!


----------



## Carta (Dec 30, 2014)

Makai Guy said:


> ​Keeping fingers crossed re Le'veon Bell.



Le'Veon's bell has been rung...If he plays, I doubt he's effective....That being said; I'm still hoping Cowboys vs Squeelers in SB....Like the old days


----------



## LannyPC (Dec 30, 2014)

Carta said:


> Le'Veon's bell has been rung...



His bell has been rung?!?!  I thought it was a thigh injury.


----------



## Carta (Dec 30, 2014)

LannyPC said:


> His bell has been rung?!?!  I thought it was a thigh injury.



I hate when I have to explain my jokes...Le'veon (BELL) rung......
Maybe the joke wasn't as funny as I thought...lol

ps.....His injury is a hyper-extended knee..


----------



## hefleycatz (Dec 30, 2014)

Makai Guy said:


> ​Keeping fingers crossed re Le'veon Bell.



BLACK N GOLD GIRL HERE!!!!!!

LEE


----------



## #1 Cowboys Fan (Dec 30, 2014)

My user name says who I want to win !!!!

Pat


----------



## LannyPC (Dec 30, 2014)

Carta said:


> I hate when I have to explain my jokes....



Okay.  I guess I missed that play on words.  You had me worried there because I am rooting for the Steelers in the AFC.


----------



## cotraveller (Dec 30, 2014)




----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 6, 2015)

I'm not a Dallas or Detroit fan, but man I think Detroit really got screwed in that game with that call reversal!  Forgetting whether it was PI or not, how does Dez Bryant (who wasn't part of the play) not get a penalty for running onto the field without his helmet on to get in the refs grill!

It gave me the heebie jeebies and reminded me on the Stealers-Seahawks SB!


----------



## Elan (Jan 6, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I'm not a Dallas or Detroit fan, but man I think Detroit really got screwed in that game with that call reversal!  Forgetting whether it was PI or not, how does Dez Bryant (who wasn't part of the play) not get a penalty for running onto the field without his helmet on to get in the refs grill!
> 
> It gave me the heebie jeebies and reminded me on the Stealers-Seahawks SB!



 I heard on the radio that the "helmet off" rule only applies to players that are on the field of play, meaning participated in the previous play, presumably.  Didn't verify accuracy.


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 6, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> It gave me the heebie jeebies and reminded me on the Stealers-Seahawks SB!



Are you talking about the one nine years ago when Jeremi Stephens' TD catch was called back because of a questionable offensive PI call and Hines Ward's TD catch (from Antoine Randle-El) was allowed despite a blatant hold by one of the Steelers' offensive lineman (can't remember which OL right now)?


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 6, 2015)

Karen G said:


> Yay! Seahawks!



They should beat the Panthers (like they did in the 2005-06 NFC Championship game) but I have a gut feeling they're going to lose to the winner of the Packers/Cowboys game.

But first things first; let's see what happens in the Divisional games this weekend.


----------



## Karen G (Jan 6, 2015)

LannyPC said:


> I have a gut feeling they're going to lose to the winner of the Packers/Cowboys game.
> 
> But first things first; let's see what happens in the Divisional games this weekend.


I surely hope your gut is wrong!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 6, 2015)

LannyPC said:


> Are you talking about the one nine years ago when Jeremi Stephens' TD catch was called back because of a questionable offensive PI call and Hines Ward's TD catch (from Antoine Randle-El) was allowed despite a blatant hold by one of the Steelers' offensive lineman (can't remember which OL right now)?



Stephens was actually short of the goal by 1/2 yard.  On that play they called a phantom holding call on Seattle.  I say phantom because the offensive lineman (forget his name, it was the right tackle) completely whiffed on the block because the Stealer defender had jumped offsides before the ball was snapped.  Hasselbeck did a marvelous job getting the ball out super fast to Stephens on that play.

By far, though, the worst call in that game was on the very next play when Hasselbeck threw an interception.  After he threw the interception he went and he tacked the Stealer who intercepted the ball and Hasselbeck was flagged for 15 yards for clipping!  BTW, the very next play was the Randell El trick play to Hines Ward for a TD!  So in that 3 play sequence in the 4th quarter the game went from being potentially 17-14 in Seattle's favor to 21-10 Stealers.

http://youtu.be/NhUEHmRtU9s

I was a Seahawks season ticket holder for 4 years prior to moving away from Seattle in 2003.  I watched that SB in Atlanta with a bunch of friends including Stealer fans and the Stealer fans there told me they felt a little dirty after that win.

Oh well, at least we had last years SB and this years is still yet to be decided!


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jan 6, 2015)

cissy said:


> Patriots all the way!



 + 1.

Go Patriots !





B


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 6, 2015)

Go Russell Wilson and the Seahawks !


----------



## Kal (Jan 6, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I'm not a Dallas or Detroit fan, but man I think Detroit really got screwed in that game with that call reversal! Forgetting whether it was PI or not, how does Dez Bryant (who wasn't part of the play) not get a penalty for running onto the field without his helmet on to get in the refs grill!
> 
> It gave me the heebie jeebies and reminded me on the Stealers-Seahawks SB!


 
 One play doesn't make the game.  Remember the lions were in the lead and their next play was a 10 YARD PUNT.  Even then, they couldn't keep Dallas from moving down the field and scoring.  And even after that score, the lions had time to score one themselves and couldn't do it.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 6, 2015)

*Panthers*

I'd love to see the Panthers go all the way to the Super Bowl and win it!  They've had such a rough time over the years and need the break!


----------



## Kal (Jan 6, 2015)

Glynda said:


> I'd love to see the Panthers go all the way to the Super Bowl and win it! They've had such a rough time over the years and need the break!


 
 Maybe they will enjoy Century Link Field and the 12s!  Go Hawks!


----------



## #1 Cowboys Fan (Jan 6, 2015)

Kal said:


> One play doesn't make the game.  Remember the lions were in the lead and their next play was a 10 YARD PUNT.  Even then, they couldn't keep Dallas from moving down the field and scoring.  And even after that score, the lions had time to score one themselves and couldn't do it.



I agree.  There were about 8 minutes left.

Let's say they managed a field goal-----they would have been up by six.

IF (I know it's not a given) things went the same-----Detroit would still have come up short by a point.

I also thought there were some questionable calls against the Cowboys in the FIRST half.

But, had they lost----I wouldn't have said that was the reason.

I think when a bad call is REALLY instrumental in the result of a game---that is different.

Such as a 14-point swing, etc.

Or, in the last minute of a game.

Pat


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 7, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Stephens was actually short of the goal by 1/2 yard.  On that play they called a phantom holding call on Seattle.  I say phantom because the offensive lineman (forget his name, it was the right tackle) completely whiffed on the block because the Stealer defender had jumped offsides before the ball was snapped.  Hasselbeck did a marvelous job getting the ball out super fast to Stephens on that play.
> 
> By far, though, the worst call in that game was on the very next play when Hasselbeck threw an interception.  After he threw the interception he went and he tacked the Stealer who intercepted the ball and Hasselbeck was flagged for 15 yards for clipping!  BTW, the very next play was the Randell El trick play to Hines Ward for a TD!  So in that 3 play sequence in the 4th quarter the game went from being potentially 17-14 in Seattle's favor to 21-10 Stealers.



I believe those plays occurred in the second half.  In the first half, I distinctly remember a pass that was caught by Stephens in the end zone but was called back on a questionable Offensive PI penalty.

Regardless, that was nine years ago and should be water under the bridge.  If there's any consolation for me, it's that the Steelers are my favourite AFC team.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 7, 2015)

*Maybe...*



Kal said:


> Maybe they will enjoy Century Link Field and the 12s!  Go Hawks!



We shall see!  I'm always hopeful!  

The Panthers did announce the loss of Star Lotulelei today due to a broken foot. If we don't win this one, I'm blame it on that.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 10, 2015)

LannyPC said:


> I believe those plays occurred in the second half.  In the first half, I distinctly remember a pass that was caught by Stephens in the end zone but was called back on a questionable Offensive PI penalty.
> 
> Regardless, that was nine years ago and should be water under the bridge.  If there's any consolation for me, it's that the Steelers are my favourite AFC team.



That was Darrell Jackson that got the TD called back for offensive PI in the first half.  Another very questionable call!

Can you tell I'm a hard core Seahwaks fan!?

I take some solace in the fact that many well known national sportscasters with no rooting interest for the Seahawks still recognize that SB as the worst officiated SB against one team that they've seen.  I heard Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic comment on that on their show just a few months ago.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 10, 2015)

Glynda said:


> We shall see!  I'm always hopeful!
> 
> The Panthers did announce the loss of Star Lotulelei today due to a broken foot. If we don't win this one, I'm blame it on that.



A little bit of Panthers trivia: Do you know where the Panthers played their home games during their inaugural season in the NFL?


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 10, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> A little bit of Panthers trivia: Do you know where the Panthers played their home games during their inaugural season in the NFL?



That was to easy...Clemson Fan...Homes games were play at the Clemson Football Stadium.

Plus, the Panthers had a winning season.


----------



## theo (Jan 10, 2015)

Although I am a loyal *New England Patriots* fan, I'm not going to make any premature or overzealous predictions. Frankly, I'm genuinely concerned about the Baltimore Ravens this afternoon. I have great respect for (always cool under pressure and seemingly unflappable) Joe Flacco --- and the Ravens have prevailed in key AFC playoff games just like this one before right here on the Patriots' home turf. Not looking for Deja Vu today. I don't much like the "thugs" makeup and mentality of the Ravens, but will readily concede without hesitation that they know how to play and how to win when it really counts.

What I would ultimately *like* to see on February 1 is a Super Bowl with the N.E. Patriots from the AFC and either Green Bay or Seattle as their NFC opponent. 
Seattle beat Denver like a drum in last year's SB and would surely just do so again ---  on any day, every day and in any venue, including in a repeat SB matchup. 
I frankly expect to see Seattle playing in the SB on February 1 (although I dislike both Pete Carroll and Richard Sherman's eternally open and always-yapping mouth).

I expect hope to see Denver make a much earlier exit this year (...specifically, tomorrow), so I frankly don't see much chance of a "repeat" of Broncos vs. SeaHawks --- which is just fine by me. Peyton Manning has a (eight times, if your're counting --- and I am) history of "one and done" in the playoffs, under pressure, and I fully expect him to extend that record to nine times tomorrow. 

We shall all see soon enough I guess, starting *today*...


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 10, 2015)

theo said:


> Although I am a loyal *New England Patriots* fan, I'm not going to make any overzealous predictions. Frankly, I'm genuinely concerned about the Baltimore Ravens this afternoon. I have great respect for Joe Flacco --- and the Ravens have prevailed in key AFC playoff games just like this one before right here on the Patriots' home turf. Not looking for Deja Vu today. I don't much like the "thugs" makeup and mentality of the Ravens, but they definitely know how to play the game and how to win.
> 
> What I would ultimately *like* to see on February 1 is a Super Bowl with the Patriots from the AFC and either Green Bay or Seattle as their NFC opponent.
> Seattle beat Denver like a bad drum in last year's SB and would surely just do so all over again ---  on any day and in any venue, including in a repeat SB matchup.
> ...



I would like to see Seattle & New England in the Big One.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 10, 2015)

*Clemson!*



Clemson Fan said:


> A little bit of Panthers trivia: Do you know where the Panthers played their home games during their inaugural season in the NFL?



Clemson!  And Summer Training Camp at Wofford College in Spartanburg, SC!
We used to have a home near there.

I actually started working on my doctorate at Clemson.  Long time ago!


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 10, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> That was Darrell Jackson that got the TD called back for offensive PI in the first half.  Another very questionable call!



Okay, my mistake.  I guess what I was thinking about was the pass in the end zone that Stephens caught and was actually allowed for the Seahawks' one and only TD that game.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 10, 2015)

theo said:


> Although I am a loyal *New England Patriots* fan, I'm not going to make any overzealous predictions. Frankly, I'm genuinely concerned about the Baltimore Ravens this afternoon. I have great respect for Joe Flacco --- and the Ravens have prevailed in key AFC playoff games just like this one before right here on the Patriots' home turf. Not looking for Deja Vu today. I don't much like the "thugs" makeup and mentality of the Ravens, but they definitely know how to play the game and how to win.
> 
> What I would ultimately *like* to see on February 1 is a Super Bowl with the Patriots from the AFC and either Green Bay or Seattle as their NFC opponent.
> Seattle beat Denver like a bad drum in last year's SB and would surely just do so all over again ---  on any day and in any venue, including in a repeat SB matchup.
> ...



I think the only way Denver makes it is if the Patriots lose today which I don't think will happen.  There's no way Denver will beat NE in NE.  I actually think Denver may lose today because I think Peyton has declined in the last quarter of the season.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 10, 2015)

LannyPC said:


> Okay, my mistake.  I guess what I was thinking about was the pass in the end zone that Stephens caught and was actually allowed for the Seahawks' one and only TD that game.



That was so nice of the refs to allow them to have at least one TD in the game!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 10, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I think the only way Denver makes it is if the Patriots lose today which I don't think will happen.  There's no way Denver will beat NE in NE.  I actually think Denver may lose today because I think Peyton has declined in the last quarter of the season.



I agree Denver cannot play in cold or below 30 degrees.


----------



## theo (Jan 10, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I think the only way Denver makes it is if the Patriots lose today which I don't think will happen.  There's no way Denver will beat NE in NE.  I actually think Denver may lose today because I think Peyton has declined in the last quarter of the season.



I agree on all of the above points, admittedly worrying a bit about Baltimore today in New England. I too don't foresee Peyton Manning making a January trip to New England at all, let alone beating N.E. at home or in the cold (...or in the crunch of a high pressure situation). Not Denver, not here, not this year, at least IMnsHO. 
Indianapolis would / will likely just get *pummeled* (...again) by N.E. this year. Seattle *or* Green Bay later, otoh, are both viable forces to be reckoned with. 

I'd like to cite the old, well worn reference to NFL uncertainty....."*any given Sunday*" --- but this Saturday has to be overcome first.


----------



## cotraveller (Jan 10, 2015)

pedro47 said:


> I agree Denver cannot play in cold or below 30 degrees.





theo said:


> I too don't foresee Peyton Manning making a trip to New England this year at all, let alone beating the Patriots at home in the cold (and the crunch of a high pressure situation). Not Peyton, not here, not this year.... at least IMnsHO.



Denver Sunday forecast - 40 degrees.
Foxboro next Sunday forecast - 41 degrees.

Should the Patriots win today and the Broncos win tomorrow, what cold weather??

What does a Colt want to be when it grows up? A BRONCO!!

*Broncos all the way!!*


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 10, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I think the only way Denver makes it is if the Patriots lose today which I don't think will happen.  There's no way Denver will beat NE in NE.  I actually think Denver may lose today because I think Peyton has declined in the last quarter of the season.



I hope we get that game, and I believe there is a way.  Time will tell.


----------



## theo (Jan 10, 2015)

cotraveller said:


> Denver Sunday forecast - 40 degrees.
> Foxboro next Sunday forecast - 41 degrees.
> 
> Should the Patriots win today and the Broncos win tomorrow, what cold weather?? <snip>



You've conveniently chosen to cite only one of my cited factors in regard to any (...highly unlikey, I am personally inclined to believe) prospect of seeing Denver playing at New England next week. One factor I cited was indeed the cold  --- another was a reference to a problematic high pressure clutch / situation for Peyton Manning who, I am inclined to strongly believe, would just fold like a warm towel fresh out of the dryer if he should even get to play in Foxboro at all next week. Frankly, I see him instead taping some more TV commercials by this time next week. 

That's no disrespect to Peyon Manning btw, just home team fan support and "trash talkin'''. There is no question that Manning *has been*  a great quarterback (... the deliberate and operative phrase there being "has been"), but subjectively speaking, I really just plain don't see Denver getting beyond this weekend. Personally, I think a weary Peyton will just be doing more Nationwide Insurance and / or Papa Gino's commercials by this time next week, instead of playing in a AFC championship game.

We shall all see soon enough...


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 10, 2015)

cotraveller said:


> Denver Sunday forecast - 40 degrees.
> Foxboro next Sunday forecast - 41 degrees.
> 
> Should the Patriots win today and the Broncos win tomorrow, what cold weather??
> ...



41 degrees + the Chill factor in Foxboro is like 30 degrees in Denver.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 10, 2015)

Flacco is a hell of a QB!


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 10, 2015)

The Ravens are done.  Nice try though.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 10, 2015)

ace2000 said:


> The Ravens are done.  Nice try though.



New England 35 and the Raven 31.


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jan 10, 2015)

0


----------



## BevL (Jan 10, 2015)

Just watched the Seahawks/Panthers matchup.  Not a huge football fan, but it's so much more exciting than the CFL.

Definitely rooting for the Seahawks.  They have a pretty big fan base here in B.C.


----------



## Karen G (Jan 10, 2015)

BevL said:


> Definitely rooting for the Seahawks.



Great game, SEAHAWKS!!!:whoopie:


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 11, 2015)

Glynda said:


> We shall see!  I'm always hopeful!
> 
> The Panthers did announce the loss of Star Lotulelei today due to a broken foot. If we don't win this one, I'm blame it on that.



The Panthers actually played really well today!  They moved the ball against the Seattle defense better then I've seen in a couple of months.

Man, I love watching Kam Chancellor!  That dude is a freak!


----------



## Karen G (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Man, I love watching Kam Chancellor!  That dude is a freak!


----------



## Kal (Jan 11, 2015)

I was worried that Baltimore would win their game with New England.  The more I saw New England play, the more I wanted them to win and play the Seahawks in the SB.  New England's effort is not so good and will make it easy for the Seahawks.  Their defense needs lots of work.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> The Panthers actually played really well today!  They moved the ball against the Seattle defense better then I've seen in a couple of months.
> 
> Man, I love watching Kam Chancellor!  That dude is a freak!



The Seahawks are only now peaking as a team. Go Seahawks.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 11, 2015)

Leave it to Bellicheat to come up with a game plan that skirts the rules when he knows he's going to have trouble winning playing the game fairly.

As stated earlier, I wanted New England to win but c'mon man, your players against theirs.

Even though it's not addressed in the rules specifically, I predict that not announcing the ineligible receivers until just before the snap will become illegal.

Just like the play the Browns got called on this season where they kept a QB  next to the sideline not facing the line of scrimmage as if talking to the coaches,then running down field to catch a pass.

Deceit of this nature has been outlawed and I think this new tactic will be addressed shortly.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 11, 2015)

csxjohn said:


> Leave it to Bellicheat to come up with a game plan that skirts the rules when he knows he's going to have trouble winning playing the game fairly.
> 
> As stated earlier, I wanted New England to win but c'mon man, your players against theirs.
> 
> ...



I'm not a football fan and even less a Patriots fan, but this game helped me pass the time while I was working last night.  I STILL don't understand the "ineligible receiver" thing; can someone explain it?  Thanks!


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 11, 2015)

SueDonJ said:


> I'm not a football fan and even less a Patriots fan, but this game helped me pass the time while I was working last night.  I STILL don't understand the "ineligible receiver" thing; can someone explain it?  Thanks!



In brief, you are only allowed 7 players on the line of scrimmage, the other 4 must be off the line, and the two on the outside ends are eligible to catch passes, along with the 4 in the back field. 

You will often see teams get penalized for too many on the line or too many in the back field.

You will often see one player step up to the line and another back off to keep things legal.

When a player with a number on his jersey that is not one of the approved for a receiver, he reports to the ref, when he comes in the game, that he is going to line up as "eligible."  You will hear refs announce.

From yesterdays game I learned something new, that someone with an "eligible" number that is going to line up and not be eligible,  must also notify the refs.

What the Ravens are claiming is that the announcement  to the refs was made just before the snap of the ball and not in time for the refs or anyone else to really know.

The problem is in the timing of announcing you are not going to be eligible, creating a deceptive and unfair advantage.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 11, 2015)

*Panthers...*



Clemson Fan said:


> The Panthers actually played really well today!  They moved the ball against the Seattle defense better then I've seen in a couple of months.
> 
> Man, I love watching Kam Chancellor!  That dude is a freak!



I only got to watch parts of the game's first half while dining out in a restaurant with friends.  At least there was one TV within sight!  

Oh well, they had a pretty good season.  I remember when they weren't doing well.  When the once full stadium was dotted with empty seats and everyone was losing hope so it's OK.  Maybe next year!  

Now WHO do I want to win?


----------



## cotraveller (Jan 11, 2015)

csxjohn said:


> From yesterdays game I learned something new, that someone with an "eligible" number that is going to line up and not be eligible,  must also notify the refs.
> 
> What the Ravens are claiming is that the announcement  to the refs was made just before the snap of the ball and not in time for the refs or anyone else to really know.
> 
> The problem is in the timing of announcing you are not going to be eligible, creating a deceptive and unfair advantage.



What's fair or unfair?  Any team can do it.  Perhaps the rules will be changed in the future but that will not affect the outcome of yesterdays game.  It was a good call that helped the Patriots.  While I would have much preferred that New England lost, to put the blame or fame on that one play is silly.    Trick plays are part of the game.  The lateral and touchdown pass is a trick play, it worked but I don't hear any complaints about that.  The Patriots won and are hosting the (hopefully *Broncos*) AFC championship game.


----------



## deemarket (Jan 11, 2015)

GO Patriots !!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 11, 2015)

Today Dallas lost but they were playing against 14 players on the field and sidelines.


----------



## MULTIZ321 (Jan 11, 2015)

The Patriots' Trick Play That Got John Harbaugh Mad - by Roger Sherman/ NFL/ sbnation.com

"John Harbaugh was mad at the referees for allowing the Patriots to run a play that was 100 percent legal..."


Richard


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jan 11, 2015)

cotraveller said:


> What's fair or unfair?  Any team can do it.  Perhaps the rules will be changed in the future but that will not affect the outcome of yesterdays game.  It was a good call that helped the Patriots.  While I would have much preferred that New England lost, to put the blame or fame on that one play is silly.    Trick plays are part of the game.  The lateral and touchdown pass is a trick play, it worked but I don't hear any complaints about that.  The Patriots won and are hosting the (hopefully *Broncos*) AFC championship game.


++++1

 I suppose the non-call of the knee to Tom Brady's head was cheating. Oh, the flea-flicker pass, too.

_Let me guess, Harbaugh also thinks Edelman should have reported as an eligible QB on his TD pass to Amendola _( I co-opted this line off a comments blog - love it).

  Oddly, despite watching the entire game,  I must have missed the penalty flag on the ineligible receiver plays as well. 

  I hope Harbaugh reads the Baltimore Sun article today where they report that the NFL says that it was legal.
"The NFL confirmed that the New England Patriots didn't break any rules when they used a four-linemen configuration during a playoff win over the Ravens..
"_The league commented on the Patriots' formation and reporting of ineligible and eligible receivers after Ravens coach John Harbaugh complained about how his defensive players weren't being given enough time to adjust to who was eligible to catch a pass. Harbaugh intentionally drew an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty in the third quarter when he went well onto the field to complain about the situation.

"Everything was legal from a formation and reporting standpoint," NFL vice president of football communications Michael Signora told The Baltimore Sun in an email."_















0


----------



## blakebr (Jan 11, 2015)

pedro47 said:


> Today Dallas lost but they were playing against 14 players on the field and sidelines.



The Cowgirls should have pointed out the extra players to the Refs. :rofl:


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Stephens was actually short of the goal by 1/2 yard.  On that play they called a phantom holding call on Seattle.  I say phantom because the offensive lineman (forget his name, it was the right tackle) completely whiffed on the block because the Stealer defender had jumped offsides before the ball was snapped.  Hasselbeck did a marvelous job getting the ball out super fast to Stephens on that play.
> 
> By far, though, the worst call in that game was on the very next play when Hasselbeck threw an interception.  After he threw the interception he went and he tacked the Stealer who intercepted the ball and Hasselbeck was flagged for 15 yards for clipping!  BTW, the very next play was the Randell El trick play to Hines Ward for a TD!  So in that 3 play sequence in the 4th quarter the game went from being potentially 17-14 in Seattle's favor to 21-10 Stealers.
> 
> ...



To my Clemson Fan: There are only two (2) undefeated college basketball teams left in the nation one is Kentucky and the other one is The University Virginia... Virginia will still be undefeated after we play Clemson on Tuesday night.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 11, 2015)

pedro47 said:


> To my Clemson Fan: There are only two (2) undefeated college basketball teams left in the nation one is Kentucky and the other one is The University Virginia... Virginia will still be undefeated after we play Clemson on Tuesday night.



Whoa! Clemson has a basketball team!?  When did that happen!?


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I think the only way Denver makes it is if the Patriots lose today which I don't think will happen.  There's no way Denver will beat NE in NE.  I actually think Denver may lose today because I think Peyton has declined in the last quarter of the season.



Sorry to say I was right there.  I'm not a Peyton hater and I actually like him quite a lot, but you could see the decline happening as the year went on.  IF he comes back next year (and I hope he does), they should really consider pacing him and maybe sit him down for a few games maybe in the middle or later part of the year to try and have him fresh for the playoffs.  His accuracy and arm strength were obviously not there today.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 11, 2015)

pedro47 said:


> Today Dallas lost but they were playing against 14 players on the field and sidelines.



It was a good call, but a terrible rule!  I've hated that rule ever since that Calvin Johnson winning TD was overturned against the Bears!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> It was a good call, but a terrible rule!  I've hated that rule ever since that Calvin Johnson winning TD was overturned against the Bears!



Clemson Fan you are alright with me !!!!

Clemson Basketball Team Today beat Pittsburgh 71 - 62 
record 9 wins & 6 loses
1 - 2 ACC


----------



## Elan (Jan 11, 2015)

Both rules in question in this thread need to be modified.  The tackle eligible thing ought to be done away with.  It's archaic, and since it involves action by the ref it's subject to variation in how it's handled.


----------



## cotraveller (Jan 11, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Sorry to say I was right there.  I'm not a Peyton hater and I actually like him quite a lot, but you could see the decline happening as the year went on.  IF he comes back next year (and I hope he does), they should really consider pacing him and maybe sit him down for a few games maybe in the middle or later part of the year to try and have him fresh for the playoffs.  His accuracy and arm strength were obviously not there today.



Peyton was consistently off target today.  I think I saw 4 or 5 passes in a row where he overthrew his receiver by 1 to 3 yards.  And throwing a 5 yard pass on third and 8?  He hasn't been playing right for the last 4 or 5 games, I'm not sure what the problem was/is.  The way the Broncos played today they did not deserve to win, and they didn't. 

Only one team left in the playoffs I can cheer for now.  Onward Packers!


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 11, 2015)

The Seahawks and Patriots are both 7 point favorites next week.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 11, 2015)

ace2000 said:


> The Seahawks and Patriots are both 7 point favorites next week.



I never want to be too overconfident, but I do like the match-up for the Seahawks against GB, especially with a gimpy Rogers.  Could GB win, certainly, but I like the matchup better than I would've against Dallas.  GB is only 4-4 on the road this year and I think they can limit GB to no more than 21 points.  I think Seattle can run on GB's defense and I think they can score more than 21 points on them.  I honestly see it like a 24-14 game.

On the other side of the country I think NE will destroy the Colts 34-17.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 12, 2015)

cotraveller said:


> What's fair or unfair?  Any team can do it.  Perhaps the rules will be changed in the future but that will not affect the outcome of yesterdays game.  It was a good call that helped the Patriots.  While I would have much preferred that New England lost, to put the blame or fame on that one play is silly.    Trick plays are part of the game.  The lateral and touchdown pass is a trick play, it worked but I don't hear any complaints about that.  The Patriots won and are hosting the (hopefully *Broncos*) AFC championship game.



I don't agree with this being considered a trick play.  

The DBs misread what happened and they got burned.  That play has been a part of football for as long as I've been watching and the only complaint you'll ever hear about is from the coaching staff lamenting the fact that their player saw a lateral and thought it was a forward pass, leaving their receiver alone.

I'm still confused about the play I questioned after reading the link Richard provided.  The article said " This ineligible player tells the ref, and the ref has to tell the defensive captain...The Ravens had the information the rulebook allowed them. Their inability to identify who was available to catch a pass and who wasn't is their own problem."

If the ineligible player was identified by the ref, they knew who was eligible and who wasn't.  There are a couple other questions raised in a NBC sports article and I don't think we've heard the end of this.



> Per a league source, the NFL will now explore whether the officiating crew gave the Ravens proper notice that an eligible Patriots player would be ineligible for a given play.





> Even if the referee did what he was supposed to do, the formation and the execution suggested that the referee may have gotten the number wrong, saying 34 when he meant to say 47.



I heard on the Fox broadcast that this past weekend was the show week for the refs to determine who officiates the Super Bowl.  It was reported by and ex ref they use for repay analysis that the refs can't play their way in but can play their way out of the big game.

They were under a lot of pressure to get things right.  For their sake, I hope they did nothing wrong.


----------



## Elan (Jan 12, 2015)

csxjohn said:


> If the ineligible player was identified by the ref, they knew who was eligible and who wasn't.  There are a couple other questions raised in a NBC sports article and I don't think we've heard the end of this.



Depending on the formation, it's not _immediately_ clear who would be eligible, especially from ground level where a DB can't see the other side of the field to see who is on the LOS and who isn't.  Ultimately, it will be clear to the defense who is eligible and who isn't, but the issue is that it takes some time, and if the time between the ref notifying the defensive captain and the snap is short, there will be defensive confusion.  That's why I said that any play that requires notification from the referee should have some additional stipulations, or be eliminated.  For instance, the offense should be required to notify the ref in the first X seconds of the play clock winding down, and cannot snap the ball until fewer than Y seconds remain on the play clock, where X+Y is less than 20, or whatever.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 12, 2015)

Elan said:


> Depending on the formation, it's not _immediately_ clear who would be eligible, especially from ground level where a DB can't see the other side of the field to see who is on the LOS and who isn't.  Ultimately, it will be clear to the defense who is eligible and who isn't, but the issue is that it takes some time, and if the time between the ref notifying the defensive captain and the snap is short, there will be defensive confusion.  That's why I said that any play that requires notification from the referee should have some additional stipulations, or be eliminated.  For instance, the offense should be required to notify the ref in the first X seconds of the play clock winding down, and cannot snap the ball until fewer than Y seconds remain on the play clock, where X+Y is less than 20, or whatever.



I agree, we hear the announcement when an ineligible number reports eligible, why not the other way around?


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jan 12, 2015)

I like reading Peter King's MMQB column. Here's what Pete had to say:

From Business Insider
_As Peter King pointed out in his MMQB column, there was a solid seven to 10 seconds between when the referee announced who was ineligible and when Brady snapped the ball. That qualifies as a "reasonable" amount of time._ 
Further to this : _I timed the three plays in question to see if Baltimore had been unfairly disadvantaged by the Patriot ploy, using NFL Game Rewind as my resource. Playing the NBC telecast back, I clocked the amount of time between referee Bill Vinovich’s in-stadium announcement of the “non-eligible player” (it sounded like that was what Vinovich called the spread-wide faux fifth lineman). By my count, seven, 10 and seven seconds elapsed between the announcements and the snap of the ball._

Either Harbaugh wasn't listening, didn't know this Alabama play or didn't want to waste a time out, but wanted to run on the field for a penaly ? Not sure. I think his beef is with his blowing a 14 point lead twice and/or with the refs.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/patriots-lineman-formation-2015-1#ixzz3Od4mIbLQ

See the play and read Peter King's thoughts (scroll down) .http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/12/nfl-p...ant-replay-catch-peyton-manning-retirement/2/

0


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 12, 2015)

Beaglemom3 said:


> I like reading Peter King's MMQB column. Here's what Pete had to say:
> 
> From Business Insider
> _As Peter King pointed out in his MMQB column, there was a solid seven to 10 seconds between when the referee announced who was ineligible and when Brady snapped the ball. That qualifies as a "reasonable" amount of time._
> ...



The Ravens tackling in that game was horrible!  Their defense not playing well is what cost them the game!  Flacco played really well!


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> The Ravens tackling in that game was horrible!  Their defense not playing well is what cost them the game!  Flacco played really well!



 Agree. We did not play nearly as well as the Ravens. They were great. My own opinion is that we were outplayed, but they were outcoached. Harbaugh is a good/great coach, but I can't see merit in his argument.


  Flacco was able to throw well as he had all the time thanks to his great defenders. That was impressive. Frustrating, but impressive. Only wish Brady was defended as well. 


  0


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 12, 2015)

So which offense this year led the NFL in explosive plays?

Answer: The Seahawks!

I heard that on the broadcast and it surprised me!  We concentrate so much on their defense that we sometimes forget that their offense is pretty good in their own right.

Oh BTW, their defense led the NFL in allowing the fewest explosive plays!

That's a pretty good combination!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 12, 2015)

Did Denver violated any NFL rules by playing a hurt Peyton Manning the last month of the season? He was playing with a torn right quad muscle.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 12, 2015)

Clemson Fan;1713787
Answer: The Seahawks!

Oh BTW said:
			
		

> I am certainly not prescient, but the quarterback for the Packers feels "Like he has 120 more minutes in him." while it appears that the Seahawks have a LOT more than 120 minutes of superb football in them. Indeed, they are peaking in their abilities, and performing before the (LOUD) home crowd, my money is on the 'Hawks.
> 
> Jim


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 12, 2015)

Wow, just heard Fox is out in Denver.  Heard the rumors for a few days and never thought it would happen.  I'd take him as a head coach on my favorite team.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 13, 2015)

Passepartout said:


> I am certainly not prescient, but the quarterback for the Packers feels "Like he has 120 more minutes in him."



I'm so glad he said that!  The more motivation you can give the LOB the better!

My one fear of GB is that they handled them so easily in the first game of the season that I was worried they might take GB lightly!  Thank-you AR for talking some trash!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 18, 2015)

Seattle won and they came from behind.  Go Seattle.!!!!


----------



## Karen G (Jan 18, 2015)

*Seahawks!!!*

I can't believe that game! That's the most amazing and incredible game I've ever watched. Go Hawks!!  Superbowl again!,:whoopie:,,


----------



## cotraveller (Jan 18, 2015)

Green Bay lost.  Fourth quarter - 2nd down and 29 for Seattle.  What does Green Bay do?  Rush 3 twice in a row and give up a first down.  Stupid!


----------



## DaveNV (Jan 18, 2015)

The best football game I've ever seen.  Go Hawks! Superbowl repeat!

Dave


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 18, 2015)

cotraveller said:


> Green Bay lost.  Fourth quarter - 2nd down and 29 for Seattle.  What does Green Bay do?  Rush 3 twice in a row and give up a first down.  Stupid!



No!! Remember they were ahead in the game and I feel they became to conservative. Thanks!!! 

My home boy is going to the Super Bowl !!!


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 18, 2015)

It all turned around first after the onside kick was recovered by Seattle, and then went into Seattle's favor after Rodgers' injury. The first half, I could only describe Green Bay's playing as 'dominant'. In the end, after 'the fat lady sung', Seattle came out ahead. Way to Go Seahawks!

Since we have kids in Seattle-land, and DW is a Wisconsin girl, I can't lose.

We'll watch the Super Bowl in Mexico over Modelo and shrimps.

Jim


----------



## Kal (Jan 18, 2015)

Will be watching the Hawks vs Pats in Key West. Hope we can find a place that serves appropriate beverages!

What does it say about Green Bay having the ball on the one foot line and kicking a field goal???? And they wanted to put the emphasis on the running game. Do all kinds of what-if scenarios but that probably cost them the game right there in the first quarter. Stupid is as stupid does. :whoopie:

 GO HAWKS!


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 19, 2015)

ace2000 said:


> The Seahawks and Patriots are both 7 point favorites next week.



The Patriots easily covered the spread.  The Hawks, not quite.

The Seahawks are *currently* 2.5 points favourites.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 19, 2015)

Wow!  I'm still in utter shock that the Seahawks won that game!  The offense had 14 turnovers all year yet today they had 5.  The defense kept them in the game just barely enough to allow them to come back.  I absolutely loved Russell Wilson's raw emotions after the game!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 19, 2015)

In the post game, Rodgers said they were the better team and they gave it away.  I'm sorry, but I beg to differ!  The Seahawks did everything in their power to give the Packers the game!  They turned the ball over 5 times and constantly put the defense in a bad position.  Despite the great field position the Packers had, they only managed to score 1 TD!  Seattle scored 4 TD's and they outgained them!  If they didn't have 5 turnovers (compared to 14 total all year), this game wouldn't have been close!

Aaron, you weren't the better team!  Yes, you did give the game away, but you weren't the better team!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 19, 2015)

LannyPC said:


> The Patriots easily covered the spread.  The Hawks, not quite.
> 
> The Seahawks are *currently* 2.5 points favourites.



The Hawks are now on a streak of 64 straight games where they haven't lost a game by double digits.  The second closest such streak in the NFL is NE at 14 games.  I don't know if the Hawks will win, but if they do lose chances are very good it won't be by much.

The Hawks played their worst half of football in years today (5 turnovers) and Wilson had his worst half of football that he'll probably have for the remainder of his career, yet they still won!


----------



## DaveNV (Jan 19, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> The Hawks played their worst half of football in years today (5 turnovers) and Wilson had his worst half of football that he'll probably have for the remainder of his career, yet they still won!



And keep in mind they did it all in the last 2+ minutes of the regular game, plus the score in OT. Awesome football!

Dave


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 19, 2015)

*Deflategate*

Interesting, the Patriots are being investigated for possibly intentionally deflating the balls they used in their game tonight.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...tigated-for-deflated-footballs-062844133.html


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 19, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I never want to be too overconfident, but I do like the match-up for the Seahawks against GB, especially with a gimpy Rogers.  Could GB win, certainly, but I like the matchup better than I would've against Dallas.  GB is only 4-4 on the road this year and I think they can limit GB to no more than 21 points.  I think Seattle can run on GB's defense and I think they can score more than 21 points on them.  I honestly see it like a 24-14 game.
> 
> On the other side of the country I think NE will destroy the Colts 34-17.



I didn't foresee the Seahawks giving the ball away 5 times, but even with 5 TO's GB only managed 22 points!

I did foresee NE destroying the Colts!

I'm not sure about the SB this year and I think it's a coin flip game.  I really thought the Seahawks would handle Denver last year, but I don't think this years Seahawks defense is quite as good as last years.  The Seahawks back 7 is phenomenal, but their D line has only been slightly above average this year.  They have some good spurts where they can generate good pressure, but I do think they can be blocked a little more easily then last years group.  Against Rodgers today, he had a lot of time to throw and wasn't pressured hardly at all.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 19, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Interesting, the Patriots are being investigated for possibly intentionally deflating the balls they used in their game tonight.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...tigated-for-deflated-footballs-062844133.html



Wow!! I wonder did the Patriots practice using deflated footballs.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 20, 2015)

I'm surprised at the seemingly lack of interest here in this years Super Bowl.

Anyway, the good wife has given me permission to go! :whoopie:

Unfortunately, she doesn't want to go and wants to just stay at home with the kids.  My parents volunteered to watch the kids for the 48 hours we would've been gone.  Anyway, I'm now going to take my 72 y/o Dad for a father son adventure.  He's excited!  I think mainly because I told him I'd pick up the tab! . My only stipulation for him is that he needs to wear a Seahawks jersey and root for them! 

I have a good friend that lives 7 miles from the stadium.  So we have a free place to stay.


----------



## theo (Jan 20, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> Interesting, the Patriots are being investigated for possibly intentionally deflating the balls they used in their game tonight.



Said "investigation" is appropriate, but let's get real here. The referees in any and every NFL game examine *all* of the game balls before *every* game and the refs physically handle the game ball after most every play during the game to spot the ball. Unfairly deflated footballs? Really? Is that the best the nay sayers have got?

Are we to assume that there are (invisible) Gremlins somehow sneaking post-inspection deflated footballs into the game --- but only when the Patriots are on offense in order to improve only their grip on the ball? In full view of view of tens of thousands of people and hundreds of cameras? (oh, I forgot --- those "deflation Gremlins" are *invisible*, so the thousands of fans, refs, camera crews and sportscasters all can't even see them deflating (only Patriot) footballs sometime *after* referee inspection). 

The Patriots have become a team that many "love to hate" in the aftermath of "Spygate" --- Head Coach Bill Belichik having orchestrated the videotaping of NY Jets signals from the sidelines in 2007. That was both bad judgement and poor sportsmanship and there is no doubt or legitimate argument about that indisputable fact. However, every one (of many) New England Patriots successes before and / or thereafter is not actually the result of some form of  conspiracy. This will be Tom Brady's *sixth* Super Bowl --- but that fact of course is just conveniently ignored and blindly overlooked by the nay sayers, as if non-existent or irrelevant --- but it isn't.

Fortunately, no one has yet discovered the invisible mechanical field tilting device at Gillette Stadium, which forces the opposing offense to have to run uphill whenever they have the ball. What else could account for the Patriots remarkable record on home field? Shhhh!......don't tell anyone about this _other_ underhanded weapon. 

Indy sustained a 45-7 *drubbing* in the AFC Championship game (I used the word "pummeling" in an earlier prediction, but it's good to mix up the vocabulary a bit). 
Yet the conversation conveniently shifts to psi of the air in the game balls. Really?? Seriously??? To borrow a line from a Randy Newman song, "it's lonely at the top". 

Personally, I would like to have seen a New England vs. Green Bay Super Bowl this year, but timid GB coaching clearly squandered GB's opportunity. Seattle / NE is an interesting matchup and I like that the Patriots will play (and IMnsHO likley beat convincingly) the defending SB Champions. The Patriots unfortunately will not have benefit of their "mechanically tilting home field" unfair advantage in Arizona and the "invisible ball-deflating Gremins" may not even make the trip West, but I'm sure that the many disgruntled conspiracy theorists will still find *something* to piss and moan about if New England (...unfairly, of course) prevails convincingly on February 1. 

In any event, I'm looking forward to watching a good football game on February 01, 2015 --- even if I can't see the "invisible post-inspection, ball deflating Gremlins".


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 20, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> In the post game, Rodgers said they were the better team and they gave it away.  I'm sorry, but I beg to differ!  The Seahawks did everything in their power to give the Packers the game!  They turned the ball over 5 times and constantly put the defense in a bad position.  Despite the great field position the Packers had, they only managed to score 1 TD!  Seattle scored 4 TD's and they outgained them!  If they didn't have 5 turnovers (compared to 14 total all year), this game wouldn't have been close!
> 
> Aaron, you weren't the better team!  Yes, you did give the game away, but you weren't the better team!



I'm a Packers' fan and agree with you!  Aaron's unhappy with his coach right now and rightfully so.  Yes, they were outcoached because McCarthy played it too conservative.  Folks here are saying he coached to "not lose" rather than Carroll who "coached to win."

Many locally want to pick the goat for the loss . . . Burnett, who slide on his interception because Peppers told him too . . . Clinton-Dix for not preventing the 2pt conversion . . . Bostick not sticking to his assignment.  There are many.  Rodgers himself didn't make some key plays (passes) and there were some dropped passes . . . so there is plenty of individual players to blame.

Yes, on Sunday the Seattle Seahawks WON the game because they were the BETTER team.

People here are generally happy for University of Wisconsin alum Russell Wilson . . . so I say GO SEAHAWKS!  (and oh yeah, he's also from VA . . . another reason for me to like the guy!)


----------



## Karen G (Jan 20, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> My only stipulation for him is that he needs to wear a Seahawks jersey and root for them!


If he's not willing to do that, I can be there in a flash with all my Seahawks jerseys!  

What a treat to be able to go to the Superbowl!  Go Hawks!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Jan 20, 2015)

Karen G said:


> If he's not willing to do that, I can be there in a flash with all my Seahawks jerseys!
> 
> What a treat to be able to go to the Superbowl!  Go Hawks!



I grew up in NY and he's a diehard Giants fan.  I'm also a Giants fan having grown up there, but the Seahawks replaced them as my favorite team after I lived in Seattle for 7 years and went to almost all of their home games as a season ticket holder for 4 of those years.  It's now been 17 years that I've been following the Seahawks.


----------



## Karen G (Jan 20, 2015)

Clemson Fan said:


> I lived in Seattle for 7 years and went to almost all of their home games as a season ticket holder for 4 of those years.  It's now been 17 years that I've been following the Seahawks.


We lived in Bellevue for 25 years and all our kids were born and raised in the Northwest. We couldn't cheer for any other team! Go Hawks!


----------



## geoand (Jan 20, 2015)

Hawks were definitly the better team.  Defensive team kept GB offensive to a minimum despite the interceptions. Offensive team took full advantage of all of GB mistakes.  GB coaches made mistakes and did not coach as well as Hawk coaches.

Go HAWKS!


----------



## laurac260 (Jan 22, 2015)

*NFL 2015 bad lip reading*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTRmyXX6ipU&feature=youtu.be

Have you seen these yet?  Very funny!


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 8, 2016)

*Wild Card Weekend*

So, FWIW, here are my predictions for Wild Card Weekend:

Chiefs, Bengals, 'Skins, & Vikings.

I believe this will be a first but is this the first time the four wild card games will be carried by one of each of the major TV networks?  The Chiefs/Texans game will be on ABC; the Steelers/Bengals game on CBS; the Seahawks/Vikings game on NBC; and the Packers/'Skins game on FOX.

Another new thing I noticed.  Both AFC games will be on Saturday and both NFC games on Sunday.  Before, IIRC, there would always be one game from each conference on WC Saturday and one from each conference on WC Sunday.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 8, 2016)

Can Washington play in the cold weather ? Packers by 10 points

Seahawks over Vikings ... Seahawks are peaking at the right time

Toss up Steelers & Bengals ...Bengals by 7 points or less OT Game

Toss up Chiefs/Texans... Chiefs by 3 points


----------



## Karen G (Jan 8, 2016)

I don't know about any of those other teams, but I'm rooting for the Seahawks. GO HAWKS!!!

Just found this video that Seahawks fans will enjoy.


----------



## BevL (Jan 8, 2016)

Karen G said:


> I don't know about any of those other teams, but I'm rooting for the Seahawks. GO HAWKS!!!



Here too.  There are a lot of Seahawks fans up here.  They are first on the sports news unless the Canucks are playing and they may bump them on game days in the next few weeks - let's hope it's a few weeks anyway.


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 8, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Can Washington play in the cold weather ? Packers by 10 points
> 
> Seahawks over Vikings ... Seahawks are peaking at the right time



You do realize that the Packers/'Skins game is in Washington (technically, Landover, MD) don't you?  Even though the Packers had a better regular-season record, the 'Skins get the home game by virtue of division winner.

Yes, the Seahawks are peaking right now but that loss at home to the hapless Rams a couple weeks ago?!  Ouch!  And the Vikings are looking good at this time now too.  Look at what they did to overtake the Packers over the last few weeks of the season to win the NFC North.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 8, 2016)

LannyPC said:


> You do realize that the Packers/'Skins game is in Washington (technically, Landover, MD) don't you?  Even though the Packers had a better regular-season record, the 'Skins get the home game by virtue of division winner.
> 
> Yes, the Seahawks are peaking right now but that loss at home to the hapless Rams a couple weeks ago?!  Ouch!  And the Vikings are looking good at this time now too.  Look at what they did to overtake the Packers over the last few weeks of the season to win the NFC North.



To be honest about the Washington game. No! Maybe the fans can be the 12th player on the field for Washington.


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 8, 2016)

Redskins vs Packers - I have no interest in this game so no prediction.

Steelers vs Bengals - I have no prediction as both teams have problems with injuries.

Sea Hawks vs Vikings - Seahawks will win which is what I want.

Chiefs vs Texans - Chiefs will win which is what I want.


----------



## BevL (Jan 10, 2016)

PVRd the Seattle game because I wasn't home until noon west coast time.

Holy cow!!  Every weird thing that could happen did.


----------



## Karen G (Jan 10, 2016)

BevL said:


> PVRd the Seattle game because I wasn't home until noon west coast time.
> 
> Holy cow!!  Every weird thing that could happen did.


What a roller coaster of a game! I thought we were doomed at the end, but that missed field goal by the Vikings was an amazing thing.  GO HAWKS!


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 10, 2016)

The Steelers vs Bengals game was flat out ugly. I was rooting for the Bengals but in the end I am glad they lost because they deserved to lose.

The Chiefs were awesome in their game, both offense and defense.

When it is all said and done I am hoping for a Chiefs vs Cardinals Super Bowl with the Cardinals winning it.


----------



## Mosca (Jan 10, 2016)

If the Pack wins, then the wild card teams will have swept their games!


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 10, 2016)

Mosca said:


> If the Pack wins, then the wild card teams will have swept their games!



That is what happened. All 4 home teams lost.


----------



## Mosca (Jan 11, 2016)

John Cummings said:


> That is what happened. All 4 home teams lost.



First time ever, I heard! 

In this instance, I don't think it is all that surprising. The only game I might have had questions about was Minn/Seattle. As close as Pitt/Cin was, you can ALWAYS count on the Bengals to self destruct. I never had any doubt. In fact I knew that the later it got into the game, the more spectacular the self destruct was going to be, and they did not disappoint. Thank you, Vontaze Burfict, for not caring about winning.


----------



## theo (Jan 11, 2016)

Gotta feel bad for Minnesota kicker Blair Walsh, shanking and badly missing a "chip shot" field goal in the final seconds and just "gifting" the win to Seattle. 
Then again, I suspect that the SeaHawks' season will promptly end Saturday in Carolina anyhow, going home empty handed (...even earlier ) again this year. 

We shall see. As the saying goes about the NFL, anything can happen "on any given Sunday" (...although, for the playoff rounds at hand, it's actually *Saturday*).


----------



## Elan (Jan 11, 2016)

Too bad for the Bengal fans, but when your team has players like Burfict and Jones, it's difficult to feel too bad.  

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 12, 2016)

theo said:


> Gotta feel bad for Minnesota kicker Blair Walsh, shanking and badly missing a "chip shot" field goal in the final seconds and just "gifting" the win to Seattle.
> Then again, I think that the SeaHawks' season will be ending in the next round at Carolina anyhow, going home empty handed (...even earlier ) this year.
> 
> We shall see. As the saying goes about the NFL, anything can happen "on any given Sunday" (...although, for the playoff rounds at hand, it's actually *Saturday*).



I was in downtown Phoenix enjoying the College Football Championship festivities when one of the vendors near me told her friends the Seahawks won on a missed field goal.

I saw the miss on TV that night at my timeshare and I noticed right away that the laces were not out as they should be.  I don't what the commentators were saying, they are always muted around here, but I had to laugh because the movie "Pet Detective" immediately came to mind.


----------



## wilma (Jan 12, 2016)

csxjohn said:


> I don't what the commentators were saying, they are always muted around here, but I had to laugh because the movie "Pet Detective" immediately came to mind.



Yep, that was Ray Finkle kicking for the Vikings!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 12, 2016)

wilma said:


> Yep, that was Ray Finkle kicking for the Vikings!



Will he be on the Vikings team next seaon.


----------



## wilma (Jan 12, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Will he be on the Vikings team next seaon.



No, he will go into hiding and resurface as a female policewoman!


----------



## geekette (Jan 12, 2016)

Elan said:


> Too bad for the Bengal fans, but when your team has players like Burfict and Jones, it's difficult to feel too bad.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk



I feel bad for the fans and the young QB that brought them into position to win.    

Aside from the blowout against Texans, was a great football weekend!


----------



## tompalm (Jan 12, 2016)

wilma said:


> No, he will go into hiding and resurface as a female policewoman!



That is good to know.  I was worried that he might kill himself.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 12, 2016)

tompalm said:


> That is good to know.  I was worried that he might kill himself.



There was a sick joke going around a few years ago and I think if was an Ohio State kicker or maybe Michigan but he missed a FG by that much, holding your finger and thumb an inch apart..  The joke was, and believe me I never thought it was funny but it was out there, that he shot himself in the head.  Everyone would ask if he died and the reply was, no, he missed by that much.

Athletes have to have a short memory or they are doomed to failure.


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 12, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Will he be on the Vikings team next seaon.



Not every kicker is perfect.  Lots of famous kickers have missed FGs.  Besides, as someone else put it, the kicker, Blair Walsh, made his previous three.  He was 3-for-4 that afternoon.  He was the only one who scored for the Vikings on Sunday.  Why couldn't the rest of the team (at least the offence) finish off any drives for TDs?  Is that Walsh's fault?

Besides, if the Vikings release him, I'm sure another team will pick him up and he will have great motivation for redemption.


----------



## Elan (Jan 12, 2016)

The Rams are finally headed back to LA!!!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## mjm1 (Jan 12, 2016)

Elan said:


> The Rams are finally headed back to LA!!!
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk



I just saw this on the NFL Network.  Great news as they should have stayed there rather than move to St Louis. Of course, this is a big loss for the fans in St Louis. I feel bad for them.

However, this puts the NFL West teams closer together and creates a geographic rivalry. As a 49er fan, I am happy about that.

Now, I hope the Chargers stay in San Diego. The AFC West has all four of the original AFL West teams in the cities where they started (other than a short stint of the Chargers in LA- one year I believe).  It will be interesting to see if the city of San Diego can put something together to keep them, now that the Rams will be building the stadium in LA.

Fun to watch what develops.

Mike


----------



## Lydlady (Jan 13, 2016)

I guess if the Chargers don't move to L.A., then the Raiders will have the opportunity.  If the Chargers do move to L.A., I heard that the Raiders might consider moving to St. Louis.  But it's just speculation at this point.  Whatever happens, it'll be nice having a "home team" here again.


----------



## GregT (Jan 13, 2016)

I still think the Chargers will move to Los Angeles -- they must be tremendously disappointed in this result, but they employed a scorched earth policy with the city and the fans and it's really hard for me to think they are going to get a stadium initiative passed now to let them build a stadium.

So the "easy" thing for them to do is to move to Los Angeles and be a tenant or a junior partner in the Inglewood project.   I think it's more likely that the Raiders come to San Diego.   

Interesting...

Best,

Greg


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 13, 2016)

Rams fans should boycott this Sunday playoff game. This would send a message to the NFL brass.


----------



## Elan (Jan 13, 2016)

Quite frankly, I don't get all of the butt-hurt associated with a team moving. Have been a Rams fan since I was around 5-6 and lived in SoCal.  Rams have moved from LA to Anaheim to St Louis in my lifetime.   I'm still a Rams fan.  Always have been.  Always will be.  Isn't that what being a fan is all about?  

  Will concede that it's perhaps different if one is a season ticket holder.  But that's a minuscule portion of a team's fan base.


----------



## wilma (Jan 13, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Rams fans should boycott this Sunday playoff game. This would send a message to the NFL brass.



which playoff game should they boycott??


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 13, 2016)

wilma said:


> which playoff game should they boycott??



  The Rams have been boycotting the playoffs for years!


----------



## geekette (Jan 13, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Rams fans should boycott this Sunday playoff game. This would send a message to the NFL brass.



??   I'm not sure what impact you believe it would have.  I doubt NFL much cares what StL fans do or don't do.  Boycotting a game their team isn't playing in is a curious way to make a statement.  Would they march around their own empty stadium carrying signs or what?


----------



## Elan (Jan 13, 2016)

ace2000 said:


> The Rams have been boycotting the playoffs for years!


Nice!!!! 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kal (Jan 13, 2016)

Lydlady said:


> I guess if the Chargers don't move to L.A., then the Raiders will have the opportunity. If the Chargers do move to L.A., I heard that the Raiders might consider moving to St. Louis.  But it's just speculation at this point. Whatever happens, it'll be nice having a "home team" here again.



 Remember, there will be a "relocation fee" for any team who moves.  Me thinks the Raiders couldn't come up with that $500 million "fee".  Who knows if the Bolts can pony up either?


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 13, 2016)

I am glad that the Rams are moving back to Los Angeles where they belong. I was a Rams fan back when Roman Gabriel was the QB. Wasn't a fan of them when they moved to St. Louis.

I hope the Chargers stay in San Diego. There is really nothing wrong with Qualcomm stadium. It may be old but is not bad and is in a great location. I have been to many games there.


----------



## geekette (Jan 14, 2016)

Kal said:


> Remember, there will be a "relocation fee" for any team who moves.  Me thinks the Raiders couldn't come up with that $500 million "fee".  Who knows if the Bolts can pony up either?



WHOA! That's big money, who gets it?


----------



## geekette (Jan 14, 2016)

John Cummings said:


> I am glad that the Rams are moving back to Los Angeles where they belong. I was a Rams fan back when Roman Gabriel was the QB. Wasn't a fan of them when they moved to St. Louis.
> 
> I hope the Chargers stay in San Diego. There is really nothing wrong with Qualcomm stadium. It may be old but is not bad and is in a great location. I have been to many games there.



If the Saints can handle playing in the KatrinaDome, what's worse with any other stadium?

The whole soak the taxpayers for new digs stuff gets old. We're still paying an extra 1% food tax for a structure long ago torn down.


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 14, 2016)

geekette said:


> We're still paying an extra 1% food tax for a structure long ago torn down.



Which structure is that?


----------



## geekette (Jan 14, 2016)

LannyPC said:


> Which structure is that?



Market Square Arena, Indy, built in the 70s, demolished 2001.  Hosted the last concert of Elvis, so the legend goes.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 17, 2016)

*Woo Hoo!*

My guys are on fire!  Carolina 31. Seattle 0. And the first half isn't even over! 

Hope they can hold on to the lead in the second half!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 17, 2016)

Glynda said:


> My guys are on fire!  Carolina 31. Seattle 0. And the first half isn't even over!
> 
> Hope they can hold on to the lead in the second half!



The SeaHawks are being out played on offense and defense.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 17, 2016)

A looooong afternoon for 'Hawks fans unless the momentum changes.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 17, 2016)

*Sigh...*



Passepartout said:


> A looooong afternoon for 'Hawks fans unless the momentum changes.




It has.  Sigh.  But my Panthers are still ahead by 10.  Just hoping that they can hold on!


----------



## Glynda (Jan 17, 2016)

*They did it!*

That got too close for my comfort but the Seahawks ran out of time!  YAY!  One more!  I really want to see Carolina in the Super Bowl.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 17, 2016)

Congratulations to the Carolina Panthers on a well played game. I think the better team won.

Jim


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 18, 2016)

geekette said:


> <<snipped>>
> 
> The whole soak the taxpayers for new digs stuff gets old. We're still paying an extra 1% food tax for a structure long ago torn down.



Same deal for us in Milwaukee and the surrounding counties.  We are still paying for Miller Park (Brewers' stadium) . . . but it hasn't been torn down.  The tax was supposed to end in so many years, but they continued to find "needs" for it, so we still pay.

The same gig will happen to us now with the demands from the new owners of the Bucks.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 18, 2016)

The Steelers had the game won until that fumble and #18 took over the game. I am not a Denver or New England fan.


----------



## theo (Jan 18, 2016)

*Dive, dive, dive...*



pedro47 said:


> The Steelers had the game won until that fumble and *#18 took over the game*.



I'm not a fan of (usually "one and done" in the playoffs anyhow) Peyton Manning, but I thought it was a *very* cheap and underhanded play on his part in the Steelers game, to deliberately take a dive to avoid getting hit before passing (completely understandable on its' own, with his fused neck and vulnerability)....*but*.... to then pop right back up and throw (and complete) a pass, because "no one had touched him" (while honoring the "dive", for his own safety) after he went down to avoid a hit. 
Seemed like very unsportsmanlike play to me, but YMMV. 

Technically, Manning _might_ be allowed to perform this "self-sack reversal" --- but the fact is that he purposefully chose to dive to avoid being hit --- and admitted later to having actually *planned and communicated to a teammate* the possibility of his getting back up and throwing a pass after said dive. I had *some* previous measure of respect for Manning, but it's considerably diminished after witnessing *that* (..ahem) "revived possum" routine.  
Peyton Manning may very well not be afforded that particular "take a dive, but then resurrect thyself and pass" routine again this coming Sunday. We shall see...


----------



## Bill4728 (Jan 18, 2016)

Passepartout said:


> Congratulations to the Carolina Panthers on a well played game. I think the better team won.
> 
> Jim



The better team sure won Sunday  Congrats Carolina

We Seahawk fans will just have to wait for next year.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 24, 2016)

*Woo Hoo!*

"My" Panthers are going to the Super Bowl!!!!


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 24, 2016)

I wanted the Cardinals to win but they were pitiful both last week and today. I have never seen such bad play calling as the Cardinals did last week. It was unbelievable. It was like they were trying to give the game away to the Packers.

However I was very happy that the Broncos won. I am not a Broncos fan but I can't stand the cheating Patriots. Brady looked pretty bad today.

I don't have anything against the Panthers but I hope that the Broncos win so Peyton Manning can retire with a Super Bowl win this tear.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 24, 2016)

*Super Bowl*



John Cummings said:


> I wanted the Cardinals to win but they were pitiful both last week and today. I have never seen such bad play calling as the Cardinals did last week. It was unbelievable. It was like they were trying to give the game away to the Packers.
> 
> However I was very happy that the Broncos won. I am not a Broncos fan but I can't stand the cheating Patriots. Brady looked pretty bad today.
> 
> I don't have anything against the Panthers but I hope that the Broncos win so Peyton Manning can retire with a Super Bowl win this tear.



I've always been a fan of the Manning's, however I'll have to cheer for "my" Panthers!  

As to "the cheating Patriots," do you think they got to the play-offs _this year_ by cheating? Just wondering if I missed something.  It seems to me as if the Patriots are an excellent team this season too, even though they lost today.  

Anyway, I'm just really happy the Panthers are going to the Super Bowl and I hope they win it!


----------



## John Cummings (Jan 24, 2016)

Glynda said:


> I've always been a fan of the Manning's, however I'll have to cheer for "my" Panthers!
> 
> As to "the cheating Patriots," do you think they got to the play-offs _this year_ by cheating? Just wondering if I missed something.  It seems to me as if the Patriots are an excellent team this season too, even though they lost today.
> 
> Anyway, I'm just really happy the Panthers are going to the Super Bowl and I hope they win it!



The Patriots are obviously a good team and shouldn't have to cheat.


----------



## lizap (Jan 25, 2016)

Huge Cam Newton fan.  Not a fan of any of the Mannings. Hope the Panthers beat 'em by a huge margin..


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 25, 2016)

lizap said:


> Huge Cam Newton fan.  Not a fan of any of the Mannings. Hope the Panthers beat 'em by a huge margin..



I also like the new kid on the block and I hope the Panthers destroy the Broncos.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

I'll take a cool, calm, collected player over a showboat every time, go Peyton.

As to the "cheating Patriots," maybe not this year but have been caught in the past so I'm also glad they're out.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

Did any of you question why Kubiak challenged the incomplete pass near the end of the game?

My thought was that it could have been reversed to a completed pass and the receiver down by contact before the ball came lose giving the Pats a first down close to the goal line.  Kubiak of course wanted it to be a complete pass and fumble with the Bronco's recovering but you have to be careful of which plays you challenge.

Luckily for the Bronco's is was still ruled an incomplete pass


----------



## Deb from NC (Jan 25, 2016)

Glynda said:


> "My" Panthers are going to the Super Bowl!!!!



We are excited here too!  Go Panthers!!!!
We will be watching the Super Bowl in Breckenridge, Colorado...wonder if we'll find any fellow Panther fans there?!?


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 25, 2016)

csxjohn said:


> Did any of you question why Kubiak challenged the incomplete pass near the end of the game?
> 
> My thought was that it could have been reversed to a completed pass and the receiver down by contact before the ball came lose giving the Pats a first down close to the goal line.  Kubiak of course wanted it to be a complete pass and fumble with the Bronco's recovering but you have to be careful of which plays you challenge.
> 
> Luckily for the Bronco's is was still ruled an incomplete pass



I thought the exact same thing even before the replay - I thought he caught it and was down.  I was kind of hoping to see if it was even possible to call it that way.  I missed the post-game, did any of the commentators say anything about it?


----------



## Glynda (Jan 25, 2016)

*Newton*



csxjohn said:


> I'll take a cool, calm, collected player over a showboat every time, go Peyton.



As big a fan as I am of the Carolina Panthers, I have to admit that Newton's "showboating" bothers me too.  Got to give the guy a lot of credit but I wish he'd tone it down just a bit.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

Glynda said:


> As big a fan as I am of the Carolina Panthers, I have to admit that Newton's "showboating" bothers me too.  Got to give the guy a lot of credit but I wish he'd tone it down just a bit.



He's a great talent but the antics get old fast.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

ace2000 said:


> I thought the exact same thing even before the replay - I thought he caught it and was down.  I was kind of hoping to see if it was even possible to call it that way.  I missed the post-game, did any of the commentators say anything about it?



I didn't see anything after the game but I was surprised the consequences weren't discussed at the time.  The announcers talk about every dumb thing you can think of but just let this slide.

My understanding is that they review the entire play and it could have been called the way I described.  What a game changer that could have been.  

The Pats challenge early on is what made the game close.  I saw live that it was backwards and was screaming at the receiver to at least knock the ball out of bounds.  They never listen to me though.

I'm going to look around to see if it's been talked about.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

At 5:45 in this video they say what it may have been but didn't discuss the how the challenge would have worked.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000627711/Patriots-vs-Broncos-highlights


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 25, 2016)

Deb from NC said:


> We are excited here too!  Go Panthers!!!!
> We will be watching the Super Bowl in Breckenridge, Colorado...wonder if we'll find any fellow Panther fans there?!?



I suspect that if you wear Panther jerseys, you'll stand out from the crowd in Colorado. Otoh, that would make it easier to find like minded fans. 

Jim


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 25, 2016)

Glynda said:


> As big a fan as I am of the Carolina Panthers, I have to admit that Newton's "showboating" bothers me too.  Got to give the guy a lot of credit but I wish he'd tone it down just a bit.



Cam carried my fantasy football season this year, including daily fantasy yesterday...  so I've kinda grown to like him.  He looks like he's just having fun.  

I'll be pulling for Carolina against Denver!


----------



## Elan (Jan 25, 2016)

csxjohn said:


> I didn't see anything after the game but I was surprised the consequences weren't discussed at the time.  The announcers talk about every dumb thing you can think of but just let this slide.
> 
> My understanding is that they review the entire play and it could have been called the way I described.  What a game changer that could have been.
> 
> ...



  My understanding is that when you challenge a call, you must specifically state which aspect you're challenging.  So Denver's challenge would have specifically been whether the pass was a completion.  If my understanding is correct, had Denver challenged and the pass been ruled a completion and possession given to Denver, then NE could have subsequently challenged whether the player was down prior to the fumble.  Independent challenges.  

  Could be wrong, but I think I've heard this explained this way previously.


  P.S. Just happy the Cheatriots are gone.


----------



## geekette (Jan 25, 2016)

Elan said:


> My understanding is that when you challenge a call, you must specifically state which aspect you're challenging.  So Denver's challenge would have specifically been whether the pass was a completion.  If my understanding is correct, had Denver challenged and the pass been ruled a completion and possession given to Denver, then NE could have subsequently challenged whether the player was down prior to the fumble.  Independent challenges.
> 
> Could be wrong, but I think I've heard this explained this way previously.
> 
> ...


Yes, I think you have to challenge very specifically and most non-calls are not challengeable.

Yeah, I wanted new blood in the big game.  Loved seeing Tommy put on his butt.  Surprising to me there is an article this morning about his aches and pains, no articles about other quarterbacks that also played and and were hit, knocked down, etc.  Shoot, even Peyton didn't slide on his run.  I thought we would see Osweiler take over ...


----------



## lizap (Jan 25, 2016)

Cam is an American success story. Most likely a kid who did not come from a 'well-to-do' family(opposite of the Manning siblings) who has made it big. I LOVE his showboating. He deserves his time..   



Glynda said:


> As big a fan as I am of the Carolina Panthers, I have to admit that Newton's "showboating" bothers me too.  Got to give the guy a lot of credit but I wish he'd tone it down just a bit.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

Elan said:


> My understanding is that when you challenge a call, you must specifically state which aspect you're challenging.  So Denver's challenge would have specifically been whether the pass was a completion.  If my understanding is correct, had Denver challenged and the pass been ruled a completion and possession given to Denver, then NE could have subsequently challenged whether the player was down prior to the fumble.  Independent challenges.
> 
> Could be wrong, but I think I've heard this explained this way previously.
> 
> ...





geekette said:


> Yes, I think you have to challenge very specifically and most non-calls are not challengeable.
> 
> Yeah, I wanted new blood in the big game.  Loved seeing Tommy put on his butt.  Surprising to me there is an article this morning about his aches and pains, no articles about other quarterbacks that also played and and were hit, knocked down, etc.  Shoot, even Peyton didn't slide on his run.  I thought we would see Osweiler take over ...



This is why I wish they would have discussed it on air with their ex-ref expert.

I just can't remember when or what but I seem to remember that they would go through that whole play and get it right.  Look to see if the pass was complete, then look to see if the receiver was down by contact or fumbled before down by contact, then if and who recovered such fumble.

In my mind it could have gone three ways, incomplete pass, complete pass down by contact or compete pass fumble.

It could have given the Pats a first down close in and they just glossed it over.  That's the part that kills me.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

From the NFL rule book.

Note 2: All reviewable aspects of the play may be examined and are subject to reversal, even if not identified in a coach’s challenge or if not the specific reason for a Replay Official’s request for review.

http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2015-nfl-rulebook#rule15

To me this is as big a play as the Pats challenge early in the game.  It was ruled incomplete but was very close to giving the pats a first down or giving the Broncos possession.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

I will be placing a few bets in this game.  The first will be $1 on the first score being a safety.

When I first started using my betting service I thought I had to bet a minimum $5 and did not want to waste that bet even though the odds were 50:1.   Yes, in that game the first score was a safety.   And then another super bowl had the same first score.

I have now learned I can bet $1 so that's where my first bet will go.  I'll put a few $$ on the Broncos with the points and a few to win outright.

Where will your money be?


----------



## DavidnRobin (Jan 25, 2016)

The ball was not in complete possession (he was bumbling it as he rolled over) - no catch by current rules.

Panthers - beat the spread easily in Santa Clara.  No more Mile High Stadium home field advantage for the Broncos. Cam has the mojo, and Panthers appear to be on mission (while having fun).
IMO


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 25, 2016)

DavidnRobin said:


> The ball was not in complete possession (he was bumbling it as he rolled over) - no catch by current rules.



I know that was the final ruling but it was so close that I would have thought that it would have been discussed much more at the time.  We all seen repays where even the ex-refs were baffled at the final ruling.  I'm glad it went against the Pats for a change.

Right now the Panthers remind me of Clemson in the college title game.  Great QB, on a good roll, swagger.  I'm hoping the Denver experience rules ,like it did for Alabama.


----------



## joewillie12 (Jan 25, 2016)

Denver made Brady & Company look less than average. That hasn't been done too often if ever in the past 10 years. The Denver defense is special. Newton will not be prancing all over the field against this team. I like the under 45.5. Newton comes back to earth in this game.


----------



## Nietzsche (Jan 26, 2016)

lizap said:


> Cam is an American success story. Most likely a kid who did not come from a 'well-to-do' family(opposite of the Manning siblings) who has made it big. I LOVE his showboating. He deserves his time..



American success story? Lets see, Pay for Play, Academic violations, felony burglary, grand theft, obstruction of justice, possession of stolen goods..... And these are just from his college days.  He "deserves his time" alright.
What is it that makes you assume he did not come from a "well-to-do" family? There are lots of "well-to-do" African American families.


----------



## Glynda (Jan 26, 2016)

*Article*



lizap said:


> Cam is an American success story. Most likely a kid who did not come from a 'well-to-do' family(opposite of the Manning siblings) who has made it big. I LOVE his showboating. He deserves his time..



Read this in our morning paper.  Hope you can see it:

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20160125/PC20/160129569


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 26, 2016)

As I mentioned earlier, Cam was the star of my fantasy football this year, so I learned to root for him during most of the season.  He has paid off for me very well!  So perhaps I'm biased a bit... 

It seems to me that he does do a lot of showboating BUT at least it doesn't seem to be directed at bad mouthing and showing up other players (i.e. Richard Sherman).  I'll take him on my team any day, and I'll be pulling for him in the Super Bowl.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 26, 2016)

csxjohn said:


> I have now learned I can bet $1 so that's where my first bet will go.  I'll put a few $$ on the Broncos with the points and a few to win outright.
> 
> Where will your money be?



If I could figure out how to legitimately place a bet on a football game (without going to Vegas), I'd be betting heavily on Carolina.


----------



## geekette (Jan 26, 2016)

ace2000 said:


> It seems to me that he does do a lot of showboating BUT at least it doesn't seem to be directed at bad mouthing and showing up other players (i.e. Richard Sherman).  I'll take him on my team any day, and I'll be pulling for him in the Super Bowl.


Agree, it's more Hey, I'm Great than YOU #$(&#($*&@#) SUCK!  I prefer good sportsmanship but if scales tip I prefer his way vs whatever the hell happened during Bengals game...


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 26, 2016)

Question for Denver fan is number 18 a better quarterback than number 7.  My vote is for #7.


----------



## PigsDad (Jan 26, 2016)

pedro47 said:


> Question for Denver fan is number 18 a bettet quarterback than number 7.  My vote is for #7.



Elway vs. Manning?  I know Manning has lost a step or two from his prime, but I doubt Elway could even run the length of the field at this point!

Oh.... You mean all-time?  

I would go with Manning when comparing the two across their whole career.  Both excellent quarterbacks, but I think Manning has had a larger impact on the teams he has played with vs. Elway.

Kurt


----------



## DavidnRobin (Jan 26, 2016)

ace2000 said:


> If I could figure out how to legitimately place a bet on a football game (without going to Vegas), I'd be betting heavily on Carolina.



It is certainly possible - there are offshore betting sites that take credit cards. The rake is somewhat high.

search Bovada Sports - I know a few people who use it.


----------



## TUGBrian (Jan 26, 2016)

carolina opened as 5.5point favorites over denver....

id expect this line to shift dramatically before kickoff however.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 26, 2016)

ace2000 said:


> If I could figure out how to legitimately place a bet on a football game (without going to Vegas), I'd be betting heavily on Carolina.



Sent you an email.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 27, 2016)

Total points for the game 50 points are less.


----------



## geekette (Jan 27, 2016)

DavidnRobin said:


> It is certainly possible - there are offshore betting sites that take credit cards. The rake is somewhat high.
> 
> search Bovada Sports - I know a few people who use it.



Does this mean that FanDuel and DraftKings (something like that...) are completely kaput?  Or, only in some states?

I'm just curious, not looking to place bets myself.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 27, 2016)

geekette said:


> Does this mean that FanDuel and DraftKings (something like that...) are completely kaput?  Or, only in some states?
> 
> I'm just curious, not looking to place bets myself.



My thought is that once the current states are successful against them, other states will follow.  They tried to make it look like the fantasy leagues were not betting but they are being exposed.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 27, 2016)

Sports Book made some changes this year.  I cannot just bet on the first score being a safety.  The bets this year are Panther's first score or Denver's first score is a safety.

The line changed a half point today so I made my five dollar bet on the Broncos +6 points.

Tell me if the coin toss is going to be heads or tails and I'll bet on that.  And yes, I do that that it will be heads or tales I just want to know which one it will be.:hysterical:


----------



## DavidnRobin (Jan 27, 2016)

how about a bet on a non-flip?

re: DraftKings/FanDuel - sports betting and these Daily Fantasy sites are completely different. On-line sports betting is not allowed in most states (iirc you can in Nevada as a NV resident - others?)
Yet - totally legal to bet on Horse Racing, and currently DailyFantasy sites.
go figure...


----------



## geekette (Jan 27, 2016)

DavidnRobin said:


> how about a bet on a non-flip?
> 
> re: DraftKings/FanDuel - sports betting and these Daily Fantasy sites are completely different. On-line sports betting is not allowed in most states (iirc you can in Nevada as a NV resident - others?)
> Yet - totally legal to bet on Horse Racing, and currently DailyFantasy sites.
> go figure...



ack, yeah, I guess I got betting vs fantasy mixed up, since I do neither ; )  

thanks for setting me straight.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 27, 2016)

DavidnRobin said:


> how about a bet on a non-flip?
> 
> ...



That was crazy, was it ever discussed on the air?


----------



## DavidnRobin (Jan 27, 2016)

csxjohn said:


> That was crazy, was it ever discussed on the air?



Yes - it was discussed and shown in slo mo

After the fact it was determined by NFL rules that the coin does not need to flip.  Also, GB was bitter because they didn't get to call heads/tails for the 2nd flip - they used their call from the 1st flip.


----------



## csxjohn (Jan 28, 2016)

DavidnRobin said:


> Yes - it was discussed and shown in slo mo
> 
> After the fact it was determined by NFL rules that the coin does not need to flip.  Also, GB was bitter because they didn't get to call heads/tails for the 2nd flip - they used their call from the 1st flip.



I did see the replay and how it did not flip.  

I wondered at the time how the ref determined he had to throw it up again and why GB did not get to call it again.  

I have noticed that it's called a coin toss and not a coin flip.

The coin toss at overtime is very important unless you're one of the teams that decides to go on defense after you win it.


----------



## "Roger" (Jan 28, 2016)

Personally I like the college rules for OT much better. Clay Mathews is of the same opinion. 

Mark Murphy (who is in charge of GB operations and has the GB vote) says no.  His argument is that the college rules change the way the game is played in overtime and that should not happen. (Isn't that also true when you give the other team a chance to score after a game winning FG?)  As far as what happened to GB the last two years, he says defense is part of the (normal) game and if GB lost without getting the ball, that is their own problem - they should stop the other team.


----------



## TUGBrian (Jan 28, 2016)

eh, the powers that be know the NFL overtime rules are ridiculous...and that while the college rules maybe arent perfect...are certainly an improvement.

but they of course cant come right out and say that, so they just shift more towards the college rules bit by bit.


there is no valid argument that the winner of a hard fought game should be decided in most cases by a coin toss.


----------



## LannyPC (Jan 28, 2016)

"Roger" said:


> Personally I like the college rules for OT much better.



What are the college rules (I don't watch college football)?  Are they anything like the Canadian Football League's OT rules?:


----------



## theo (Jan 28, 2016)

*Super Bowl 50*

I am admittedly not a Peyton Manning fan and never have been, but he was genuinely impressive in the AFC championship game (as was the Denver defense). 
The game was not really as close as the 20-18 final score might suggest --- Denver led and thumped New England and Tom Brady all game long, for the most part.  

That being said, if this is indeed maybe his "last rodeo" (as spoken to Bill Belichik after the AFC championship game in what was clearly intended to be just a private  comment, not intended for mic pickup and subsequent public broadcast), I'll reluctantly admit that I'd like to see Peyton Manning "go out on top" with a ring; he is a class act and he has earned what may well be one last chance. Flashy Cam's showboat routine can wait, first logging the mileage that Manning has accumulated, IMnsHO.

Frankly, I think chances for Denver success on 07 February may not be all that great, but I will still hope that the Broncos prevail.  

I will deny ever having said *any* of this; I am already preparing my indignant, outraged claim that my computer was hijacked.


----------



## "Roger" (Jan 28, 2016)

LannyPC said:


> What are the college rules (I don't watch college football)?  Are they anything like the Canadian Football League's OT rules?:


Here is the full explanation.

The basics are that each team is given the ball on the opponent's 25 yard line from where they try to score (field goal or TD).  If both teams score the same number of points (or fail to score at all), they do it again.  After two ties, from then on, if a team scores a TD, they have to try for a two point conversion.

The coin toss determines who goes first and who goes into the wind.

Very exciting.


----------



## TUGBrian (Jan 28, 2016)

I would expect that peyton will be on TV on sundays for many years to come...although not in a uniform.

I can only imagine every network tripping over themselves to recruit him to their morning/pregame show team as he is easily the most entertaining and likable football player in front of a camera in eons.


----------



## theo (Jan 28, 2016)

TUGBrian said:


> I would expect that peyton will be on TV on sundays for many years to come...although not in a uniform.
> 
> I can only imagine every network tripping over themselves to recruit him to their morning/pregame show team as he is easily the most entertaining and likable football player in front of a camera in eons.



Will he be able to find the time, between taping all of those "Nationwide is on your side" jingle-like commercials --- maybe for the rest of eternity?


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 28, 2016)

Cam Newton is about to take a huge leap forward with his marketing career...


----------



## TUGBrian (Jan 28, 2016)

whoever put him in that most recent oikos commercial (the one with the 3 of himself on the couch)...should be fired.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 28, 2016)

I have little time for today's game having become a fan back in the 50s when a big lineman weighed a little over 200 lbs; where the Steelers ran a Single Wing Offense; and where many players played the entire game (both offense, defence, kickoffs, punts, etc.); and many quarterbacks called their own plays.  

Today the game is so overly sophisticated with players running in and out, helmets wired for sound; instant replay;  computers on the sidelines; and multiple coaches in the press box.  But my biggest complaint is how disjointed the officiating is and how it often determines who wins and who loses.  So much seems to depend on when holding, pass interference, roughing the passer, etc. are called or overlooked.

George


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 28, 2016)

TUGBrian said:


> whoever put him in that most recent oikos commercial (the one with the 3 of himself on the couch)...should be fired.



Brian, that commerical makes him look like a nerd, and worst than that  Nutty Professor movie, with, Eddie Murphy some years ago. Truly a very bad commercial for a NFL star. That is my opinion only.


----------



## Ironwood (Jan 28, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> I have little time for today's game having become a fan back in the 50s when a big lineman weighed a little over 200 lbs; where the Steelers ran a Single Wing Offense; and where many players played the entire game (both offense, defence, kickoffs, punts, etc.); and many quarterbacks called their own plays.
> 
> Today the game is so overly sophisticated with players running in and out, helmets wired for sound; instant replay;  computers on the sidelines; and multiple coaches in the press box.  But my biggest complaint is how disjointed the officiating is and how it often determines who wins and who loses.  So much seems to depend on when holding, pass interference, roughing the passer, etc. are called or overlooked.
> 
> George



While I'm a big football fan and can say I've seen all 49 Superbowls, on TV of course, Rugby even at world cup level has none of the stuff you cite as compromising the game of football.  There is much more purity in the game and its played without padding except for protective head gear that frankly all players should wear.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 28, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> I have little time for today's game having become a fan back in the 50s when a big lineman weighed a little over 200 lbs; where the Steelers ran a Single Wing Offense; and where many players played the entire game (both offense, defence, kickoffs, punts, etc.); and many quarterbacks called their own plays.
> 
> Today the game is so overly sophisticated with players running in and out, helmets wired for sound; instant replay;  computers on the sidelines; and multiple coaches in the press box.  But my biggest complaint is how disjointed the officiating is and how it often determines who wins and who loses.  So much seems to depend on when holding, pass interference, roughing the passer, etc. are called or overlooked.
> 
> George



Can you name ten players that played offense and defense from the fifty? . I am going to start with the late Frank Gifford,  NY Giants and, Otto Graham, Cleveland Brown.


----------

