Cammie and the Pussycats: What Went Wrong?

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

I hate the broncos as much as anyone. I don't know how anyone can watch that Cotchery play and come away upset that it was incomplete. Football outsiders has a pretty good GIF of a good camera angle here:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/clutch-encounters/2016/clutch-encounters-super-bowl-50

If the ball touches the ground during a catch, it has to be securely held, and can't move. Not only does it move, but Cotchery's whole hand comes off it. Its so clearly not a catch.

Yeah, I've got no catch there too. It's interesting how people see different things, but after seeing that I feel strongly enough that if it had been called a catch on the field, I wouldn't have thought it crazy if they overturned it. Again, though, I'm sure I'm in the minority.

What I continue to feel (agains from posting this in another thread clearly in the minority) is that NFL replays should be reviewed by the guy who had the call on the field, not the white hat (unless it was his call). I am very much opposed to anyone not a trained ref reviewing calls and think the ceding of responsibility to Blandino or New York is a significant mistake. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist so much, but because if you've ever spent any time around refs or in the ref community, you come to truly believe that they simply do not give a shit about the outcome. The gauntlet to get from toiling in rec leagues to the NFL is tight, and while talent and temperament are a large part of it, every one of these guys has been inculcated for 20 years in the culture of not giving a shit who wins. They may fuck up like crazy on their calls, but by and large you can usually feel pretty good that they just don't care, or at least that they are very steeped in a ref culture that teaches that as a value to be put above all others. Guys in the league office don't have that same history, or even if they had it, they don't any more. Even without conspiracy theories, there are all sort of subtle and maybe even subliminal reasons to favor one team over another from grudges to economic. It works in the NHL, I guess, because so many of those calls are binary objective decisions -- across the line or not. Not so in the NFL. So, it has to be a guy on the field, for me. Which guy? The Cocherty thing convinces me even more that I want the guy who thought he saw it to be the guy who looks at it on video, because he is uniquely positioned to quickly concede "hmm, that's not what I thought I saw in real time." Another ref will never do that. He will defer. New York will never do that. No ref at that level wants to kick a call. Give him the information he needs to complete his call.

 

[Hagios]

Fumbling the ball on the 35 is a lot different than fumbling it on the 10, though. That was an underrated key to the game - both of Newton's fumbles essentially handed Denver touchdowns, while both of Manning's turnovers were more in the middle of the field where they had less impact.

I wonder how much of that is chance? Perhaps high quality QBs with excellent situational awareness play more like game managers when close to their own end zone, start taking risks near midfield, and then get more conservative once in field goal range.

 

[Hagios]

.[/QUOTE]

Nice gif, I've been watching that for about ten minutes now and the more I watch the more confused I get.

* Newton originally chose to aggressively pursue the fumble. He ran after the ball and lowered himself to drop down on it. Then he jumped up and back away from the ball.
* Was he afraid of DeMarcus Ware (#94)reaching for his ankles?
* Was he afraid of his own teammate, Ryan Kalil (#67), who was diving on the ball and dropping to the level of Cam's knees?
* Or did he see Derek Wolf (#95) charging in out of his peripheral vision? I lean towards this explanation. It looks like Wolf must have thought "Ok, Newton is closer and will get to the ball first, but he won't have secured it yet. So I'm going to hit him hard and maybe the ball will go loose again." Cam shied away from this pending hit.

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

.

Nice gif, I've been watching that for about ten minutes now and the more I watch the more confused I get.

* Newton originally chose to aggressively pursue the fumble. He ran after the ball and lowered himself to drop down on it. Then he jumped up and back away from the ball.
* Was he afraid of DeMarcus Ware (#94)reaching for his ankles?
* Was he afraid of his own teammate, Ryan Kalil (#67), who was diving on the ball and dropping to the level of Cam's knees?
* Or did he see Derek Wolf (#95) charging in out of his peripheral vision? I lean towards this explanation. It looks like Wolf must have thought "Ok, Newton is closer and will get to the ball first, but he won't have secured it yet. So I'm going to hit him hard and maybe the ball will go loose again." Cam shied away from this pending hit.[/QUOTE]

One explanation that I have heard that somewhat makes sense that doesn't label Cam a coward is that he saw he wasn't going to be able to get it and knew it might squirt loose, so he jumped back a tiny bit to get a better angle on a free ball...and that's exactly what happened, it just didn't squirt the right way for him.

 

[Soxfan in Fla]

I've seen something that Cam says he felt he was risking injury to dive for the ball. (Think it was running on ESPN ticker last night) WOW!!!! If true that's pathetic. You know how many high paid QB's would have pounced on that ball injury be damned? Damn near all of them.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

I've seen something that Cam says he felt he was risking injury to dive for the ball. (Think it was running on ESPN ticker last night) WOW!!!! If true that's pathetic. You know how many high paid QB's would have pounced on that ball injury be damned? Damn near all of them.

He's been getting murdered on Boston radio for it Constantly since he said it and no one even is bothering to defend him. It's pathetic. He doesn't get it.

 

[DourDoerr]

Don Schula strikes me as the kind of prick who gets a perverse thrill when his kid doesn't live up to his lofty standards.

True! But the kid's got a long way to go to equal his dad in total SB losses (4 - tied for record). Kudos to Raymond Berry and his 8-3 record against Don - difficult to do given Shula's manipulation of the Rules Committee. Plus, Shula's got a funny looking statue outside the Dolphins' stadium. Ha ha.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

He's been getting murdered on Boston radio for it Constantly since he said it and no one even is bothering to defend him. It's pathetic. He doesn't get it.

Yup. By his own admission he bailed on the football. He wasn't trying to figure out a bounce. He wasn't hoping to pick it up and run. He wasn't trying to back up to make a tackle after the recovery.

He didn't dive for the ball because he didn't want to get hurt. Pathetic.

“I don’t dive on one fumble because the way my leg was—it could have been [contorted] in a way,” Newton said. “OK, you say my effort. I didn’t dive down. I fumbled. That’s fine. But we didn’t lose that game because of that fumble. I can tell you that.”

 

[86spike]

The strange thing is Cam could have easily said " footballs bounce in irregular ways, I thought it was about to hop back at me and was trying to grab it when it did." I would have totally bought that.

He's had a rough few days.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

That's the point. He's had days to think about an answer and instead he answers with the he won't conform bullshit and deflecting that some QBs don't try to tackle after an INT.

He doesn't want to be compared to other QBs unless it fit his narrative. Any other decent QB in the league doesn't pull that crap during the Super Bowl. Afraid of getting hurt? There's Minutes left in a one score game. Get on the fucking ground and try to get the ball.

 

[86spike]

That's the point. He's had days to think about an answer and instead he answers with the he won't conform bullshit and deflecting that some QBs don't try to tackle after an INT.

He doesn't want to be compared to other QBs unless it fit his narrative. Any other decent QB in the league doesn't pull that crap during the Super Bowl. Afraid of getting hurt? There's Minutes left in a one score game. Get on the fucking ground and try to get the ball.

Especially when Fused Vertebrae Early Bird Special Eater Peyton Manning had both thrown himself on a fumbled ball at his feet and tried to make a tackle after throwing a pick only to get trucked by a blocker and knocked on his rickety ass in that same very game.

 

[glennhoffmania]

We finally have an answer:

“All of the numbers pointed to Carolina. And when I saw Cam Newton walk out in gold shoes -- ‘MVP' -- I switched my mind, essentially, right then,” Fassel said. “I said, ‘That's not what a starting quarterback, MVP, leading his team -- and I had a lot of respect for him during the season -- that's not what happens.' You don't do that. And I said, ‘This guy's already become soft,' and that's what he was."

Link

 

[geoduck no quahog]

The NFL needs to address penalties near the goal line. There are the "halfway to the goal" which are often the result of a "what have we got to lose" penalty that saves a touchdown, particularly on 1st down. Then there's the Talib foul which essentially cost the Broncos nothing.

Maybe I'm not explaining it correctly, but it seems that some penalties could be added on to the next time the defending team has the football. Instead of awarding 3 yards on a near-goal play, award that 3 yards and then make the first play after the kickoff be 1st and 20.

Am I making any sense at all?

 

[Silverdude2167]

I like the idea. Doubt the league would ever go for it.

 

[86spike]

Accordign to the Denver defense, Carolina's Offense came out and made zero attempt to add any wrinkles or change anything about their game plan to confuse Denver.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/02/08/nfl-super-bowl-50-denver-broncos-defense
(be ready to stop play on an annoying Peter King video when you click this)

Ward was asked if the Panthers showed them anything that they didn’t expect. “No. We read them like a book.”

“They did everything we watched on film,” said fellow safety Darian Stewart.

The safeties weren’t the only ones saying this. Marshall, when asked the question, laughed. (Causing linebacker Todd Davis, one locker over, to also laugh.) “They did everything that we saw on film,” Marshall said. “That’s the crazy thing. You’d think with two weeks to prepare for the Super Bowl, they would do a new wrinkle. They did everything the same. Nothing new.”

There's a nice break down of the defenisve strategy from Denver in there as well for those interested.

 

[DourDoerr]

The NFL needs to address penalties near the goal line. There are the "halfway to the goal" which are often the result of a "what have we got to lose" penalty that saves a touchdown, particularly on 1st down. Then there's the Talib foul which essentially cost the Broncos nothing.

Maybe I'm not explaining it correctly, but it seems that some penalties could be added on to the next time the defending team has the football. Instead of awarding 3 yards on a near-goal play, award that 3 yards and then make the first play after the kickoff be 1st and 20.

Am I making any sense at all?

I don't think it's a problem as is for the offense getting the distance and 1st down - it's a big advantage when that close in. Plus, it rewards the defense if they're smart enough to exploit it.

BUT, I do think they're should be allowances for what you're proposing on personal fouls. After all, I assume personal fouls are differentiated to discourage poor behavior and/or injuries. It seems reasonable then to penalize as it is now and then to tack on yards when the defensive team is on offense. It might prevent a play like Talib's which could have been incredibly serious.

 

[steveluck7]

They could also start actually ejecting people. I'm not talking about the "2 personal fouls and you're out" stuff that was (i think) recently proposed. If a penalty is egregious enough, kick them out.

 

[DourDoerr]

That's going to be tough to pull off in a big game when refs already hold their whistles on clear infractions to avoid "deciding the game."

 

[Jettisoned]

Nah I think the threat alone would still have an effect even if refs don't call as much in the playoffs. For most people getting ejected from a big game would be worse than losing it.

 

[lexrageorge]

Actually, the face mask would have been Talib's 2nd personal foul that game. So a 2 personal foul rule would have been a deterrent.

Still, in that situation, perhaps they should give the team accepting the penalty the option to penalize the opposing team on their next possession, if say the "half the distance" ends up being less than 2 yards.

 

[pockmeister]

Why not simply award a penalty TD in instances such as the Talib personal foul? If committing a personal foul prevents a TD being scored, the TD should simply be awarded and the next play become the PAT. Penalizing yardage isn't a deterrent when there is no yardage to penalize. Rugby sets some example in this with refs able to award a penalty try under the posts as a punishment for repeated infringement by the defending team.

 

[gryoung]

That's going to be tough to pull off in a big game when refs already hold their whistles on clear infractions to avoid "deciding the game."

If (a big "if") the NFL really wants to get rid of helmet-helmet contact and other nasty personal fouls, this clearly is the easiest approach all the way around.

It would take a couple of high-profile ejections to get the message across, but the message would get across as players/coaches see potential income loss through fines and/or lost games.

 

[Oil Can Dan]

Yup. By his own admission he bailed on the football. He wasn't trying to figure out a bounce. He wasn't hoping to pick it up and run. He wasn't trying to back up to make a tackle after the recovery.

He didn't dive for the ball because he didn't want to get hurt. Pathetic.

I read this yesterday and I'm still thinking about it. I honestly can't believe he said this. Or even felt this. You're in the Super Bowl, it's a one possession game with 3 minutes left, and he gave up on the game! Then he admitted it!

I can't imagine the 360 turnaround a Panther fan must feel on Cam. You wake up that morning feeling like your franchise QB is about to make the leap, and then that night you realize you have a soft, front-runner QB that just quit on himself, his teammates and you. It's one thing to try your hardest and lose, but it's another thing all together to quit because hey, maybe you'll get hurt. Maybe it's just that I grew up watching Bird dive into the stand for balls when the Celtics were up 10 points late in the game during the regular season, but I simply can't believe this guy gave up on his team like that then had the balls to admit it out loud.

 

[Super Nomario]

My take on the game for ITP:

The Panthers outgained the Broncos significantly, 315 yards to 194, tallied 21 first downs to Denver’s 11, and ran 19 more plays on offense, resulting in five-and-a-half more minutes of possession. Obviously, those statistics don’t entirely capture the story of the game. The hidden game of Super Bowl 50 shows how the events of the game ‒ field position and down-and-distances ‒ had a decisive bearing on the final outcome.

More at: http://insidethepylon.com/nfl/nfl-playoffs/2016/02/12/the-hidden-game-of-super-bowl-50/

 

[edmunddantes]

180... 180... 360 brings you back to where you started.

 

[Oil Can Dan]

Yes, that too!

 

[BuellMiller]

Why not simply award a penalty TD in instances such as the Talib personal foul? If committing a personal foul prevents a TD being scored, the TD should simply be awarded and the next play become the PAT. Penalizing yardage isn't a deterrent when there is no yardage to penalize. Rugby sets some example in this with refs able to award a penalty try under the posts as a punishment for repeated infringement by the defending team.

That was my first thought as well. I think it's technically never been called, but isn't there a rule to prevent players or coachs (cough Mike Tomlin) from tackling an opposing player breaking away down the sideline. (after using the google, it's called the "Palpably unfair act", and it seems pretty vague and open-ended). Could (or should) the NFL suggest refs use this in these kind of egregious cases?