Main Menu
collapse

Resources

Recent Posts

Let's talk Josh. #FREEJOSH by Pakuni
[Today at 11:16:39 AM]


What/Who is Hiroshima? by rocky_warrior
[Today at 10:46:13 AM]


Beat the Friars! by Zog from Margo
[Today at 10:22:59 AM]


Marquette Team Rankings by MUbiz
[Today at 10:02:53 AM]


Post defense and rebounding by muwarrior69
[Today at 08:45:15 AM]


2025-26 Big East Conference TV Schedule by Mr. Nielsen
[January 18, 2026, 09:37:51 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!


GB Warrior

Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2026, 11:05:27 PMFrom The Athletic, here's NFL rules analyst Walt Anderson on the controversial interception in the Bills-Broncos game:

"As the receiver's going to the ground, as soon as he hits the ground, the ball is immediately loose," Anderson said. "By definition, that would normally be an incomplete pass if it comes out and hits the ground.

"The reality here is the ball never hits the ground. The loose ball ends up being immediately in control by the defensive player, who then rolls over with the ball, and he maintains control of the ball."



It amazes me that people are struggling to see the difference between this play and Adams'. If Cooks rolls over and drops it, it's an obvious incompletion and no one says anything.

Adams is fighting for yardage (a football move) and happens to be down by contact.

Funny that there were two even remotely similar plays this weekend, but they were both absolutely ruled correctly

Jockey

Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2026, 11:05:27 PMFrom The Athletic, here's NFL rules analyst Walt Anderson on the controversial interception in the Bills-Broncos game:

"As the receiver's going to the ground, as soon as he hits the ground, the ball is immediately loose," Anderson said. "By definition, that would normally be an incomplete pass if it comes out and hits the ground.

"The reality here is the ball never hits the ground. The loose ball ends up being immediately in control by the defensive player, who then rolls over with the ball, and he maintains control of the ball."



I didn't realize there was a controversy. Seemed pretty black and white - receiver never had full possession and ball never hit the ground.

withoutbias

https://x.com/JeffDarlington/status/2013018711641223216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2013018711641223216%7Ctwgr%5E12685cfdaee2370162fa561ecd6d76040d232cc0%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ffanbuzz.com%2Fnfl%2Fnfc-north%2Fbears-fans-focus-on-wrong-team-with-pre-game-chant-packers-rams-playoffs-nfl%2F

Haha. Lil bro going into a Playoff game against the Rams and still thinking about big bro.

Ice Man is really Ass Man who had a horseshoe up his ass all year. Guy is going to need to learn how to throw a football on schedule or he'll continue to throw 5 picks in 2 Playoff games.

forgetful

Quote from: GB Warrior on Today at 08:43:15 AMIt amazes me that people are struggling to see the difference between this play and Adams'. If Cooks rolls over and drops it, it's an obvious incompletion and no one says anything.

Adams is fighting for yardage (a football move) and happens to be down by contact.

Funny that there were two even remotely similar plays this weekend, but they were both absolutely ruled correctly


The two plays were way more similar than you are implying here.

Cooks had caught the ball, and is fighting off the defender by rolling away from him after hitting the ground. According to the definition of a football move, which includes "extend the ball forward, take an additional step, tuck the ball away and turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so." One could make the argument that he has made a football move. He had possession of the ball, knee was down, he rolled (with possession of the ball) to ward off the defender, and only afterward was stripped of the ball. (note this is one interpretation of the video).

Similarly, you are giving credit for Adams making a football move by fighting for more yardage. There isn't time for him to do so. He took two steps, knee down, which immediately after, the ball is stripped. They called that a football move.

I'm honestly fine with both calls, but they were way way more similar than you give credit, and the really egregious aspect was that in the Bills game they did not stop the game and have an automatic review, instead, I'm assuming they relied on NY. Should have been reviewed by the in-game officials.


GB Warrior

Quote from: forgetful on Today at 09:13:34 AMThe two plays were way more similar than you are implying here.

Cooks had caught the ball, and is fighting off the defender by rolling away from him after hitting the ground. According to the definition of a football move, which includes "extend the ball forward, take an additional step, tuck the ball away and turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so." One could make the argument that he has made a football move. He had possession of the ball, knee was down, he rolled (with possession of the ball) to ward off the defender, and only afterward was stripped of the ball. (note this is one interpretation of the video).

Similarly, you are giving credit for Adams making a football move by fighting for more yardage. There isn't time for him to do so. He took two steps, knee down, which immediately after, the ball is stripped. They called that a football move.

I'm honestly fine with both calls, but they were way way more similar than you give credit, and the really egregious aspect was that in the Bills game they did not stop the game and have an automatic review, instead, I'm assuming they relied on NY. Should have been reviewed by the in-game officials.

No disagreement on the last point, though I think it was called correctly on the field. But I don't think there was any active act by Cooks...he fell. Also Dez caught it.

Pakuni

Quote from: Jockey on Today at 08:44:09 AMI didn't realize there was a controversy. Seemed pretty black and white - receiver never had full possession and ball never hit the ground.

https://x.com/RSherman_25/status/2012918356551389282?s=20


jesmu84

The problem with both of those situations is no one still has any idea what a "catch" is

tower912

Calvin Johnson has some more weed and chuckles.
In honor of Pope Leo XIV,
Matthew 25: 31-46

Also in honor of Pope Leo,  I have no enemies.  I have brothers and sisters I sometimes disagree with.

Pakuni

Quote from: GB Warrior on Today at 09:26:19 AMNo disagreement on the last point, though I think it was called correctly on the field. But I don't think there was any active act by Cooks...he fell. Also Dez caught it.
I know the catch rule is confusing, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't require a receiver to make an active act after he's down by contact. He fell because the Denver DB was on top of him.

MUBurrow

McDermott out.  Hopefully, like the Taliban, he can learn from his time out of a job and come back even stronger.

MU82

He's not a "bad" coach, and he'll get another HC job if he wants one. But it was time. The Bills, and Allen, need a different voice.
"It's not how white men fight." - Tucker Carlson

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." - George Washington

"In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

GB Warrior

I'm seeing Daboll chatter... I think Josh will be forced into injury retirement within 3 years if Daboll is allowed a second go at him

Pakuni

Quote from: GB Warrior on Today at 10:07:43 AMI'm seeing Daboll chatter... I think Josh will be forced into injury retirement within 3 years if Daboll is allowed a second go at him

That or possibly this is how they keep Joe Brady in town.

Previous topic - Next topic