Shit this game was about as close to a playoff game as it gets prior to week 17's end. If that call materially impacted who won (it did not, thankfully), it would have been just as bad.
just because they were huddling doesn’t mean one (or multiple) officials were getting info in their ear….. They rarely look at replay and throw a flag (when was the last time that happened) but this LAAAAAATE flag just so happens to occur after the NFL announces officiating changes?
Isn't Denver notorious for never showing replays of plays that aren't favorable to them on the jumbotron? I don't blame them if that is the case, but that is what I always heard. I think the most likely outcome is the line judge came over to Hoculi late and said something or Blandino got on the headset and told them to throw the flag. If its the former, nothing to see here, if its the latter, it certainly opens up criticism for the league about their ability to influence games to suit their wishes.
Well the call for the review happened so Kate because Denver took a time out, which allowed the booth to look at it again and call for the replay, which is absolutely the right sequence in that event.
But what changed? There were good replays right after the play, what changed the booths mind? They should not have needed a second look to decide whether or not to review it.
I'm glad you mentioned that incompletion. I didn't think that play was reviewable. Maybe a replay would show otherwise, but watching live it sure seemed like the play was blown dead and then Wolfe ran over and picked up the ball while everyone else sort of shut down. But the Bengals didn't seem to protest, and the announcers never mentioned it (not that the latter proves anything, obviously). Apologies if this was discussed elsewhere; I haven't waded through the game thread.
Wolfe aside, the problem is if other players slow up or stop due to a whistle.
Blandino and his team in NY have a direct line of communication to the local review booth official at each game. That official has a line to get in the ear of the head referee on the field. It's a two step process but one that Blandino admitted he used in the NYG game last week wrt the Beckham antics.
Exactly.
Agreed it's a problem, but it's also the the way the rule is written.
Actually it turns out NYHQ does have a direct line to the referee. This is not something I was aware of and is certainly a bit troubling. This article from last year gives a great behind the scenes look at the replay review system. This part in particular stood out to me:
I went back and watched it during the review...the whistle most definitely blew a second or two after the ball was picked up. As for the TO giving the booth extra time...I mean, look at the posts here...there was definitely some discussion and no consensus. I have zero problem with the booth not being able to figure it out in the course of 10-12 seconds but then deciding to do so after the other team takes a time out and the booth gets a better look at it. This happens every week.
Is it though? Can anyone point to any loss of dollars, franchise valuation, advertising revenue, etc relating to any of these "scandals"? Because the NFL only cares about those things, as should be blatantly obvious now. They know you'll keep watching anyway.
I'm not even so sure they need the eyeballs. We might be seeing of the early straws that could break a camel's back, but it doesn't feel as though the camel's in trouble of weakening.
I think it does, for two reasons.
Again, does it? I don't think majority of fans feel the league has integrity *now*, and ratings and contracts have only gone up.
Something significant like players murdering people, killing themselves or severely battering their spouses? I mean, what is this tipping point event that will be more awful or damaging than these things that have happened and been moved right past? A player being involved in a terrorist event? And that would still get pinned on the player and the league would be unscathed. Again.
Boxing's decline is directly and inextricably linked to Muhammad Ali's obvious impairment. When there is a loquacious, charismatic ex-NFL player drooling through a national TV interview, that's when football will be in the same situation as boxing.
Well, also, the rise of MMA, which a lot of boxing fans (okay, at least me) find kind of gross, but which the younger fans seem to go for in preference to boxing.
There are a variety of reasons and Ali is only a part of it. It's not inextricably and directly linked.
Agreed, far more complicated than just "Ali". And, worth noting that the corruption and the physical impact on participants are present (to greater or lesser degress) in NFL today. Things don't change in a day.
Declines occur over years and decades. Not weeks. Concussion came out last week. Manning hit the news Saturday. That was 3 days ago. Also, news like Manning's HGH won't be even a blip to the sport's popularity.
Fine. Ali being reduced to a shaking, unable-to-speak husk of a person was the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the tipping point. It was the galvanizing moment. It was the reason mothers stopped letting their kids watch boxing.
Honest question, do you have any evidence or research to back any of this up? It seems like after the fact conjecture, which has nothing to do with the late flag in Denver. I've never heard anyone reference Ali at the Olympics as a reason of boxing's decline and I'm a boxing fan. I'd put the reasons:
My experience with Ali goes back to the early 80s when he was still the world's greatest talker. Ali at the 1996 Olympics was sad. The most vibrant, alive, trash-talker ever was a mute, shaky mess.
Honestly, I don't even think an onfield death would affect the product much. It would drive some away, and bring back some of the people who whinge about the NFL becoming 'flag football'
Sure makes me feel confident that the NFL is upholding the integrity of the game.
This is another good point. Matchmaking in boxing sucks now too. Plus there's no "league" like th ufc handling marketing and promotions of the sport and individual fighters.
Just let every play be reviewable and be done with it.
I'm going to assume you don't mean that literally otherwise you will start having 6hr+ games. What happens when the offense asks for an illegal contact review on the same play the defense asks for an offensive holding review. Both are probably going on more than 50% of all plays according to the letter of the rule so how do you possibly allow everything to be reviewable? That is a slippery slope that I don't think anyone wants to go down.
