too soon for an NFL thread?

[sbb122]

They were down 14-0 to the skins last week and it took a quarter or so to get the offense rolling. Lots of game left.

Hmmm... seems to me this guy knows what he is talking about. :ss:

 

[pixburgher66]

Either way that's a TD.

 

[Darkstone42]

So did Atlanta.

When was that?

 

[ritari330]

When was that?

Elway's 2nd SB

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XXXIII

 

[elocomotive]

When was that?

1999.

 

[dash]

I'll bet Unger wants that to be a fumble.

TD Lynch!

 

[IPostedWhat]

Now lets see a missed XP.

Damn, I was hoping for OT.

 

[pixburgher66]

"Only the fumbling player can recover the ball under 2:00 and advance it". Possibly the stupidest rule I've ever heard. Didn't come into play, but seriously...is that because of the fumblerooski?

 

[Darkstone42]

What a weird rule... You can't pick up a fumble and advance it inside of two minutes? I can understand not being able to fumble forward.

 

[dash]

The Seahawks have left too much time on the clock is my fear...

 

[sbb122]

"Only the fumbling player can recover the ball under 2:00 and advance it". Possibly the stupidest rule I've ever heard. Didn't come into play, but seriously...is that because of the fumblerooski?

Oakland Raiders Holy Roller Dave Casper.

 

[dash]

"Only the fumbling player can recover the ball under 2:00 and advance it". Possibly the stupidest rule I've ever heard. Didn't come into play, but seriously...is that because of the fumblerooski?

Yup, the Dave Casper 'Holy Roller'

 

[elocomotive]

"Only the fumbling player can recover the ball under 2:00 and advance it". Possibly the stupidest rule I've ever heard. Didn't come into play, but seriously...is that because of the fumblerooski?

It's so players can't intentionally fumble it forward if all hope is lost.

 

[dash]

Lose six seconds to gain 6 yards - That's pretty selfish.

 

[Slimpikins]

Nope. Great idea. You have a limit to the # of calls, but it keeps everything in play. If Seattle actually got that last play off, why is that a less important mistake than seeing if a receiver got his feet down in bounds?

Fewer rules and exceptions makes officiating easier. It puts the onus on the coaches to decide when and how to use the challenges. That makes being a ref easier and doesn't allow some bad calls to determine the game, while other bad calls can be corrected.

Terrible idea? Terrible response. Craft a real argument if you want to debate it, not two sentences that don't even build your idea at all.

Terrible idea. Judgement calls can't be challenged, holding happens on every play which ones are actually called is discretionary. Allowing those to be challenged undermines the referees. It won't happen. Same thing with forward progress, it is up to the ref when the play it's dead, you can not determine at what point a ref mentally decided the pay was over by watching a video.

Additionally you can't put a time limit on reviews, they were implemented to ensure calls were correct, putting a time limit on then is counter productive. I like the fact that if you win your challenges, you can keep challenging plays. Limiting that would not benefit the system. I can understand revamping parts of the replay system but saying everything should be reviewable is just short sighted.

Terrible response? If you want a better conversation start with a better idea.

 

[elocomotive]

3-4 plays and then a kick chance here. Crazy finish.

 

[forty_three]

So it was 20-0, and I decided it was time to de-decorate.

The tree is down, pine needles vacuumed and...

WTF?

 

[pixburgher66]

Oh man...oh man oh man...

 

[sbb122]

Holy hell, comes down to Bryant's leg.

 

[pixburgher66]

Here we go. Seattle's D may have just given the game away at the very end. This is what, 45?