2014-15 NFC North/NFL Thread

[wadesworld]

Yup, which I said I understand the anger.  I would be too.

You didn't answer any of my questions, how come?

3rd and 1 and you have the lead, and they go for a tough pass and they punt.  One would think you run it twice there to keep the drive alive.

Having the ball at the 30 yard line is the same as a meteorite striking....with a team that has scored all of 3 points the second half and not a touchdown since the first quarter?  More than likely, they kick a FG (if they make it), and Dallas is still down only 6 points.

So people can't assume a touchdown but you can assume a field goal.  Got it.

Now that that's clear, since we know it's only a 6 point lead and Detroit then kicked a field goal, I guess you know that Dallas's ensuing drive goes exactly as it did following the 10 yard punt, despite them now needing a touchdown to keep their season alive (as opposed to a field goal to tie the game) with less time on the clock, and worse field position (but I guess you must know the return man would've returned the kickoff to exactly where the punt resulted).  Do you really think Dallas's offense and Detroit's defense play the exact same way if Dallas is down 6 starting at their 20 with 5:20 left as they did with Dallas down 3 with 8:10 left in the game?  Of course they wouldn't, but that doesn't fit your narrative so nobody else can conclude anything about the rest of the game except for you.

I hate Detroit and they got screwed.  The refs missed the call you want to make, and they made the call that they should have made, yet they inexplicably made the call and then reversed it.  Beyond that, Dez Bryant should've been flagged for a 15 yard penalty.  So while you want to say they have it at the 30, they should've had it at the 15.  Not to mention, even if it went your way and there were offsetting penalties, isn't 3rd and 1 a lot different than 4th and 1?  Because if there were offsetting penalties, that's what the situation would've been.  But again, that doesn't fit your narrative.

[tower912]

I have written earlier in this thread that, like the Bartman Cubs, Detroit had a chance to win the game and failed to do so.   They ARE the Lions, after all.    However, to argue that the arc of the game wasn't altered by those two wrong calls, picking up the flag and failing to flag Dez, is somewhere between disingenuous, oblivious to the ebb and flow of games, and fantasy. 

[MerrittsMustache]

I have written earlier in this thread that, like the Bartman Cubs, Detroit had a chance to win the game and failed to do so.   They ARE the Lions, after all.    However, to argue that the arc of the game wasn't altered by those two wrong calls, picking up the flag and failing to flag Dez, is somewhere between disingenuous, oblivious to the ebb and flow of games, and fantasy. 

This is a very good comparison from the standpoint that even after the one play in question, there were opportunities for both teams to win the game. The PI call would have increased Detroit's chances of winning, but they still shanked a punk then allowed Dallas to drive 60 yards for the go-ahead score, giving up a 20-yard pass on 4th and 6 in the process. In addition, the Lions had 2:30 and 2 TOs to drive down the field to win the game. Not easy, but not impossible.

[tower912]

Exactly.  Despite the blown calls, Detroit had the ball back down 4 with 2:32 to go.   If they weren't the same old Lions, they would have found a way to move down the field and win the game, like they had 5 time earlier in the season.   In the end, Dallas made the stop and Detroit didn't get it done.   But that doesn't make the calls correct, and it doesn't mean their wrongness didn't have an effect on the outcome. 

[hairy worthen]

Yup, which I said I understand the anger.  I would be too.

You didn't answer any of my questions, how come?

3rd and 1 and you have the lead, and they go for a tough pass and they punt.  One would think you run it twice there to keep the drive alive.

Having the ball at the 30 yard line is the same as a meteorite striking....with a team that has scored all of 3 points the second half and not a touchdown since the first quarter?  More than likely, they kick a FG (if they make it), and Dallas is still down only 6 points.

I didn’t answer your questions because none of it mattered. The Lions suck, that’s your answer. What does that have to do with a blown call that changes the momentum of the game?

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

see Golden Tate's TD catch against GB in Seattle a few years ago during the Refs' strike

Still one of my favoriteam regular season moments 

[MerrittsMustache]

Good take from Bill Barnwell:

And the reality is that the decision hardly turned the game into a guaranteed victory for the Cowboys. Brian Burke’s win probability model noted that the call swung Detroit’s chances of winning by about 12 percentage points, as the Lions would have had a 79.4 percent chance of winning if the penalty had been enforced, only to settle for a 67.2 percent win expectancy after the flag was picked up. Burke notes that Detroit’s chances changed by about the same amount when Matthew Stafford hit Corey Fuller for a 21-yard completion earlier on the drive. It would be impossible to argue that the non-call didn’t help Dallas’s chances, but acting like a Cowboys win was fait accompli after the flag was picked up is just inaccurate.

[ATL MU Warrior]

This is a very good comparison from the standpoint that even after the one play in question, there were opportunities for both teams to win the game. The PI call would have increased Detroit's chances of winning, but they still shanked a punk then allowed Dallas to drive 60 yards for the go-ahead score, giving up a 20-yard pass on 4th and 6 in the process. In addition, the Lions had 2:30 and 2 TOs to drive down the field to win the game. Not easy, but not impossible.

I heard Keefe did this one night in Bangladesh.

[wadesworld]

Just read something that shocked me.  At 31 years old, Rodgers is the 3rd oldest player on the Green Bay Packers.  Only Peppers and Kuhn are older.  Only 8 players on the roster are 30 years old or older.

[Benny B]

see Golden Tate's TD catch against GB in Seattle a few years ago during the Refs' strike

Were the refs also responsible for the fact that GB wasn't leading by 9 points when the "fail mary" was caught?  Seems like had Rodgers thrown another TD pass earlier in that game, Tate's catch wouldn't have mattered.

Refs do not determine the outcome of a game.  They can influence it, but they don't determine it.  Score more points than the other team, and there's nothing the refs can do to take a win away.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Refs do not determine the outcome of a game.  They can influence it, but they don't determine it.  Score more points than the other team, and there's nothing the refs can do to take a win away.

I get where you coming from but in that situation the score was 12-7 before the bad call was made so yes the refs did directly affect the outcome IMO. Sure if Rodgers had thrown for 5 TDs that call wouldn't have mattered but that wasn't the case was it?

[Benny B]

Has anyone considered the possibility of the following sequence:

1) Back judge sees DPI, throws the flag.
2) Head linesman sees hand-to-face or OPI, but sees BJ throw flag, assumes BJ saw what he saw, and so does not throw the flag himself (it's highly unusual for an HL to throw a flag for a penalty in the secondary as he's not usually in the best position to make such calls - and doesn't want to step on the toes of his crewmates).
3) Referee signals DPI.  HL has an "oh sh|t" moment, goes over to R to discuss.
4) Officiating crew confers, knowing that they either have to deal with calling a penalty 45-60 seconds after the play was over (and an initial penalty called) or pick up the flag for the penalty that was already called.  Not knowing of any situation where the former had occurred and several where the latter had (though not after the signal for the flag) probably influenced the decision.
5) Crew decides the lesser of two evils to be picking up the flag.  Rationale: Had OPI/HTF been the original infraction (which it was) and the officials conferred before signalling any call, the call for DPI most likely would not have been made and only OPI/HTF would have been the call (I can't find any example where OPI/HTF and DPI were called on the same play).  Therefore, the result of the play should have been 10 yards &replay the down, in which case Dallas may have declined the penalty to bring up 4th down any way, in which case, the end result would have been the ideal result to begin with.  

In other words, if the pass was unlikely to have been caught (which I can't say is or is not the case), the Lions may have actually derived benefit from the outcome of the play in relation to how it should have been called (HTF/OPI, no DPI) as opposed to how it was ultimately called (no call).  Detroit fans may be upset about it, but the Cowboys may in fact have been the team who got the short end of the stick because the officials effectively declined a penalty without having consulted them.

Not saying that is what happened, but it's one logical explanation for the controversial result of the play being the correct one.  It also may explain why Dez Bryant was not called - the only reason Bryant came on the field was because the officials already knew they screwed up the call to begin with.

[Benny B]

I get where you coming from but in that situation the score was 12-7 before the bad call was made so yes the refs did directly affect the outcome IMO. Sure if Rodgers had thrown for 5 TDs that call wouldn't have mattered but that wasn't the case was it?

Semantics perhaps, but I would argue that it was the Packers (or Seahawks) who failed to control the outcome of the game by putting the refs into a position to  directly affect the last play of the game, which indirectly led to them affecting the outcome of the game. 

[JWags85]

Not saying that is what happened, but it's one logical explanation for the controversial result of the play being the correct one.  It also may explain why Dez Bryant was not called - the only reason Bryant came on the field was because the officials already knew they screwed up the call to begin with.

So ignoring 2 blatant infractions (on the field without a helmet and entering the field to begin with) is cool cause they were having an "oops my bad" moment?  So by that logic, it would be logical or make sense for an NBA ref to not discipline a player who throws a punch at an opponent because 5 seconds before, they had mistakenly called a charge when the defender was clearly in the restricted area.  Already messed up, might as well just move along.

Whatever the outcome of the 3rd and 1 play, its a moot point because there is absolutely NO excuse for Bryant doing what he did and escaping all manner of penalties.

[wadesworld]

So ignoring 2 blatant infractions (on the field without a helmet and entering the field to begin with) is cool cause they were having an "oops my bad" moment?  So by that logic, it would be logical or make sense for an NBA ref to not discipline a player who throws a punch at an opponent because 5 seconds before, they had mistakenly called a charge when the defender was clearly in the restricted area.  Already messed up, might as well just move along.

Whatever the outcome of the 3rd and 1 play, its a moot point because there is absolutely NO excuse for Bryant doing what he did and escaping all manner of penalties.

Exactly.  You can't yell, "You're a (effing) dumbass!" at an NBA referee who knows they just made a bad call.  They'll T you up without a thought.

Semantics perhaps, but I would argue that it was the Packers (or Seahawks) who failed to control the outcome of the game by putting the refs into a position to  directly affect the last play of the game, which indirectly led to them affecting the outcome of the game. 

No.  When you have the lead and you intercept a pass in the end zone you should have won the game.  The fact that the refs ruled that it was a touchdown despite it clearly being an interception means the refs screwed you over and lost the game for you.

[HutchwasClutch]

Semantics perhaps, but I would argue that it was the Packers (or Seahawks) who failed to control the outcome of the game by putting the refs into a position to  directly affect the last play of the game, which indirectly led to them affecting the outcome of the game.  

So if one team can't dominate the other, or at least win going away, i.e., by greater than one possession, then they deserve to get screwed at the end if the refs are incompetent?  When your argument is all twisted and contorted as your above quote is, you need to re-think that you're just plain wrong.

Why not come clean Benny and just admit your anti-Packer bias?  At least everyone will know where you're coming from when your argument on this topic is so ridiculous.

[HutchwasClutch]

Still one of my favoriteam regular season moments 

It's all you Bear fans have the last 20 plus years now isn't it? Living vicariously through another teams win over Green Bay. 

[GGGG]

No.  When you have the lead and you intercept a pass in the end zone you should have won the game.  The fact that the refs ruled that it was a touchdown despite it clearly being an interception means the refs screwed you over and lost the game for you.

Two bad calls in that drive.  Jeron McMillan's interception overturn on a bad PI call was the first.

[HutchwasClutch]

Three greatest screw jobs in the history of sports -

1) Soviets over USA -1972 Olympic Men's Basketball.
2) Fail Mary
3) Tuck rule.

[HutchwasClutch]

Two bad calls in that drive.  Jeron McMillan's interception overturn on a bad PI call was the first.

Three blown calls as there was the non-call of blatantly obvious offensive PI on Golden Taint on the fail mary play.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

It's all you Bear fans have the last 20 plus years now isn't it? Living vicariously through another teams win over Green Bay. 

The reaction from all the Packer fans on my floor was more enjoyable then the game. I had 3 guys try to fight me because I was trolling them by saying it was a good call. I wouldn't have cared if I hadn't gotten a reaction.

[HutchwasClutch]

The reaction from all the Packer fans on my floor was more enjoyable then the game. I had 3 guys try to fight me because I was trolling them by saying it was a good call. I wouldn't have cared if I hadn't gotten a reaction.

Do you ever stop and think about, gee, what if that happened to the Bears?   I mean seriously, that call should have been an offense to anyone who calls themselves a football fan. 

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Do you ever stop and think about, gee, what if that happened to the Bears?   I mean seriously, that call should have been an offense to anyone who calls themselves a football fan. 

Absolutely, I admit it was a terrible call but it doesn't make it any less funny. The fact that they were ready to fight me was effin hilarious.

[HutchwasClutch]

Absolutely, I admit it was a terrible call but it doesn't make it any less funny. The fact that they were ready to fight me was effin hilarious.

Yeah, I'd probably laugh too, especially if it were the Vikings or the Bears, but a tiny part of me would feel empathy toward their fans after a debacle like that. 

[GGGG]

The reaction from all the Packer fans on my floor was more enjoyable then the game. I had 3 guys try to fight me because I was trolling them by saying it was a good call. I wouldn't have cared if I hadn't gotten a reaction.

You rool dood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNwt_C0qGqM