54 posts in this topic

18 hours ago, Falconsfan567 said:

I think it's dumb because it's such a subjective call. What exactly is pass interference and what is just "hand fighting and letting them play?" It's like holding. You can realistically call holding on every single play. It's all in the eye of the beholder. You could call holding or illegal contact on so many places where it doesn't get called. Now we're putting even more of the outcome of the game in the hands of the officials and I think that's wrong. We should be taking it out of the officials hands more.

Think about it like this, the refs already have the ability to throw the PI flag. Now if they get it wrong, it can be changed. I think it will help us most in situations were it should be called, but it isn't. That happens a lot with JJ, and now we have the ability to throw that challenge flag to force the PI call. Knowing we have that ability will probably cause JJ to get a little lighter coverage...

JD dirtybird21 and PokerSteve like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alomar said:

Think about it like this, the refs already have the ability to throw the PI flag. Now if they get it wrong, it can be changed. I think it will help us most in situations were it should be called, but it isn't. That happens a lot with JJ, and now we have the ability to throw that challenge flag to force the PI call. Knowing we have that ability will probably cause JJ to get a little lighter coverage...

That would require them to actually overturn the call. Maybe I'm jaded by how horrible the MLB replay system is, but I'll believe it when I see it.

VTCrunkler likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Falconsfan567 said:

That would require them to actually overturn the call. Maybe I'm jaded by how horrible the MLB replay system is, but I'll believe it when I see it.

This is true, but we can't say they won't or will yet. Only time will answer that question for us. If it's a close call, I honestly don't expect them to overturn it. If it's blatant, I think they will. Let's hope for the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alomar said:

This is true, but we can't say they won't or will yet. Only time will answer that question for us. If it's a close call, I honestly don't expect them to overturn it. If it's blatant, I think they will. Let's hope for the best.

This. Can’t overturn a call when it’s too close to tell. If it’s clear, then overturn it. I really don’t think it will be a huge deal 

Alomar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

This. Can’t overturn a call when it’s too close to tell. If it’s clear, then overturn it. I really don’t think it will be a huge deal 

Like I said, maybe I'm jaded by the MLB replay system because it's supposed to work like that but doesn't.

JD dirtybird21 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Falconsfan567 said:

Like I said, maybe I'm jaded by the MLB replay system because it's supposed to work like that but doesn't.

Do you think the NFL replay system works the way it’s supposed to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

Do you think the NFL replay system works the way it’s supposed to?

Last year, I don't think it did, previous years, I thought for the most part it was alright. But last year they changed it to how the MLB system. I hate replay systems that go back to a central unit to get the ruling. The ruling should be made right there at the stadium.

JD dirtybird21 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

This. Can’t overturn a call when it’s too close to tell. If it’s clear, then overturn it. I really don’t think it will be a huge deal 

Here is the thing. All sports use video replay and state clear and obvious to overturn it. And none of the leagues have figured out how to do it correctly. What is clear and obvious to one person is different from another. All sports are extremely inconsistent in their application of replay. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Falconsfan567 said:

I think it's dumb because it's such a subjective call. What exactly is pass interference and what is just "hand fighting and letting them play?" It's like holding. You can realistically call holding on every single play. It's all in the eye of the beholder. You could call holding or illegal contact on so many places where it doesn't get called. Now we're putting even more of the outcome of the game in the hands of the officials and I think that's wrong. We should be taking it out of the officials hands more.

That's the fundamental flaw with American football. The penalties are too subjective

Falconsfan567 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jpg428gggg said:

Here is the thing. All sports use video replay and state clear and obvious to overturn it. And none of the leagues have figured out how to do it correctly. What is clear and obvious to one person is different from another. All sports are extremely inconsistent in their application of replay. 

 

If they wanted to make it right the a.i. exists to view each play to look for egregious penalties. All it takes is to write the correct algorithms and let the machines do the heavy lifting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jpg428gggg said:

Here is the thing. All sports use video replay and state clear and obvious to overturn it. And none of the leagues have figured out how to do it correctly. What is clear and obvious to one person is different from another. All sports are extremely inconsistent in their application of replay. 

 

Maybe. Did you see the 2 examples I used? The first one is clear and obvious. The 2nd one is “gray”. The new rule isn’t going to fix the issue completely. Nothing ever will. We will always have bad calls. But, I ultimately appreciate the leagues willingness to attempt to improve 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

Maybe. Did you see the 2 examples I used? The first one is clear and obvious. The 2nd one is “gray”. The new rule isn’t going to fix the issue completely. Nothing ever will. We will always have bad calls. But, I ultimately appreciate the leagues willingness to attempt to improve 

I did and it makes sense, but we have so much grey area when it comes to pass interference. How much is too much contact? How much hand fighting do you allow? What if a player gets their a millisecond too early? It was not viewable in real speed but you can see it when you go frame by frame. Does that warrant pass interference? Baseball, tennis, and hockey have it the easiest since calls are cut and dry.

Football and soccer are the toughest because it requires judgement calls and both probably face the most scrutiny.

JD dirtybird21 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Falconsfan567 said:

That would require them to actually overturn the call. Maybe I'm jaded by how horrible the MLB replay system is, but I'll believe it when I see it.

So, can you throw the flag if you thought PI should have been called and wasn't? 

Also, do the coaches have the same number of challenges, and this is just added to what they can challenge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fuego said:

So, can you throw the flag if you thought PI should have been called and wasn't? 

Also, do the coaches have the same number of challenges, and this is just added to what they can challenge?

As far as I understand it this is just a new play that can be challenged. Coaches were not given any more challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2019 at 8:37 PM, FalconFanSince1970 said:

I know I'm in the minority but I still don't think that 2012 play was PI. Bowman was well within the chuck rule. Ryan locked in on Roddy when he had TonyG on a left slant for the win. The player execution in that game was turrible. That play, the whiff snap, slip pick, zone drops and hash mark trip up were a recipe for disaster. 

It was, but we put ourselves in the position to lose that game. Vernon Davis did more damage to us via Stephen what's his name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Alomar said:

Think about it like this, the refs already have the ability to throw the PI flag. Now if they get it wrong, it can be changed. I think it will help us most in situations were it should be called, but it isn't. That happens a lot with JJ, and now we have the ability to throw that challenge flag to force the PI call. Knowing we have that ability will probably cause JJ to get a little lighter coverage...

This is the thing which makes this rule change a good one for the Falcons. No longer can the refs just ignore pass interference on Julio without a challenge. This could obviously be a game-changer for us.

Now the new problem will be getting the review officials in the booth to have the stones to go against their buddy officials on the field and actually uphold the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oof, Chris Simms. NBC is desperate for warm bodies at this point, I see.

On 6/26/2019 at 11:30 PM, JD dirtybird21 said:

Lastly, let’s say the Saints DID get that call. That call doesn’t actually guarantee them victory. 

It doesn't guarantee victory but as close to it as you can get given the circumstance. Lets say the flag is thrown, lets go step by step...

1st & Goal from the LA 6 with 1:45 left, Rams have 1 timeout.

Run the ball on 1st, takes an additional ~5 seconds off to 1:40, Rams call their final timeout.

Run the ball on 2nd, takes another ~5 seconds off to 1:35 and the clock is now running, not snapping the ball until there's :01 on the play clock eats 39 additional seconds and puts the next snap around 0:56 seconds left.

Run the ball on 3rd taking another ~5 seconds off and running the play clock down a full :40 seconds (and taking the delay of game penalty) puts the game clock at 0:11 seconds left. Also this is all without gaining a single yard on these 3 hypothetical runs.

Kicking the 31-yd FG on 4th takes another :04 off the clock (which is the same distance we kicked from and same time that came off the clock) putting 0:07 left in the game.

Squib the ensuing kickoff where they have no choice but return it and likely run off an additional 4-5 seconds, if not all 7 seconds of it.

And before anyone can chime in, "wHaT iF tHe rAms RuN tHe KiCk-OfF bAcK fOr A tD? iT OnLy ToOk ThE ViKiNgS 10 sEcOnDs tO eLiMiNaTe Y'aLL LaSt yEaR!" That is a possibility, however our kick-off and punt coverage team performed well enough that our average defensive starting position last year was 3rd in the League (and 2nd in 2017) since Westhoff came on board in 2017 and his coverage units didn't allow a kick or punt return TD. Certainly far better odds than we were dealt by the no-call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Iron Saint said:

Oof, Chris Simms. NBC is desperate for warm bodies at this point, I see.

It doesn't guarantee victory but as close to it as you can get given the circumstance. Lets say the flag is thrown, lets go step by step...

1st & Goal from the LA 6 with 1:45 left, Rams have 1 timeout.

Run the ball on 1st, takes an additional ~5 seconds off to 1:40, Rams call their final timeout.

Run the ball on 2nd, takes another ~5 seconds off to 1:35 and the clock is now running, not snapping the ball until there's :01 on the play clock eats 39 additional seconds and puts the next snap around 0:56 seconds left.

Run the ball on 3rd taking another ~5 seconds off and running the play clock down a full :40 seconds (and taking the delay of game penalty) puts the game clock at 0:11 seconds left. Also this is all without gaining a single yard on these 3 hypothetical runs.

Kicking the 31-yd FG on 4th takes another :04 off the clock (which is the same distance we kicked from and same time that came off the clock) putting 0:07 left in the game.

Squib the ensuing kickoff where they have no choice but return it and likely run off an additional 4-5 seconds, if not all 7 seconds of it.

And before anyone can chime in, "wHaT iF tHe rAms RuN tHe KiCk-OfF bAcK fOr A tD? iT OnLy ToOk ThE ViKiNgS 10 sEcOnDs tO eLiMiNaTe Y'aLL LaSt yEaR!" That is a possibility, however our kick-off and punt coverage team performed well enough that our average defensive starting position last year was 3rd in the League (and 2nd in 2017) since Westhoff came on board in 2017 and his coverage units didn't allow a kick or punt return TD. Certainly far better odds than we were dealt by the no-call.

What makes you think they’d run the ball? Leading up to the penalty, they should have been doing that...they did not 

Ovie_Lover and Falconsfan567 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

What makes you think they’d run the ball? Leading up to the penalty, they should have been doing that...they did not 

This lol if they had been running it in the first place we aren't having this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JD dirtybird21 said:

What makes you think they’d run the ball? Leading up to the penalty, they should have been doing that...they did not 

While we weren't actually rushing the ball, our short passing game essentially is running it considering we bled off 3:11 of the game clock before the no-call (and that's without bleeding the play clock to :01 like in our hypothetical). The only play of that drive before the no-call that did stop the clock without a timeout was the slant to Thomas on 1st & 10 on the LA 13 that ended up incomplete right after the 2-min warning and two plays before the no-call. It's the one playcall I was slightly miffed on because I felt the ball should have been run there specifically on 1st down to make the Rams burn their 2nd timeout, even if the run is stuffed for no gain (which is the same result of the incomplete pass but now the clock stopped without the Rams needing to use their timeout).

However, the call is a high-success/low-risk one considering Mike's catch rate on that set up over the last two years, so I can see why they went that way instead of trying to run it which the Rams were obviously focused on stopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yall are missing the important factor.. If Falcons make a big deal in 2012, and it gets added to reviewable, then the Saints could have challendged and possibly gone on to win a Super Bowl.  Ergo by not raising ****, we ****** over the Saints.  That's how I will forever look at it. :D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, poutlipper said:

Yall are missing the important factor.. If Falcons make a big deal in 2012, and it gets added to reviewable, then the Saints could have challendged and possibly gone on to win a Super Bowl.  Ergo by not raising ****, we ****** over the Saints.  That's how I will forever look at it. :D:D

You sly devils, playing the long game, are we?! :argh::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Iron Saint said:

While we weren't actually rushing the ball, our short passing game essentially is running it considering we bled off 3:11 of the game clock before the no-call (and that's without bleeding the play clock to :01 like in our hypothetical). The only play of that drive before the no-call that did stop the clock without a timeout was the slant to Thomas on 1st & 10 on the LA 13 that ended up incomplete right after the 2-min warning and two plays before the no-call. It's the one playcall I was slightly miffed on because I felt the ball should have been run there specifically on 1st down to make the Rams burn their 2nd timeout, even if the run is stuffed for no gain (which is the same result of the incomplete pass but now the clock stopped without the Rams needing to use their timeout).

However, the call is a high-success/low-risk one considering Mike's catch rate on that set up over the last two years, so I can see why they went that way instead of trying to run it which the Rams were obviously focused on stopping.

Let’s say the no call doesn’t happen, and instead it’s just an incomplete pass. Sean Payton is getting some serious clock management criticism this offseason.

And my main point is, the Saints could have easily won this game had they just executed when they were supposed to. Could have been up 21-0. Didn’t put the rams away 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now