Official Post Game Thread- Pats beat the Bills

Deus Irae said:

The theory was that the ball was touched by a player who was out of bounds before Jackson had it secured.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll have to give it another look because I thought he had it secured before then.

rochrist said:

It was a division and conference game. It meant a great deal.

Click to expand...

Imagine thinking that any games prior to February are meaningful. Are you a Chiefs fan or something?

I've already booked my tickets to Miami for February.

StairwayToSe7en said:

Imagine thinking that any games prior to February are meaningful. Are you a Chiefs fan or something?

I've already booked my tickets to Miami for February.

Click to expand...

Ahhhh Fourier Series. You cant hide with 100% "Fourier Series" posts like that.

StairwayToSe7en said:

Imagine thinking that any games prior to February are meaningful. Are you a Chiefs fan or something?

I've already booked my tickets to Miami for February.

Click to expand...

Haven't watched football much eh? We'll just assume you weren't around for those years that losing home field cost them a trip to the SB.

rochrist said:

Haven't watched football much eh? We'll just assume you weren't around for those years that losing home field cost them a trip to the SB.

Click to expand...

Their main competition is currently a team with a historically bad defense who sucks at home in the playoffs.

Fun fact: the Patriots have won more AFCCGs at Arrowhead than the Chiefs.

The game being played there would be an advantage for the Patriots.

StairwayToSe7en said:

Their main competition is currently a team with a historically bad defense who sucks at home in the playoffs.

Fun fact: the Patriots have won more AFCCGs at Arrowhead than the Chiefs.

The game being played there would be an advantage for the Patriots.

Click to expand...

I suspect you're a Reverse Troll.

DaBruinz said:

I know that OK is a synonym for average. The fact that you think James White is just "average" and that you don't believe opposing teams game plan for him tells me you don't understand the game 1/100000 th as much as you think.

I guarantee you that teams game plan for Edelman regardless of whether or not he's 100%.

I believe that you are someone who doesn't understand the game nearly what you think you do. I believe you throw crap out to disparage the players and other posters regardless of what is said. And as such, you spin to make yourself look intelligent as you've done to this point.

Click to expand...

Why the ad Hominems? I just gave an opinion. You seem triggered.

Double TE said:

Why the ad Hominems? I just gave an opinion. You seem triggered.

Click to expand...

Sorry that you don't like people giving opinions of your blathering posts. Just keep on spinning and making things up. Only thing you've shown yourself to be capable of.

Fauria is killing Bedard for Bedard's (alleged) misreading of plays via the all-22. And he's doing it by breaking down the specific plays that Bedard is talking about and pointing out all the (alleged) interpretation errors being made by Bedard.

"...using video to support their point of view, and they're FLAT OUT WRONG."

1960Pats said:

On the JC Jackson INT along the sideline did I hear right, that someone was claiming the play should have been overruled? Anyone know why? It looked to me like Jackson made a great play.

Click to expand...

The refs totally blew the review.

Jackson went up for the ball, got control of it in his hands, and got one foot down. But while the second foot was over a foot in the air, the Bills receiver WHO WAS CLEARLY STANDING OOB touched the ball.

That makes the ball OOB as well. Since it happened before the 2nd foot was down hence was before the catch was made. So it should have been ruled incomplete.

fnordcircle said:

There are better players but I think at this point KVN is the absolute heart and soul of our defense.

Click to expand...

I know where you’re coming from but not McCourty? He’s playing at another level in my mind.

QuantumMechanic said:

The refs totally blew the review.

Jackson went up for the ball, got control of it in his hands, and got one foot down. But while the second foot was over a foot in the air, the Bills receiver WHO WAS CLEARLY STANDING OOB touched the ball.

That makes the ball OOB as well. Since it happened before the 2nd foot was down hence was before the catch was made. So it should have been ruled incomplete.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that sounds a little ridiculous to me. What you’re saying is that all a defender (whether on offense or defense) needs to do is stand out of bounds and touch the ball before the receiver (whether on offense or defense) gets his 2nd foot down, even if the ball is securely held by the receiver.

That makes no intuitive sense at all to me, and is the type of technicality that the league was trying to eliminate with the catch rule tweak. If the ball wasn’t secured, then sure, the rule makes sense. But Jackson had firm control. It’s not a loose ball situation like the David Patten play - those rules were made for loose ball situations which this should not be considered even though the catch wasn’t officially completed at that point.

If this really is the rule, then it needs to be fixed. I understand Steratore thought it was, but he retired before they made the current rule changes.

That’s the rule and has been forever. The ball is OOB and the play is dead the moment the ball touches anything OOB.

This saved NE in 2001 when an unconscious Patten fumbled but landed with his head OOB. The ball touched his feet just before Buffalo recovered the fumble. The play was correctly blown dead with NE retaining possession.

GB has taken advantage of this rule many times. When a KO is near the sideline a GB player will put one foot OOB then reach over and touch the ball. Instant kickoff OOB penalty on the kicking team.

QuantumMechanic said:

That’s the rule and has been forever. The ball is OOB and the play is dead the moment the ball touches anything OOB.

This saved NE in 2001 when an unconscious Patten fumbled but landed with his head OOB. The ball touched his feet just before Buffalo recovered the fumble. The play was correctly blown dead with NE retaining possession.

GB has taken advantage of this rule many times. When a KO is near the sideline a GB player will put one foot OOB then reach over and touch the ball. Instant kickoff OOB penalty on the kicking team.

Click to expand...

Right, and I pointed out the Patten play in my response. Both examples you mentioned were actual loose balls. Jackson’s was not loose, it was securely held, he just didn’t have the 2nd foot down yet - he was in the process of completing the catch. If they consider that a loose ball for the purpose of this rule, then the rule needs to be changed.

QuantumMechanic said:

That’s the rule and has been forever. The ball is OOB and the play is dead the moment the ball touches anything OOB.

This saved NE in 2001 when an unconscious Patten fumbled but landed with his head OOB. The ball touched his feet just before Buffalo recovered the fumble. The play was correctly blown dead with NE retaining possession.

GB has taken advantage of this rule many times. When a KO is near the sideline a GB player will put one foot OOB then reach over and touch the ball. Instant kickoff OOB penalty on the kicking team.

Click to expand...

I don’t know if your interpretation of the rule is correct, but the Patten play is a really poor comparison.

Also, Jackson did NOT have firm control. He lost the ball completely but was able to re-grab it.

But even if he had firm control, so what? If his foot came down OOB there’s no catch. If he got shoved so that his foot came down OOB there’s no catch. If he jumps, gets firm control, and a defender forces him OOB before he lands there’s no catch. There’s nothing special about “firm control”. You still have to complete the catch. And that means avoiding OOB until you’re done.

And many sports have “OOB is conductive” rules where a player touching OOB is considered to be entirely OOB as is anything the player touches. This is hardly unique to football.

Finally, you worry too much. No defender is going to regularly position himself OOB to try to make a play. For one thing, it’s illegal to move down the field OOB. For another, they’re going for the receiver, who is in-bounds. Positioning yourself on the sideline to try to pull off something like this will burn the defender far more than it will help him.

One thing that does surprise me about sideline plays, however, is that since the elimination of the forceout rule DBs who are near a jumping receiver at the sideline don’t simply concede the ball but then just shove the receiver to land OOB. Seems a higher percentage play than challenging the ball.

Hammer of Thor said:

he was in the process of completing the catch. If they consider that a loose ball for the purpose of this rule, then the rule needs to be changed.

Click to expand...

Read the rule book. All forward passes are considered loose balls (and always have been) until the catch is completed.

Hammer of Thor said:

Right, and I pointed out the Patten play in my response. Both examples you mentioned were actual loose balls. Jackson’s was not loose, it was securely held, he just didn’t have the 2nd foot down yet - he was in the process of completing the catch. If they consider that a loose ball for the purpose of this rule, then the rule needs to be changed.

Click to expand...

It isn't in anyone's possession until the second foot comes down, making it as loose as the most rumbly tumbly fumble.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

I don’t know if your interpretation of the rule is correct, but the Patten play is a really poor comparison.

Click to expand...

Why? It applies the rule in the exact same manner. Same as the KO returner who stepped a foot OOB before touching the ball to earn a free penalty.