Keegs
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2006
- Messages
- 4,942
- Reaction score
- 12
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Ronnie Brown wasnts to play for the Patriots? That's news to me.
Ronnie Brown wasnts to play for the Patriots? That's news to me.
"literally undressed"?
Good to see a team was finally smart enough to beat decent cover guys on Welker. It's obvious Welker can beat slow linebackers and terrible nickle guys. this is what happens when you put a good DB on him.
I see a lot of talk about illegal contact and holding etc from Pats fans around here, when it was your guys doing it the Colts recievers you were singing a different tune.
I see a lot of talk about illegal contact and holding etc from Pats fans around here, when it was your guys doing it to the Colts recievers you were singing a different tune.
No it wasn't legal, they just didn't call it as often. It helped you get a SB so quit crying about it now is all I'm saying.
Was on the felger show. Said the above and said the ravens had no reason to complain about offiiciating
glad someone saw it even if it was this guy
That's all well and good but why couldn't he say this on Mike and Mike this morning. All he did was bash the Pats while they said that despite the "lousy" calls a "conspiracy" was unrealistic.
An hour or more after the game, ESPN did a segment on how the Ravens were able to take Welker out of the game. They showed 3 plays and in 2 of them the Ravens DB had Welker's shirt and held it keeping Welker from getting seperation. I find it hard to believe they were the only times and that other DB's weren't doing similar tactics with other Patriots recievers.
So, unlike most others, I don't blame the Ravens for being upset with the call when they were called for holding Watson. If the refs are going to let similar things go on all game, why wouldn't they be upset when it's called on the 2nd biggest play of the game? How are DB's suppsoed to know what they can and can't do when it isn't called the same throughout the game?
The holding rule, if I can make a comparison, is like holding in hockey during the mid 90's. The rule was in place but was never enforced. In the NHL it lead to low scoring, crappy games. They made it a point of emphasis a few years ago and since then scoring has increased.
In the NFL it's a similar thing: when Polian threw his weight around to have the league enforce the calls, it was simply because the Patriots had a physical defense and took advantage of a rule that never got called.
Now, however, holding IS a point of emphasis and it's been noted time and again that it could be a reason why Belichick and Pioli went out of their way to put together a fantastic receiving core: when the advantage is given to the offense, you have to put together a squad that can capitalize on that.
All that said, when a team holds on almost every play like the Ravens did last night the officials aren't going to call it...it would be ridiculous to see a flag on every down. And unfortuntely that's what it'll take, because I have a feeling other teams are looking at this game film thinking 'hey, we can do that too.' Hopefully the Patriots are all over the league to do something about this, because we'll be seeing it every week if it's not adressed.
the hold (or call it illegal contact if you want.....past 5 yard cushion) was blatant there man......you need to look at it again......
Yup, that's exactly what I thought after the Pats did it to the Colts.
Well then they should be calling it every other play then right? This is ridiculous....if they hold....they get PENALIZED....PERIOD.....after about 15 holding penalties they will wake up and stop doing it.....actually if you call them every time you see it....it could have the reverse effect....and they will get gun shy to try to clutch and hold........Refs need to enforce this EVERY time it happens......and it was "allowed" way too much last night.....
Definition of literally includes:
Quote:
(intensifier before a figurative expression) without exaggeration; "our eyes were literally pinned to TV during the Gulf War"
| 29 | 5K |
| 54 | 5K |
| 41 | 3K |
| 227 | 14K |
| 43 | 3K |
From our archive - this week all-time:
May 24 - June 8 (Through 26yrs)










