Guess we don't find out1918stabbedbyfoulke said:I was wondering the same thing.
That was incredible. In a bad way.jsinger121 said:horrendous playcalling
I think those last three downs illustrate why Rivers is the best active QB to have not played in a Super Bowl.Lose Remerswaal said:Guess we don't find out
Sportsbstn said:Brady throws that pass early and its an easy TD
I love Woodhead but he's not a goal line weapon. Strange playcalling. The Pats go to a TE in that situation and tie the game.1918stabbedbyfoulke said:I think those last three downs illustrate why Rivers is the best active QB to have not played in a Super Bowl.
ShaneTrot said:I love Woodhead but he's not a goal line weapon. Strange playcalling. The Pats go to a TE in that situation and tie the game.
He's not even the best Chargers QB not to make a Super Bowl.jsinger121 said:Rivers has to be the best QB ever to not make a super bowl.
maufman said:He's not even the best Chargers QB not to make a Super Bowl.
Edit: But besides Fouts, Warren Moon is the only guy I'd definitely put ahead of Rivers on that list. He's had a good career.
His throwing motion is really unique too. Just looks odd and not right.Freddy Linn said:I love Rivers. Dude just wants to win. Plus he has nineteen kids or something.
Tough as hell too. I hated those lights out Chargers teams, but in hindsight what he did on one leg in those playoffs was impressive.GeorgeCostanza said:His throwing motion is really unique too. Just looks odd and not right.
This has not mattered before.
"We just had a review in the Lions-Bears game. The ruling on the field was interception. Golden Tate controlled the pass right at the goal line," Blandino said, explaining the play. "The ball came loose and wasn't eventually caught by a Chicago defender."
Blandino said that it's not fair to compare Tate's play to the famous non-catches by Dez Bryant or Calvin Johnson because both of those catches involved the ball hitting the ground.
"This is different than the plays we've been talking about, the Dez Bryant play or the Calvin Johnson play. This is not a receiver who's going to the ground," Blandino said. "The issue here is 'Did he become a runner before the ball came loose? Did he have control, both feet down and time enough to become a runner after the second foot is down?" Blandino said.
and where is the explanation of Tate's football move? I don't see it.
"When you watch the play, when the ball comes loose, he's taking his third step," Blandino said. "The third step is almost on the ground when the ball comes out. He had demonstrated possession, had become a runner. Once the ball breaks the plane of the goal line in the possession of the runner, it is a touchdown and the play is over at that point."
What you're missing is that there is a different standard for a catch if you are judged to be in the process of going to the ground or not. If you are going to the ground (as was determined to be the case on the Dez / Eifert / Devonta Freeman plays), you have to secure the catch through impact with the ground. If you are not going to the ground (as was determined to be the case in the Tate play), you just have to get both feet down and establish yourself as a runner. Blandino's pointing out Tate's "third step" because Tate doesn't need to take a third step for it to be a catch - the fact that he's taking a third step means he already had both feet down and is now a runner.edmunddantes said:I'm pissed at the NFL and Blandino.
As inane as the catch rule has been, at least the NFL had been consistent as to how it was called. I finally could easily tell when something was and wasn't a catch.
Then the Lions/Bears game happened, and Blandino suddenly throws out everything they've been harping on throughout this whole process.
And he had a shit eating grin on his face as he did it.
This has not mattered before.
My other favorite part is when Tate gets credited for taking a third step because he's almost made the third step.
and where is the explanation of Tate's football move? I don't see it.
Eifert TD he got more than two feet down and it didn't matter.
They ruled that Eifert was going to the ground as part of the catch. That one is debatable. He was hit before he got the second foot down.edmunddantes said:Doesn't match the Eifert TD ruling. He didn't immediately go to ground either. He made catch. Gets stood up at line. Making two or three stutter steps to try to get in. Then lunges across. Ball then knocked out.
Coughlin should have challenged that spot. Rare to overturn but that looked obvious.Ed Hillel said:LOL ref ran backwards a yard on his spot and fucked over the Giants.