Week 5 Game Thread
- Thread starter DanoooME
- Start date
You rightly called this earlier. Browns can kick deep there if they still had those TOs in hand.
One of the few times I've been on top of something this season.
Browns smoked the Jets this game, horrific loss by them. Their o-line abused the Jets d line and their D played great.
2 misses Fgs
3 TOs : 2 in the red zone
Horrific 4th and short from the 5
Well, we'll see. But everytime he gets dinged, he's gesticulating and crying and jumping all around. He's the boy who cried wolf.
Nut punch of a sequence for Giants fans, Odell going down, sack fumble, Chargers take the lead.
His ankle would've been better off caught in a wolf trap. $50 says he's out for the year.
Isn’t he touching it with his foot down out of bounds? Isn’t that a dead ball at the 1?
Giants deciding to use him for kickoffs seemed like a bad idea. I'm sure there is at least one other person that could've returned kicks given that OBJ's ankle still wasn't right? Don't mind seeing the Giants at 0-5 though.
I get that. I thought the rule was that once the ball touches anything out of bounds including a player who’s out it’s a dead ball at the spot.
"And the Giants drop to 0-5"..................that has a nice ring to it, not as nice as "And the Giants drop to 0-16", but I'll take it.
I thought the JESTS were the NY team that was supposed to suck this year?
That said; leave it to the JESTS to blow their draft position and end up finishing 8-8, because JESTS gonna JEST.
I thought the JESTS were the NY team that was supposed to suck this year?
That said; leave it to the JESTS to blow their draft position and end up finishing 8-8, because JESTS gonna JEST.
The fumble end zone touchback rule had never made sense to me. Anywhere else in the field, a fumbled ball out of bounds is returned to the team that most recently possessed it where it goes out. Isn't the most consistent thing to do the same when it's fumbled into the end zone? Put the ball on the one, or put it on the 5 or 10 to disincentivize diving for the pylon. Is there something I'm missing?
The old David Patten rule. I thought the same thing. They must have said the ball was completely out by the time his foot hit out of bounds.
They did, there was an angle from the back corner of the end zone that showed the ball clearly out of his hand before his foot came down OOB.
They said he didn't have full possession of the ball when his foot stepped out of bounds.
