The Official Patriots vs Ravens Post Game thread

[Deus Irae]

Deus, you don't have to overcompensate on behalf of the people unwilling to call a spade a spade. There was contact, it changed Edelman's momentum. Whether you like the call or not, it's not appropriate to call it "horrible." That call gets made all the damn time. Frankly, I don't like it anymore than you do. But it's not an abnormal call.

1.) It is an abnormal call

2.) It doesn't get made "all the damn time"

3.) EVEN IF YOU WANT TO PRETEND THAT THE CONTACT WAS SUFFICIENT, the contact was at the 5 yard line, not in the end zone

4.) Edelman cuts into the path of the defender, meaning Edelman was the one initiating the contact, not the defender.


Like the Boyce play, the call was blown in more than one way.

As I said, denying bad calls like this is the sort of crap that gives Patriots fans a bad name.

 

[Ring 6]

Those are plays with incidental contact that happen on roughly half of well covered pass plays. The flag needs to stay in the pocket there because there was absolutely nothing that Smith could have done to avoid the contact.

That is not a component of the rule. If he is in the wrong place impeding the pattern and not going after the ball, not being able to avoid contact does not excuse the infraction.
In this case, the best argument for no call is that the contact was minmal, and you could stretch to say that he eventually found the ball and tried to play it even though he was not playing the ball at all when the contact occured.

Those are split second reaction plays that don't do anything to excuse a bad call. Further, I'm not sure if you have had to play LB, corner, or safety, but when you're running leg in leg full speed with someone and are turning your head to look up at the ball, it's difficult to pinpoint the exactly trajectory of it until it's about 10-15 feet away from coming down. That ball was still very much in the air.

Smith was facing the goalpost, and the ball was thrown toward the flag.

 

[Ring 6]

1.) It is an abnormal call

2.) It doesn't get made "all the damn time"

3.) EVEN IF YOU WANT TO PRETEND THAT THE CONTACT WAS SUFFICIENT, the contact was at the 5 yard line, not in the end zone


Like the Boyce play, the call was blown in more than one way.

As I said, denying bad calls like this is the sort of crap that gives Patriots fans a bad name.

They did not call it in as in the end zone.

 

[Ring 6]

That was a call that shouldn't be made. If and when it does happen to our DBs, I'm pissed off over it. Glad it happened in our favor yesterday, but this call and the call Boyce got against the Browns were ticky tack. Same with the call Gregory received.

This one and the Gregory one were consistent with each other.

The Boyce call differed in that the DB defended a route, not a pass.

 

[BradyManny]

Those are plays with incidental contact that happen on roughly half of well covered pass plays. The flag needs to stay in the pocket there because there was absolutely nothing that Smith could have done to avoid the contact.

He could have not grabbed Edelman on both sides of his hips, which is a sure fire way to get DPI every time.

it's difficult to pinpoint the exactly trajectory of it until it's about 10-15 feet away from coming down. That ball was still very much in the air.

I'm sure it's difficult, but I don't think that's a factor in the rulebook. Smith might've been looking back, but he made no play on the ball, and prevented Edelman from doing so. I wasn't excited when I saw the flag, but this gets called all the time.

 

[Bella*chick]

Bad officiating crew. So what. It's par for the course this year.

It's not like Patriots fan saying, "yeah, those were bad calls." will make the rest of the NFL and their fandom love us. So who cares.

 

[BradyManny]

1.) It is an abnormal call

2.) It doesn't get made "all the damn time"

3.) EVEN IF YOU WANT TO PRETEND THAT THE CONTACT WAS SUFFICIENT, the contact was at the 5 yard line, not in the end zone

4.) Edelman cuts into the path of the defender, meaning Edelman was the one initiating the contact, not the defender.


Like the Boyce play, the call was blown in more than one way.

As I said, denying bad calls like this is the sort of crap that gives Patriots fans a bad name.

2) I agree the contact was made at the 5 and should've been enforced there. That, likewise, gets blown across the league as well.

4) There's a GIF directly above you that contradicts this. Edelman had a step on Smith and had a path to the ball, Smith, sticks his arms out and contacts Edelman. Stop trying to pretend your more objective than all of us.

This gets called all day. A hand on his front, a hand on his back, that is not Edelman initiating contact, that is Jimmy Smith initiating contact. I hate to quote Felger, but fact, not opinion.

 

[condon84]

This one and the Gregory one were consistent with each other.

The Boyce call differed in that the DB defended a route, not a pass.

Refs were consistently bad yesterday at least.

I still think the Boyce call was soft. If refs were to call it consistently like that, there would be a flag on every pass play. And if that had happened against our team at the end of the game to set up a game winning TD, I would be furious and so would everyone else.

 

[Kontradiction]

Come on, man. You're smarter than this.

He could have not grabbed Edelman on both sides of his hips, which is a sure fire way to get DPI every time.

Once again, what in God's name are people looking at when they watch GIF images? The image shows that it's clear that he didn't "grab Edelman on both sides of his hips". He touched the rib area and that wasn't even a grab. He put his hands out to brace himself because they made contact with one another, which Edelman initiated by the way.

I'm sure it's difficult, but I don't think that's a factor in the rulebook. Smith might've been looking back, but he made no play on the ball, and prevented Edelman from doing so. I wasn't excited when I saw the flag, but this gets called all the time.

It's ridiculously difficult.

Smith wasn't in the position to make a play on the ball because Edelman cut into his path and initiated the contact.

 

[Ring 6]

1.) It is an abnormal call

2.) It doesn't get made "all the damn time"

3.) EVEN IF YOU WANT TO PRETEND THAT THE CONTACT WAS SUFFICIENT, the contact was at the 5 yard line, not in the end zone

4.) Edelman cuts into the path of the defender, meaning Edelman was the one initiating the contact, not the defender.


Like the Boyce play, the call was blown in more than one way.

As I said, denying bad calls like this is the sort of crap that gives Patriots fans a bad name.

The bolded part is meaningless. If a player is running to the pass and runs into a player NOT playing the ball, who initiates contact is meaningless.

I know you want to be seen as the guy who sees without bias, but in doing so, you go too far in the wrong direction and that results in stretching to bring in things like this that are flat out wrong.

It is very easy to say you thought there wasn't enough contact to justify PI without making things up to pretend there was more to it than that.

When you run an animal over with your car, its dead. You don't have to shoot it, beat it with a club, and set it on fire to prove its really, really dead.

 

[Deus Irae]

4) There's a GIF directly above you that contradicts this. Edelman had a step on Smith and had a path to the ball, Smith, sticks his arms out and contacts Edelman. Stop trying to pretend your more objective than all of us.


This gets called all day.

The gif doesn't contradict me, at all. It fully supports me. Edelman is on the defender's right until he veers left, into the path of the defender and attempting to cut him off, which is why there was contact.

Given your position, particularly since you now even admit that the call, if any, should have been made at the 5 and not in the endzone, it's pretty clear that I'm not pretending when it comes my objectivity in comparison to yours.

 

[BradyManny]

Once again, what in God's name are people looking at when they watch GIF images? The image shows that it's clear that he didn't "grab Edelman on both sides of his hips". I grabbed the rib area and that wasn't even a grab. He put his hands out to brace himself because they made contact with one another, which Edelman initiated by the way.

Man A going 15MPH N, turns and heads 15MPH NW. Man B going 15MPH N, reaches out and hits Man A. Man A is no longer heading NW. Incompletion.

The still above clearly shows Smith makes contact with two arms on Edelman. At that speed, that's going to stop Edelman's change of directions in its tracks, which it did.

And again, it doesn't matter how difficult a play it is for Smith. If you want to argue DPI rules are in need of rehab, I would agree with you.

Again, I'm not saying it's a GOOD CALL. But it's not something ridiculous, absurd, out of left field, egregious, life-altering call.

 

[BradyManny]

The gif doesn't contradict me, at all. It fully supports me. Edelman is on the defender's right until he veers left, into the path of the defender and attempting to cut him off, which is why there was contact.

1) The path of the defender was not in the direction of the throw, he was not playing the ball.
2) Smith reached out to make contact. That will get called.

 

[Ring 6]

Refs were consistently bad yesterday at least.

I still think the Boyce call was soft. If refs were to call it consistently like that, there would be a flag on every pass play. And if that had happened against our team at the end of the game to set up a game winning TD, I would be furious and so would everyone else.

I disagree, because the distinction is that the DB was beaten and made contact solely to disrupt the receiver from the ball.
If the DB were in step with Boyce and were defending the pass, not the man, then it wouldn't have been a penalty. It was because he was defending the player by trrying to prevent him from his route, not defending the pass. It is a night and day difference.

 

[Deus Irae]

1) The path of the defender was not in the direction of the throw, he was not playing the ball.
2) Smith reached out to make contact. That will get called.

You are now defending a call you admit was bad by making up nonsense.



That's pathetic. We're done here. You should be embarrassed. As a fellow Pats fan, I'm embarrassed for you.

 

[Ring 6]

2) I agree the contact was made at the 5 and should've been enforced there. That, likewise, gets blown across the league as well.

4) There's a GIF directly above you that contradicts this. Edelman had a step on Smith and had a path to the ball, Smith, sticks his arms out and contacts Edelman. Stop trying to pretend your more objective than all of us.

This gets called all day. A hand on his front, a hand on his back, that is not Edelman initiating contact, that is Jimmy Smith initiating contact. I hate to quote Felger, but fact, not opinion.

The angle the ref had is 180 degrees different too.
I could easily see a ref on the backside of this making the call, but not making it if he is on the front side.
Some people expect refs to make calls as if the play s frozen in time and they can see it from every angle.
How many calls get overturned exactly because they can't do that but the replay can.

 

[Ring 6]

The gif doesn't contradict me, at all. It fully supports me. Edelman is on the defender's right until he veers left, into the path of the defender and attempting to cut him off, which is why there was contact.

Given your position, particularly since you now even admit that the call, if any, should have been made at the 5 and not in the endzone, it's pretty clear that I'm not pretending when it comes my objectivity in comparison to yours.

It did happen at the 5, they called it in the end zone because that is where the pass landed. That is done all the time, correct or not.

 

[PatsFan2]

The angle the ref had is 180 degrees different too.
I could easily see a ref on the backside of this making the call, but not making it if he is on the front side.
Some people expect refs to make calls as if the play s frozen in time and they can see it from every angle.
How many calls get overturned exactly because they can't do that but the replay can.

Exactly AJ that is what the Refs see in real time not slow motion.

 

[Ring 6]

You are now defending a call you admit was bad by making up nonsense.



That's pathetic. We're done here. You should be embarrassed. As a fellow Pats fan, I'm embarrassed for you.

There is nothing wrong with thinking a call is wrong and defending why it was made.
The fact that the ref had a different angle than the one you are judging from is the first that comes to mind.

 

[BradyManny]

You are now defending a call you admit was bad by making up nonsense.



That's pathetic. We're done here. You should be embarrassed. As a fellow Pats fan, I'm embarrassed for you.

Why does everything have to be so black & white? I never admitted it was bad, nor did I make up nonsense.

How many ways do you want to look at this? Two guys made contact, one of them was running at the ball, one of them wasn't. The latter was a defender. He gets called for DPI. No matter how you slice it, this call gets made often, and we've been on the other end of it. It's frustrating for fans of football at times, but it is what it is.

I would've had no problem with you saying you don't like the call, but to suggest anyone who thought the call wasn't egregious is a blind homer, I take offense to that.