OK how was that roughing the passer ?

[boogiewithstu2007]

He didn't HIT his knees he just tackled him by the legs… WTF is the NFL doing ?

 

[Cloud]

It's about time the refs scored a TD.

26-3 Seattle over Falcons. 26-7 Seattle over Refs.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

I'm sick of this @#$^ … I understand not spiking towards a quarterbacks knees but that wasn't the case there… He just reached out and tackled him by the legs … There was nothing malicious in any way shape or form…

 

[STBR 27]

Really, really bad call.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I would be shocked if that doesn't make C'Mon Man on Monday. An NFL player makes a legit tackle at the legs (sack) on a QB and is called for Roughing the Passer.

"The Drive" (and that's what I'll refer it to going forward) by the Falcons was just an absolute joke. 4 straight bad calls... I get bad calls happen in the NFL, but FOUR on one drive? Are you kidding me? For reference:

1) Bruce Irvin unnecessary roughness for a late hit on a 'defenseless receiver' (happened to be the fullback lol) who dropped the ball. Irvin hit him < 1 second after he dropped it, not helmet to helmet.
2) Bad spot, clearly a yard shy of the 1st down marker, but had to get challenged.
3) The call described above.
4) Offsides when Clemon clearly timed the snap correctly... after of course the Falcons had been blatantly jumping offsides all game.

By far worst officiating I've seen this year and what I can remember over the last few.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

I would be shocked if that doesn't make C'Mon Man on Monday. An NFL player makes a legit tackle at the legs (sack) on a QB and is called for Roughing the Passer.

"The Drive" (and that's what I'll refer it to going forward) by the Falcons was just an absolute joke. 4 straight bad calls... I get bad calls happen in the NFL, but FOUR on one drive? Are you kidding me? For reference:

1) Bruce Irvin unnecessary roughness for a late hit on a 'defenseless receiver' (happened to be the fullback lol) who dropped the ball. Irvin hit him < 1 second after he dropped it, not helmet to helmet.
2) Bad spot, clearly a yard shy of the 1st down marker, but had to get challenged.
3) The call described above.
4) Offsides when Clemon clearly timed the snap correctly... after of course the Falcons had been blatantly jumping offsides all game.

By far worst officiating I've seen this year and what I can remember over the last few.

It was definitely God awful officiating today, but this has been going on all season. If the replacement refs were around right now you know they'd be getting crucified by ESPN and NFL announcers, but for some reason they won't speak up about how bad the regular officials are.

Of course, not all of it is due to the refs. Some of these absolute bullshit rules created by Goodell and his cronies need to go. Like you said, there were two legitimate tackles today that were penalized by the refs. It's a joke.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

LOL, then they don't overturn that fumble in the SF game. Refs are blowing calls all over the place this season.

 

[dude82]

See this is the stuff that leads people to call for instant replay on certain penalties. What gets me on the roughing the passer call is that Bennett came at him from the front and sacked him. Penalizing him for taking out the quarterback's knees from behind would have made sense, but that's not what happened. It wasn't even a hard hit. Neither was the hit that Irvin made that got called for "hitting a defenseless receiver". Luckily the Seahawks played too well outside of those calls for them to matter much, but that doesn't mean they weren't bad calls/rules.

 

[Itsmytime]

The thing that bothers me about certain roughing the passer and helmet to helmet hits, is sometimes they CANNOT be avoided. The men playing this game know what they are getting into by playing this sport, it's not a contact sport, it's more of a collision sport. Injuries will happen, and the league just has to deal with it.

 

[DonyellFreak]

Yeah they had a flag everytime we had a sack today, double pisses me off owning the Seahawks in fantasy lol.

Great win though it's nice not to feel stressed the whole game thinking we might lose to a beatable team.

 

[Destroydacre]

There were plenty of bogus calls. Roughing the passer was terrible. Personal foul on Irvin was terrible. Offside on Clemens was terrible. The horse collar on Avril was terrible (didn't get his hands down into the shoulder pads). I even thought the defensive holding on Chancellor was bad, there was contact, but Kam backed off beyond 5 yards and it looked like at that point if anyone was doing any holding it was Gonzalez. I'll admit though I would liked to have seen a better angle on that one. It's really hard to stop teams when every time the defense makes a play the refs take it away.

 

[Robotech]

The restrictions on the defense is taking something away from the game of football. I won't go as far as to say it is ruining the game, but it is certainly much, much harder to play defense these days. I wonder what kind of numbers Steve Young, Joe Montana, Dan Marino, et al. would have racked up had they played in this era.

 

[blstoker]

The restrictions on the defense is taking something away from the game of football. I won't go as far as to say it is ruining the game, but it is certainly much, much harder to play defense these days. I wonder what kind of numbers Steve Young, Joe Montana, Dan Marino, et al. would have racked up had they played in this era.

I always love these questions, and there really isn't any way to find out, but I have been playing with adjusting their numbers for era, and this is what I have come up with for these three, all stats adjusted to 2012 levels:

Dan Marino:

Actual - 4967-8358 59.4 61361 420 -252 86.4
Adjust - 5822-9074 64.2 69695 479-196 96.2

Steve Young:

Actual - 2667-4149 64.3 33124 232-107 96.8
Adjust - 2629-3802 69.1 32180 224-76 106.3

Joe Montana:

Actual - 3409-5391 63.2 40551 273-139 92.3
Adjust - 3702-5349 69.2 42361 297-96 103.8

 

[Robotech]

I always love these questions, and there really isn't any way to find out, but I have been playing with adjusting their numbers for era, and this is what I have come up with for these three, all stats adjusted to 2012 levels:

Dan Marino:

Actual - 4967-8358 59.4 61361 420 -252 86.4
Adjust - 5822-9074 64.2 69695 479-196 96.2

Steve Young:

Actual - 2667-4149 64.3 33124 232-107 96.8
Adjust - 2629-3802 69.1 32180 224-76 106.3

Joe Montana:

Actual - 3409-5391 63.2 40551 273-139 92.3
Adjust - 3702-5349 69.2 42361 297-96 103.8

That's interesting. What's your methodology? I wonder about the older QB's, too, like Unitas, Starr, Bradshaw and Namath. Their stats are pedestrian, especially Namath, compared to today's top quarterbacks, but it must've been much harder to complete passes in an era where defenders could do things that would be considered pass interference in today's game.

 

[blstoker]

That's interesting. What's your methodology? I wonder about the older QB's, too, like Unitas, Starr, Bradshaw and Namath. Their stats are pedestrian, especially Namath, compared to today's top quarterbacks, but it must've been much harder to complete passes in an era where defenders could do things that would be considered pass interference in today's game.

Really, I figure that there's no way to account for the rule changes and changes in offensive philosophies, so I compare each QB to what is the norm during their time. I did this months ago to rank the QBs against each other, I just had to apply the numbers to 2012 to come up with the new numbers.

Really it's all about the percentages. In 1982 Joe Montana averaged 133.3% completions over the league norm, so adjusting that to 2012 would mean it adjusted his completions from 213 to 451.

I just realized a mistake on Young and Montana (I used a short cut in my spread sheet I didn't realize it changed my numbers).

Here's the actual adjust numbers

Montana - 3958-5716 69.2 45112 305-100 103.2
Young - 3004-4366 68.8 37050 268-84 107.2

I'm a little upset I made that mistake, just careless on my part.

 

[blstoker]

That's interesting. What's your methodology? I wonder about the older QB's, too, like Unitas, Starr, Bradshaw and Namath. Their stats are pedestrian, especially Namath, compared to today's top quarterbacks, but it must've been much harder to complete passes in an era where defenders could do things that would be considered pass interference in today's game.

Bart Starr

Actual - 1808-3149 57.4 24718 152-138 80.5
Adjust - 3114-4497 69.2 36435 177-89 98.4

Joe Namath

Actual - 1886-3762 50.1 27663 173-220 65.5
Adjust - 3314-5531 59.9 44468 237-161 87.7

Johnny Unitas

Actual - 2830-5186 54.6 40239 290-253 78.2
Adjust - 5792-8734 66.3 69082 539-323 95.5

Terry Bradshaw

Actual - 2025-3901 51.9 27989 212-210 70.9
Adjust - 3512-5918 59.3 46089 327-166 90.7

 

[Robotech]

Really, I figure that there's no way to account for the rule changes and changes in offensive philosophies, so I compare each QB to what is the norm during their time. I did this months ago to rank the QBs against each other, I just had to apply the numbers to 2012 to come up with the new numbers.

Really it's all about the percentages. In 1982 Joe Montana averaged 133.3% completions over the league norm, so adjusting that to 2012 would mean it adjusted his completions from 213 to 451.

I just realized a mistake on Young and Montana (I used a short cut in my spread sheet I didn't realize it changed my numbers).

Here's the actual adjust numbers

Montana - 3958-5716 69.2 45112 305-100 103.2
Young - 3004-4366 68.8 37050 268-84 107.2

I'm a little upset I made that mistake, just careless on my part.

Your methodology is sound, IMO. There may really be no other way to do it than to compare QB's to their peers. What do you think of Eli Manning? His career passer rating is somewhere in the low 80's, and he is playing in an era that heavily favors the passing game. I don't think he is a Hall of Famer, but many have strong opinions, especially NYG fans, that he is a Hall of Famer. I think Rogers, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Phillip Rivers are all better than him. There are probably more. Maybe I am relying too much on stats, but assuming that stats matter, should we really have a QB with mediocre stats in the Hall of Fame just because he was on two Super Bowl winning teams?

 

[blstoker]

Your methodology is sound, IMO. There may really be no other way to do it than to compare QB's to their peers. What do you think of Eli Manning? His career passer rating is somewhere in the low 80's, and he is playing in an era that heavily favors the passing game. I don't think he is a Hall of Famer, but many have strong opinions, especially NYG fans, that he is a Hall of Famer. I think Rogers, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Phillip Rivers are all better than him. There are probably more. Maybe I am relying too much on stats, but assuming that stats matter, should we really have a QB with mediocre stats in the Hall of Fame just because he was on two Super Bowl winning teams?

I think Eli is very flawed, especially when it comes to turning the ball over. Of all the guys who qualified for my list, only Eli and Brett Favre threw as many picks as the league average over their entire careers. Favre threw 336 INTs and the league average during his career was 336. Eli has thrown (coming into this season) 144 INTs while the league average is 142.5 during his time in the NFL (and that number should get worse with what's happened this year).

There are 6 guys who came out the same year as Eli (Rivers, Romo, Roethlisberger, Schaub, Palmer and Eli), and in my analysis he came in last when compared to all of them (these numbers are from before the season).

Also, Peyton was 9th all time, Brees 11th (Rodgers hasn't played long enough, I limited it to 10 years, 5 years as a starter, though I did the class of 2004 just to see how they compared to each other). Tom Brady came in 4th. Top 10 was:

Otto Graham
Joe Montana
Sammy Baugh
Tom Brady
Roger Staubach
Sid Luckman
Fran Tarkenton
Sonny Jurgenson
Peyton Manning
Steve Young

The thing about Eli is that he has put up numbers that put him firmly in the average category. Adjusting his numbers to 2012, this is what it looks like:

Actual - 2612-4457 58.6 31527 211-144 82.7
Adjust - 3095-5231 59.2 37281 251-147 85.4
Average* - 3258-5351 60.9 35618 228-141 83.8

(adjusted for games played, Manning missed 6 games in 2004).

 

[Robotech]

I think Eli is very flawed, especially when it comes to turning the ball over. Of all the guys who qualified for my list, only Eli and Brett Favre threw as many picks as the league average over their entire careers. Favre threw 336 INTs and the league average during his career was 336. Eli has thrown (coming into this season) 144 INTs while the league average is 142.5 during his time in the NFL (and that number should get worse with what's happened this year).

There are 6 guys who came out the same year as Eli (Rivers, Romo, Roethlisberger, Schaub, Palmer and Eli), and in my analysis he came in last when compared to all of them (these numbers are from before the season).

Also, Peyton was 9th all time, Brees 11th (Rodgers hasn't played long enough, I limited it to 10 years, 5 years as a starter, though I did the class of 2004 just to see how they compared to each other). Tom Brady came in 4th. Top 10 was:

Otto Graham
Joe Montana
Sammy Baugh
Tom Brady
Roger Staubach
Sid Luckman
Fran Tarkenton
Sonny Jurgenson
Peyton Manning
Steve Young

The thing about Eli is that he has put up numbers that put him firmly in the average category. Adjusting his numbers to 2012, this is what it looks like:

Actual - 2612-4457 58.6 31527 211-144 82.7
Adjust - 3095-5231 59.2 37281 251-147 85.4
Average* - 3258-5351 60.9 35618 228-141 83.8

(adjusted for games played, Manning missed 6 games in 2004).

I just kind of laugh when Eli supporters say he is a definite Hall of Famer. However, even though he's average, the Manning name and the two Super Bowls give him a good chance of getting into the HOF. It would be undeserved, IMO.

 

[SonnyCID]

Defenders know that you cant hit a QB in the front of his legs like that.