|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| REGISTER FOR PATSFANS.COM |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Register | Blogs | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Arcade | Mark Forums Read | Chat Room |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#61 |
|
PatsFans.com Supporter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 258
|
With a hard enough hit from a hand to the head, a QB could end up with a concussion. I believe there is also a rule to stop offensive linemen from slapping defensive guys in the head (or maybe vice versa?) Rather than leave it in the refs' hands to determine the severity of the hit, it is easier just to make a rule to not allow any contact with the QB's head. It takes the judgement call away from the refs, which I think is the better way to go.
|
|
|
|
| FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT |
|
|
| DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM | ||
| RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP! | ||
|
|
|
#62 | |
|
On the Roster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 67
|
Quote:
I agree 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#63 | |
|
PatsFans.com Supporter
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,950
|
Quote:
With that in mind, we got 2 iffy roughing calls against us in the Buffalo game that were huge - one against Wilfork where the "Brady rule" was called on a clean hit clearly well above the knees, one on Adalius Thomas where the referees should have blown the play dead but allowed the QB to struggle while in the grasp, then whistled AD for "slamming" him to the ground. That's not to absolve bad calls. But if the refs around the NFL have decided to step up protecting the QB and be ultra-vigilant, at least they should be consistent. It's even worse to have an inconsistent standard. Of the plays I saw, the one where we clearly got a favorable ruling was the fake field goal pass. The referee's explanation after the game sounds hollow - something we have been on the other end of many times. The 4th down spot on McGahee was a good call. His forward progress was clearly stopped well short of the 1st down, and after he was stopped he tried to reach the ball forward. Tough game to lose, as you guys clearly played well enough to beat almost anyone. I thought we would put you away in the 3rd quarter, but the Suggs sack/fumble for a TD was huge. I thought we would put you away after we stopped McGahee twice, but your defense was stout. It was a toe-to-toe slugfest, and the Ravens showed that they had what it takes to go the distances. Just because they lost a "split decision" by a hair doesn't detract from that accomplishment. The Chargers and Colts have a powerhouse passing attack but are otherwise limited. The Steelers have yet to run effectively and have had their share of inconsistency. The Jets have a fabulous defense but haven't shown enough offensive balance or the ability to sustain it throughout the season. As far as I can tell, the Pats and the Ravens are the two most balanced and complete teams in the AFC.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 | |
|
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,693
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
On the Roster
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
|
Well, I can understand why some of us are taking it so hard. Most of us feel that we have a championship caliber team, and got a lot of flak because the teams we beat were KC, SD and Cle, so many people were saying we're a "fake" 3-0 because we didn't beat any elite teams. This game was about respect for us, because here was our chance to go into New England and beat them in their own house, which would have brought a lot of credibility to us. But we blew it. It's a tough pill to swallow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
PatsFans.com Supporter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,517
|
Of the people accusing you of having a "fake" 3-1 team, how many of them have "real" 1-3 teams? That's pretty much how it works...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Canada's Wicked Hosah!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,655
|
The Ravens were good. The Pats were better. See you in January.
![]()
__________________
Check out the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. for my first feature film! |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
All Pro Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,252
|
I think it's pretty clear that, through 4 games, there aren't any teams in the NFL, other than the Giants, playing playoff caliber football.
__________________
When it comes to the Koolaid, take sips not chugs. There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Last edited by Deus Irae; 10-05-2009 at 01:53 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
PatsFans.com Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 2,021
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
All Pro Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,252
|
There is a spectrum in between "terrible" and "playoff caliber". I think that the Saints are playing good football. That said, they've beaten the Lions, the Bills (who actually made them work a bit), the Eagles in Kolb's first game as a starter, and the Jets, with Sanchez playing as Sanchez has played against pressure all season. They look good, but I wouldn't say that they are playing playoff caliber football.
And, yes, I did watch the Jets/Saints game.
__________________
When it comes to the Koolaid, take sips not chugs. There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| What Do Ravens Fans Think? | QB12 | PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum | 17 | 09-29-2009 10:54 AM |
| What Ravens Fans Are Saying | shmessy | PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum | 2 | 03-05-2007 02:56 PM |
|