on to Baltimore @BAL

[alf8478]

Over under on how long it takes Marvin to say "We're on to Kansas City?"

I think he is already on to Kansas City. He doesn't have the balls to try and win this game

 

[CrashDavisSports]

A lot of reverse psychologists on this message board I see.

 

[cincygrad]

A lot of reverse psychologists on this message board I see.

You know we've seen this movie before Crash!

 

[dare2be]

This will be over at half.... The Ravens are desperate. We're happy with 2-0.... Instead of having a killer instinct to knock our rival out of the division race before September ends, we'll just roll over.

Ravens 31, Bengals 13

I think the Bengals are a good club and I think we will make the playoffs..... I'm just not seeing it this week.

*RavensRockNorth likes this

 

[futballiscool]

Question: Why the hell does Baltimore have such a difficult time finding receivers? Have they ever had a good one (Steve Smith doesn't count; he's still good, but he's old as dirt).

They've had some good ones recently, but most were retreads a bit past their prime (SSmith, Boldin, Mason). They took Perriman in the 1st round this year. He's supposedly boom or bust

 

[cravnravn]

The Ravens are hard to figure out. They played great defense in week 1 but the offense was terrible. They played great offense in week 2 but the defense got torched. I think it'll be a one score game

Denver has a darn good defense, neither team did much of anything offensively in that game. Week 2 for as well as our offense played don't forget we spotted Oakland a quick 10-0 lead by turning the ball over.

You break it down our team is two plays from being 2-0 instead of 0-2, Perriman is on the field running at least, so we should get him back in two weeks.

It should be a good game today a field goal difference.

 

[cincygrad]

Denver has a darn good defense, neither team did much of anything offensively in that game. Week 2 for as well as our offense played don't forget we spotted Oakland a quick 10-0 lead by turning the ball over.

You break it down our team is two plays from being 2-0 instead of 0-2, Perriman is on the field running at least, so we should get him back in two weeks.

It should be a good game today a field goal difference.

Crav -- I'm sure you picked the Ravens at 14-2..... A little odd for them to get their two losses out of the way in September, eh?

 

[cravnravn]

Grad I did have them at 14-2 had them losing week at Denver, oh well there's always next year.

 

[kramer1]

lol if he really had them at 14-2

 

[cincygrad]

lol if he really had them at 14-2

Crav has predicted 14-2 every year I can remember..... And I think that goes back to 2003.

 

[Cincyfan78]

The game really seemed to turn on the Eiffert non-catch. I understand what the refs were trying to say, but I disagree with their interpretation of the rule of what constitutes a catch. From there the terrible time management with under a minute left.

Can't do much (if you are Marvin, that is) about the porous tackling that enabled the Ravens to continually work out of 3rd and long situations. Guys have to make open field tackles in those situations.

 

[cincygrad]

The game really seemed to turn on the Eiffert non-catch. I understand what the refs were trying to say, but I disagree with their interpretation of the rule of what constitutes a catch. From there the terrible time management with under a minute left.

Can't do much (if you are Marvin, that is) about the porous tackling that enabled the Ravens to continually work out of 3rd and long situations. Guys have to make open field tackles in those situations.

It's a ridiculous rule. If the same pass play occurs in the middle of the field, it's called a fumble. Why is it a catch when it happens in the middle of the field, but not a catch when you cross the goal line?

 

[cincygrad]

My issue with Marvin was going for it on 4th down in that situation. Your defense is killing them - They don't have 17 points in them if you're not helping. I get the whole 'stick it to them' deal, but at that point in the game, I thought they were greedy. The time management before halftime was also terrible.

But I give them credit..... They fought through some bad shit and won a game. That's a sign of a well-coached team.

 

[alf8478]

My issue with Marvin was going for it on 4th down in that situation. Your defense is killing them - They don't have 17 points in them if you're not helping. I get the whole 'stick it to them' deal, but at that point in the game, I thought they were greedy. The time management before halftime was also terrible.

But I give them credit..... They fought through some bad shit and won a game. That's a sign of a well-coached team.

Exactly. Kick the field goal, go up 17, hopefully don't give up a 2 minute drill td or fg, and go to the half. There was no reason to give them any momentum or hope.

 

[cravnravn]

Good game gang, nice hard earned win..Can't stand our db' s they can't cover worth crap.

Good luck the rest of the way

 

[Cincyfan78]

It's a ridiculous rule. If the same pass play occurs in the middle of the field, it's called a fumble. Why is it a catch when it happens in the middle of the field, but not a catch when you cross the goal line?

It's ridiculous if only because they've completely convoluted what constitutes a caught ball. You need to know about 14 different rules to decide if someone made a catch or not. Stupid.

 

[cincygrad]

Good game gang, nice hard earned win..Can't stand our db' s they can't cover worth crap.

Good luck the rest of the way

Hope life is treating you well Crav..... The Ravens need some receivers and defensive backs. I wouldn't mind seeing them take it out on the Steelers this week!

 

[CrashDavisSports]

It's ridiculous if only because they've completely convoluted what constitutes a caught ball. You need to know about 14 different rules to decide if someone made a catch or not. Stupid.

I was able to live with the Calvin Johnson rule, even though I didn't think it was right. But between the Dez Bryant non-catch last year and the Eifert non-catch yesterday, this rule is getting ridiculous. How many times did the refs change the complexion of the game yesterday with their dirty laundry for both teams? There was a need for some penalty calls, but I only agreed with like half the penalties.

I am tried of the refs deciding the games and not the players.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I was able to live with the Calvin Johnson rule, even though I didn't think it was right. But between the Dez Bryant non-catch last year and the Eifert non-catch yesterday, this rule is getting ridiculous. How many times did the refs change the complexion of the game yesterday with their dirty laundry for both teams? There was a need for some penalty calls, but I only agreed with like half the penalties.

I am tried of the refs deciding the games and not the players.

Heck, I even understand the issue with Bryant. The problem I have is that Eiffer'ts play and Dez's play weren't even close to the same thing. Eiffert clearly turned around, which HAS to be a change in momentum. The rule, as I've said, isn't that bad. However, the interpretation of it yesterday was way off.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Yes they were the same thing. Bryant caught the ball, took a step and lunged for the end zone line. He clearly caught the ball, he clearly possessed the ball, and he clearly lunged towards the goal line. The ball hit the ground inside the end zone and bounced out of his hands. Once the ball crosses the goal line, it is a dead ball as the play should have ended. He caught the ball outside the end zone and made an athletic move to reach for the goal line. Eifert did the exact same thing. Eifert caught the ball outside the end zone, had clear possession of the ball, made an athletic move by twisting towards the end zone and then lunging for the goal line like Bryant. The ball was clearly over the goal line, the ball should have been dead the second it touched the plain of the goal.

Now with Calvin Johnson, the catch was made in the end zone at the sidelines so they are ensuring that he clearly possesses the ball all the way to the ground because he doesn't have a chance to make an "athletic move" once the catch is made. Same way with sideline catches. If you are able to get your two feet in, luckily, you have no hope of making an athletic move to prove the catch was made. Therefore, you have to possess it all the way to the ground.

Now, if Bryant was jumping and making a catch while falling into the end zone, then he has to possess it all the way to the ground, because he is unable to make an athletic move before going to the ground.

The way the rule SHOULD BE, is this...

As long as the player is in the field of play and is able to put two feet on the ground while possessing the ball and do something other than fall (for example: twist, change hip placement, turn his head, take a 3rd step, lunge, etc), it should be a catch. If the player is in the process of making a catch and going to the ground at the same time like a diving catch, or falling backwards, or dotting the sideline, he has to possess it all the way through to the ground and maintain possession.

The way they are currently calling it, you have to take like three steps, make an athletic move on top of that and still possess the ball all the way to the ground. The rule currently is ridiculous.

However, there are so many rules in favor of the offense, I can see why they at least have one rule in favor of the defense.