Mankins penalty and a few other thoughts

[Sciz]

I'm fine with both Talib and Mankins getting the PF flags that they got. They were both incredibly stupid plays that shouldn't have happened.

What did Mankins actually do? They never showed it on TV.

 

[Kontradiction]

Are you really asking why I would be biased toward my home team?

No, I'm asking why you would give them the benefit of the doubt no matter what. It indicates that critical thinking skills aren't present and you've never struck me as that kind of guy. Did you give Cannon the benefit of the doubt as well?

I am not saying the refs should give him the benifit of the doubt. But on a play like that where I can determine him holding his leg was either him thinking the play wasnt over or him being a punk/sour grapes I will lean toward giving my guy the benifit of the doubt.

Even though it's very obvious that it wasn't due to the fact that Talib was unaware that the play was over.

Had he just jumped right up and cold clocked Smith than no benifit could be given but that wasnt the case here also I am not OK with everything that followed and he gets no benifit of the doubt for grabbing Smith face mask.

Actually, this was one that I could have excused. Smith was being a punk, shoved Talib first, then got in Talib's face after Talib retaliated. I had no problem with that, though I was also glad the ref didn't throw the flag.

You saw it as clearly him being cheap so there would be no reason for you to give him the benifit of the doubt.

I don't think he was being cheap. I just think he had some sour grapes over getting burned a couple of plays before.

 

[signbabybrady]

No, I'm asking why you would give them the benefit of the doubt no matter what. It indicates that critical thinking skills aren't present and you've never struck me as that kind of guy. Did you give Cannon the benefit of the doubt as well?

I wouldnt give them the benifit of the doubt no matter what. In this case right or wrong I came up with a reason to give him the benifit of the doubt.


I didnt see the Cannon play initially so there were no emotions involved in my analysis there as the game was long over when I saw it but no way do I give a player the benifit of the doubt there as I am not sure what the excuse could have been.

Even though it's very obvious that it wasn't due to the fact that Talib was unaware that the play was over.

Clearly we disagree with how obvious it was that Talib knew the play was over but had it not been so obvious to you might you not have given the player you like the benifit of the doubt?

Actually, this was one that I could have excused. Smith was being a punk, shoved Talib first, then got in Talib's face after Talib retaliated. I had no problem with that, though I was also glad the ref didn't throw the flag.

I can see your point here but would still rather see cooler heads prevail which I guess is a little funny as above I am admitting to letting my own emotions make me a little bias.

Also is this not you giving him the benifit of the doubt that Smith antagonized him into? Your reason here for excusing Talib is Smith baited him and while this was more clear than my thinking he thought the play wasnt over it is still you writing off his behavior based on the case as I am with the "late holding of the leg".

I don't think he was being cheap. I just think he had some sour grapes over getting burned a couple of plays before.

Nothing really to say here just semantics over what we want to call the action.

 

[supafly]

If the team is sure that Mankins isn't worth his price tag anymore, they had better do a better job of replacing him than they have with Koppen and Waters, or Brady is going to be taken out on a stretcher by Week 3 of next season.

I definitely agree.

For the record, I'm not advocating the release of Mankins on any level, at least not next year in 2014 anyway. I'm just wondering if he's as good as he once was + worth what they are paying him, that's all.

 

[doesntmatter1]

I rewatched the game and I have to say we played pretty well on both sides of the ball for the most part. If we had just stopped just ONE of Cam's back breaking scrambles it would have made all of the difference in the world. The scramble where Ninko missed twice just should not have happened.

While watching the scrambles I noticed how they basically tackled our dts and it looked illegal to me. I didn't notice this the first time but chris jones and velano were thrown to the ground at least twice. They were real slick about it but if we did it I feel it would have resulted in a block in the back or something.

 

[supafly]

I rewatched the game and I have to say we played pretty well on both sides of the ball for the most part. If we had just stopped just ONE of Cam's back breaking scrambles it would have made all of the difference in the world. The scramble where Ninko missed twice just should not have happened.

I agree with your point on the 3rd down defensive breakdowns.

I also think that we had a golden opportunity to permanently take advantage of the momentum once and for all by scoring a TD to make it 24-17 with about 4-5 minutes left, yet weren't able to convert the most important 3rd and 1 attempt of the game. I think it was pretty much lost there, as I assumed that Carolina would have plenty of time to score the game winning TD--and they did.

A FG in that situation just wasn't acceptable based on how they were successful vs our defense. We needed a TD, where they'd only have been able to tie the game at best, and would've been under a ton of pressure to do so. The worst part about it is that we were in easy FG range at the end of the game, so even if they did tie it we'd have likely won with a FG as time ticked down.

 

[tuckeverlasting]

I agree with your point on the 3rd down defensive breakdowns.

I also think that we had a golden opportunity to permanently take advantage of the momentum once and for all by scoring a TD to make it 24-17 with about 4-5 minutes left, yet weren't able to convert the most important 3rd and 1 attempt of the game. I think it was pretty much lost there, as I assumed that Carolina would have plenty of time to score the game winning TD--and they did.

A FG in that situation just wasn't acceptable based on how they were successful vs our defense. We needed a TD, where they'd only have been able to tie the game at best, and would've been under a ton of pressure to do so. The worst part about it is that we were in easy FG range at the end of the game, so even if they did tie it we'd have likely won with a FG as time ticked down.

i wanted them to go for it on 4th and one. a brady sneak, a little bubble screen. a short slant to amendola. we were gashing them with the run. something. go for the win.

 

[supafly]

i wanted them to go for it on 4th and one. a brady sneak, a little bubble screen. a short slant to amendola. we were gashing them with the run. something. go for the win.

On 4th and 1 it's pretty much a no-brainer that you'd probably just kick the FG and take the lead up 20-17 with about 4:30 left in the game. Unfortunately, I think many of us realized that our defense was likely to cave yet again....

It's a fair thought, and I wonder if it was pondered at all, but I think the FG was the safer choice; although pinning them down very deep in their own zone in a tied game may have not been such a bad losing prize either--which is likely your point.

The poor choice in my opinion, was the specific 3rd and 1 call. I would have preferred to see a run there, or at least a different kind of pass. I did not care for that playcall for whatever it may be worth (nothing).

 

[Sciz]

No fine for Mankins. That's usually a pretty good indicator that the refs blew the call, which I will continue to assume was the case here.