2019 NFL Thread v. Chiefs are Champs, Missouri rules the sports world

[Stadler]

At least the last play was clean.  That would be too much to bear.

[King Postwhore]

It was still there for him.

And was that the best play they had?

All out blitz is a one on one play. Julian not the best one on one jump ball guy to go to.

[El Barto]

It was there for him. He quits on plays so fucking easily.

Dude, he is 42 and slow.  It's amazing he picked up as many yards as he did.

Good grief, we're gonna bitch when Brady only rushes for 13 instead of 18?

It was still there for him.

And was that the best play they had?

It was an excellent play and worked exactly as intended. The DB just made a phenomenal play on the ball. Sometimes you stand on 20 and still get beat.

[Stadler]

Good defensive play. Should have a chance to kick a tying FG but them are the brakes.  Should have adjusted in the 2nd quarter.

That second quarter was a killer.  Worst in Gillette history, Jim Nance helpfully pointed out.  They held Mahomes to a field goal in the second half though.  Nothing wrong with that.  You hold Mahomes to 23 points you should win. 

[Stadler]

It was still there for him.

And was that the best play they had?

All out blitz is a one on one play. Julian not the best one on one jump ball guy to go to.

That's where a Gronk (or Kelce or Kittle) is so valuable.

[TAC]

Dude, he is 42 and slow.  It's amazing he picked up as many yards as he did.

Good grief, we're gonna bitch when Brady only rushes for 13 instead of 18?
 

Yes. the only thing between him and the endzone was a guy's shadow.

And was that the best play they had?

It was an excellent play and worked exactly as intended. The DB just made a phenomenal play on the ball. Sometimes you stand on 20 and still get beat.

Sure, it almost worked. But the guy was draped all over him. Tony Romo told you they were blitzing. Just seemed like a low percentage play.

[King Postwhore]

That's really the only play in a blitz in 4th down close to the endzone.  Harry would have been better for that play.

[El Barto]

It was still there for him.

And was that the best play they had?

All out blitz is a one on one play. Julian not the best one on one jump ball guy to go to.

That's where a Gronk (or Kelce or Kittle) is so valuable.

That's why they drafted Harry in the first round.

[Stadler]

It was still there for him.

And was that the best play they had?

All out blitz is a one on one play. Julian not the best one on one jump ball guy to go to.

That's where a Gronk (or Kelce or Kittle) is so valuable.

That's why they drafted Harry in the first round.

That'll be the go-to option in two years, sure.  .

Seriously, though, I think that's at the heart of Brady's beef; he doesn't have the confidence - and his lack of confidence is not unfounded at this point - in these guys to go to with one and only one play. 

[pg1067]

The Carrie Underwood bastardization of the overrated Joan Jett song is really bad.

[King Postwhore]

Joan Jett would disagree.   She's taking in the money for it plus, the spotlight. 

[Dream Team]

NE got hosed by bad calls for sure. But I have a separate issue, that so many Patriot fans are so hypocritically un-self aware about. Brady is the only QB allowed to blame shit receivers. In the 2016 AFC CG Roethlisberger had to throw to 3 assholes who never played another down in the NFL. But according to comments made during the game, it’s because he sucks not because of shit receivers.  . By the way, last time I checked Edelman and Sanu were legit NFL starters.

Back to the game. I was sure KC was going to blow it again because of typical things teams do in Foxboro. Fumbles, blocked punts, etc. But huge kudos to the much-maligned KC defense for stepping up. Based on how NE competed I still think they’ll make noise in the playoffs.

[King Postwhore]

That's bullshit. If you were unbiased,  you'd know the offensive line is the root of all that's wrong but you want to put the blame on the player you dislike.  Dislike?  More like hate.

[KevShmev]

I think his point, and it is a valid one, is that some act like poor Tom Brady is the first QB to play behind an average line and to have to deal with new wide receivers.  He's not. 

Russell Wilson has played behind a terrible O-line for most of his career.  There are years he would have loved to have the O-line Brady has this year.

[King Postwhore]

No.  That's pointing out the obvious Kev.  I know you saw the game tonight.   Hey I blame BB for this.  You know Brady is only mobile in the pocket.   So the O line is the most important part. 

It's not like this is something new with Brady. 

[Stadler]

And I can't speak for anyone else, but I never said they were 'shit', just that they are not fully acclimated yet. THat's an observation, not a complaint. We're pointing out differences that might explain why the record is different, why the outcomes are different, why the vibe is different.  Sanu is a quality receiver.  Harry will be.  I'm thinking Meyers will be. 

And most of my complaints aren't about "shit receivers" - we've lived a blessed life in New England - it's with the knee jerk "Brady's spent!" rhetoric.  I wish they won; I'm frustrated that they didn't, and I'm frustrated about the Harry call (it changes the game; they just have to punch a FG at the end and we're in OT, where anything can happen).   But they didn't.  No whining, no complaining.  We play next week, like everyone else.   But it wasn't Brady's fault that they lost. 

[Stadler]

Gurley looks like a beast tonight.  Goff is... well, I'm spoiled. I'm glad he's not my franchise's quarterback.

[Ben_Jamin]

That was a terrible game.

[bosk1]

So, in the 49ers' win yesterday, after throwing for 345 yards and 4 TDs, Jimmy G. had the second highest passer rating on the team. 

[KevShmev]

No.  That's pointing out the obvious Kev.  I know you saw the game tonight.   Hey I blame BB for this.  You know Brady is only mobile in the pocket.   So the O line is the most important part. 

It's not like this is something new with Brady. 

Of course, because when things go wrong, it is never Brady's fault, but always Belichick's, right?

And I can't speak for anyone else, but I never said they were 'shit', just that they are not fully acclimated yet. THat's an observation, not a complaint. We're pointing out differences that might explain why the record is different, why the outcomes are different, why the vibe is different.  Sanu is a quality receiver.  Harry will be.  I'm thinking Meyers will be. 

And most of my complaints aren't about "shit receivers" - we've lived a blessed life in New England - it's with the knee jerk "Brady's spent!" rhetoric.  I wish they won; I'm frustrated that they didn't, and I'm frustrated about the Harry call (it changes the game; they just have to punch a FG at the end and we're in OT, where anything can happen).   But they didn't.  No whining, no complaining.  We play next week, like everyone else.   But it wasn't Brady's fault that they lost.

Seeing the play again, it looks like a Chief defender was there to make the tackle around the 15, but was blocked in the back, which allowed Harry to get the corner and (almost) score.  So, while the officials missed him scoring, they also missed an apparent block in the back that allowed him the opportunity to score. 

[Stadler]

Seeing the play again, it looks like a Chief defender was there to make the tackle around the 15, but was blocked in the back, which allowed Harry to get the corner and (almost) score.  So, while the officials missed him scoring, they also missed an apparent block in the back that allowed him the opportunity to score.

Maybe, maybe not.  That's a judgment call, and as I noted above, I'm less concerned with the judgment calls as I am the clearly factual ones.  His foot is either in or out, there's no gray area.   We've had four or five instances in the last couple weeks about officials prematurely blowing the play dead.  I forget the play now, but it wasn't more than a couple weeks where it was reaffirmed that the refs should err on the side of letting the play run out, THEN calling it back if they had to.  This isn't "judgment" at this point, it's protocol. 

I've ref'd and ump'd (hockey and baseball/softball).  I get it; it's fast, and people make mistakes.  But like anything else, you have to build that in and make mistakes the right way.   As a ref you put yourself in the position of having the least effect on the outcome that you can. 

(And by the way, I'm not just talking about the Patriots; as I noted above, there's not an ounce of whining or complaining here; they lost, they lost, let's move on.  I'm of the opinion that December losses in New England reap more than they sow; I liked what I saw in that game with respect to the playoffs.    If anything, I'm referring to the Saints run over the past year or so; Payton must've banged someone's wife or something, because the Saints cannot catch a break with the penalties.   Some deserved - the face mask; that was stupid - some not - I don't know how CJ Gardner-Johnson was supposed to play that receiver in that instance.)

[KevShmev]

I agree, blowing plays dead too quickly is terrible.  The Kelce fumble play yesterday cost NE some yards (I doubt he scores and makes it much farther since Tyreek Hill, who is faster than the roadrunner, was already on his way to stopping the return), and then of course the Harry play.  Since all scoring plays are reviewed, it would have made more sense call it a TD and then look at it, but then the problem with always calling close calls TD's is that what if he didn't score, but there is no evidence to overturn it?  Then touchdowns are being called when they aren't to the naked eye on first look just for the sake of being able to look at the replay to confirm it.  The bottom line is, there is no easy solution, and I get that these guys are human and make way more tough calls than they miss, but they just seem to miss so many glaring ones now.  And sure, instant replay and us, the viewer, getting 144 replays of it right away don't help, when those guys have to make the correct call in real time, but when they have been told to not blow plays dead prematurely and do it anyway, it's just a really bad look, especially since any discipline NFL officials get is always being closed doors and I don't think we ever told about it.

[Stadler]

There might be a middle ground:  have New York (or whatever euphemism we use for the booth review) have a line in to the head ref.   OBVIOUS, non-judgmental calls can get corrected in real time without coaches or fans being any the wiser.   Have that person be "part of the crew" and have on tap those plays that are likely going to be glaring on the Jumbo-tron.   It's no difference - from a practical standpoint - of having the line judge weigh in on a call that is nominally the back judge.  Or whatever.

Hell, if every character in every cop procedural can talk in real time with the computer wizard in the back office, then certainly there can be a huddle or two on field while plays like that are reviewed.

[King Postwhore]

No.  That's pointing out the obvious Kev.  I know you saw the game tonight.   Hey I blame BB for this.  You know Brady is only mobile in the pocket.   So the O line is the most important part. 

It's not like this is something new with Brady. 

Of course, because when things go wrong, it is never Brady's fault, but always Belichick's, right?

And I can't speak for anyone else, but I never said they were 'shit', just that they are not fully acclimated yet. THat's an observation, not a complaint. We're pointing out differences that might explain why the record is different, why the outcomes are different, why the vibe is different.  Sanu is a quality receiver.  Harry will be.  I'm thinking Meyers will be. 

And most of my complaints aren't about "shit receivers" - we've lived a blessed life in New England - it's with the knee jerk "Brady's spent!" rhetoric.  I wish they won; I'm frustrated that they didn't, and I'm frustrated about the Harry call (it changes the game; they just have to punch a FG at the end and we're in OT, where anything can happen).   But they didn't.  No whining, no complaining.  We play next week, like everyone else.   But it wasn't Brady's fault that they lost.

Seeing the play again, it looks like a Chief defender was there to make the tackle around the 15, but was blocked in the back, which allowed Harry to get the corner and (almost) score.  So, while the officials missed him scoring, they also missed an apparent block in the back that allowed him the opportunity to score.

Nope, I still blame The GM.  That Offensive line is the issue.  I've said this over and over.  No time to throw is ten fold harder with newer players and not quite knowing where they should be in this offense so yeah, the majority of the blame is on the GM.

[bosk1]

...I get that these guys are human and make way more tough calls than they miss, but they just seem to miss so many glaring ones now.

But is it really that much worse?  I'm not saying it isn't.  But there are so many factors now that seem to magnify these errors and make them seem more glaring than they would on the field in real time.  As you mentioned, instant reply overload is one such factor.  But digging into that, there's a lot there.  There are a lot more camera angles available now, and better ones at that.  There's high def.  There's the ability to slow down and pause in high def.  There's a lot of technology that makes it very easy to scrutinize everything after the fact and see things as glaringly obvious that were anything but that in the moment.  Then you throw in the fact that the games is just faster now than it has ever been, and there are more rules now than there ever have been, and I think it's hard not to have a high degree of human error.  So, is the officiating markedly worse nowadays?  I'm not so sure.  I can't really take a hard stance one way or the other.

[pg1067]

Joan Jett would disagree.   She's taking in the money for it plus, the spotlight.

Bad song and profitable cash-in for one of the songwriters are two different things (interesting that this is the only one of Jett's three top-10 singles that she co-wrote).  I'm sure Desmond Child (the other songwriter) enjoys it as well, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if Joan Jett sold off her publishing from the 80s and didn't get a dime out of this (except for an appearance fee for being in the video).

[King Postwhore]

Conjecturing if she still owns the rights to the song justifies your stance for a song you don't like doesn't make sense.

It just seems weird that you are passionate on a TV theme song that i really don't pay much attention to.  In this day and age I'm on my phone until the first hut hut!

[Stadler]

Terry Bradshaw said something last week that was interesting:  he turned to Howie Long and said "remember when we were standing on the sideline and we looked at each other and said 'can you believe we used to do THAT?'", commenting on the speed and ferocity of the game, especially as compared to the college game. 

[pg1067]

Conjecturing if she still owns the rights to the song justifies your stance for a song you don't like doesn't make sense.

Huh?  I just don't like the song.  That requires, and I offered, no justification (hence my comment that "Bad song and profitable cash-in . . . are two different things").  At least it's better than the prior intro song where Underwood basically screamed, "SUNDAY NIGHT!" for two straight minutes.

[KevShmev]

There might be a middle ground:  have New York (or whatever euphemism we use for the booth review) have a line in to the head ref.   OBVIOUS, non-judgmental calls can get corrected in real time without coaches or fans being any the wiser.   Have that person be "part of the crew" and have on tap those plays that are likely going to be glaring on the Jumbo-tron.   It's no difference - from a practical standpoint - of having the line judge weigh in on a call that is nominally the back judge.  Or whatever.

Hell, if every character in every cop procedural can talk in real time with the computer wizard in the back office, then certainly there can be a huddle or two on field while plays like that are reviewed.

That would make the most sense, and we know the NFL can afford it, but I'll bet that Jerry Jones, who has as much or more power than any other owner, puts the kabash on that because he thinks human error if a part of the game and that bad calls are good for the league since they create controversy and get people talking more about the league.

Nope, I still blame The GM.  That Offensive line is the issue.  I've said this over and over.  No time to throw is ten fold harder with newer players and not quite knowing where they should be in this offense so yeah, the majority of the blame is on the GM.

Okay, but haven't they lost like two or three centers now to injury?

...I get that these guys are human and make way more tough calls than they miss, but they just seem to miss so many glaring ones now.

But is it really that much worse?  I'm not saying it isn't.  But there are so many factors now that seem to magnify these errors and make them seem more glaring than they would on the field in real time.  As you mentioned, instant reply overload is one such factor.  But digging into that, there's a lot there.  There are a lot more camera angles available now, and better ones at that.  There's high def.  There's the ability to slow down and pause in high def.  There's a lot of technology that makes it very easy to scrutinize everything after the fact and see things as glaringly obvious that were anything but that in the moment.  Then you throw in the fact that the games is just faster now than it has ever been, and there are more rules now than there ever have been, and I think it's hard not to have a high degree of human error.  So, is the officiating markedly worse nowadays?  I'm not so sure.  I can't really take a hard stance one way or the other.

It probably isn't any worse now than it ever was, but the combination of too many new rules (to which Joe has alluded) and better instant replays for the viewer gives the perception that it is.  And the league doesn't help by seemingly doing as little as possible to help (see: their refusal to overturn tons of PI calls this year), and then never holding officials who make big blunders accountable publicly.  The NHL in the playoffs last year suspended two officiating crews for the remainder of the playoffs due to terrible calls/non-calls that directly influenced the outcome of games (and in one case, the outcome of a series), and made those suspensions public. The NFL would never publicly do that to an official or a crew who screwed up a big call in a playoff game.

[bosk1]

So, anyone think the 49ers go 14-2?  They are at home against the Falcons and Rams, and then up to Seattle for their final game.  If Seattle loses against either the Panthers or Cardinals, and the 49ers win the next two weeks, the week 17 game becomes irrelevant.

Going back to the SF/Seattle game a few weeks ago, that again raises an interesting point about whether the 49ers should have played for the tie when they got the ball at the 20 with 1:50 remaining.  Shanahan has been criticized for not being more conservative and running out the clock.  https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/should-49ers-have-gone-tie-late-overtime-loss-seahawks  And I get it and cannot disagree.  But he thought it was important to the team and to the fans to put his money where his mouth is in terms of expressing confidence in his offense to get it done, and I don't fault him for that, even though a tie would have now rendered the week 17 matchup meaningless if both teams win out from this point forward up to that game (the 49ers would have a half game lead over the Seahawks even if they were to lose the week 17 game). 

As for overall standings/seeding, I still mostly stand by this:  https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=53408.msg2609154#msg2609154  Although Denver threw a bit of a monkey wrench into the AFC South.  I think the Titans could sneak up and win the division, bumping the Texans to the #6, and in turn bumping the Steelers out.  I think this scenario is more likely than I thought it would be a week ago.

[Stadler]

It probably isn't any worse now than it ever was, but the combination of too many new rules (to which Joe has alluded) and better instant replays for the viewer gives the perception that it is.  And the league doesn't help by seemingly doing as little as possible to help (see: their refusal to overturn tons of PI calls this year), and then never holding officials who make big blunders accountable publicly.  The NHL in the playoffs last year suspended two officiating crews for the remainder of the playoffs due to terrible calls/non-calls that directly influenced the outcome of games (and in one case, the outcome of a series), and made those suspensions public. The NFL would never publicly do that to an official or a crew who screwed up a big call in a playoff game.

To that last point, I think the rules have morphed a bit.  It's turned from "fair guidelines as to how the game is played" - two feet in bounds, you can't level a receiver the moment the QB says "hike", etc. - to "governing behavior on the field" - well, that was a legit tackle, but since you didn't give the impression that you gave two shits about his mental capacity in fifteen years, we're going to flag you".   I think the problem for me is the latter.  It's created this morass of things that a ref has to look at on every play, and when you couple that with the sheer speed of the game, it's untenable.

And I don't think I have to actually say, I disagree with Jerry Jones' reality TV viewpoint of the league. Controversy is NOT good, except in the short game.  There's going to come a point - and for me, a die-hard NFL fan, it's fast approaching - where I just say "it ain't worth it". 

[KevShmev]

I hear that.  Maybe it has happened since and I do not recall, but the last time I remember the NFL calling out one of their officials for a bad call was when Hercules Hochuli blew that play dead in the Broncos/Chargers game in 2008 (the Chargers recovered it after the whistle which would have ended the game with them winning, Broncos retained possession because of the whistle and went on to score and win).

[Stadler]

So, anyone think the 49ers go 14-2?  They are at home against the Falcons and Rams, and then up to Seattle for their final game.  If Seattle loses against either the Panthers or Cardinals, and the 49ers win the next two weeks, the week 17 game becomes irrelevant.

I'm not pissing on your question, because it's relevant and interesting, but I think for me, it's a trap ("It's a TRAP!").   I think the league is in an interesting place now. There are certainly "tiers" of teams - I roughly look at three tiers - but within that, there's a sort of parity in the league.  I think when you look at the top tier teams - SF, KC, NE, Baltimore, NO, Seattle, GB (though I'm not as high on GB as the rest of the group) - any one of those teams can win on any given week, especially in the playoffs.  I can't speak for any one else, but I didn't see Seattle phoning in that game last night.  Not in a million years.  They had every reason, every incentive, to play that game like it was the NFC Championship game, and yet they didn't.  Conversely, I don't think very many people saw yesterday afternoon's game being 23-16.   

That said, I don't see the Seahawks losing to both the Panthers and the Cardinals.  I think in a meaningful game, that week 17 match is going to be as good as any game we saw yesterday.   

[El Barto]

I hear that.  Maybe it has happened since and I do not recall, but the last time I remember the NFL calling out one of their officials for a bad call was when Hercules Hochuli blew that play dead in the Broncos/Chargers game in 2008 (the Chargers recovered it after the whistle which would have ended the game with them winning, Broncos retained possession because of the whistle and went on to score and win).

Last year. And from what I gather refs do get suspended during the season for making mistakes.

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/10/25/18023646/nfl-referee-fired-officiating-browns-chargers-missed-false-start