[NFL] Thread: Season Over - Kansas City And San Francisco Super Bowl; Eventually

1323335373843

Posts

  • quovadis13quovadis13 Registered User regular
    Man, that dropped Seattle pass might have done them in

    knitdanGoumindongCapt HowdyKana
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    With all the beer and bratwurst consumed by their fans, you'd think the Packers would play in such a way as to not induce cardiac arrests.


    My blood pressure. :(

    A Dabble Of TheloniusHeir
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Rodgers proves that letting him throw was/is the right idea.

    wbBv3fj.png
    HeirMorganV
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    ...and there’s the dagger. GG

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    Heir
  • Sir LandsharkSir Landshark resting shark face Registered User regular
    I’m just glad the Packers didn’t get blown out after how shit the offense has been the past few weeks.

    Please consider the environment before printing this post.
    Heir
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    That was never a danger, this Seahawks team is incapable of blowing anyone out

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    KanaTheBlackWindH3KnucklesA Kobold's Kobold
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited January 13
    Its not quite over but its pretty close. Edit: maybe not?

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
  • quovadis13quovadis13 Registered User regular
    Home field advantage spot right there

    GoumindongCarpyElvenshaeHappylilElf
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    I tell you what it’s kind of frustrating to see someone actually make use of Jimmy Graham after we traded Max Unger to get him and then promptly wasted him for the entirety of his time in Seattle.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    Ticaldfjam
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Assuming no first down. Dont be cowards greenbay

    wbBv3fj.png
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    That was a really bad spot. His head wasnt to the line! Was the ball in his helmet?

    wbBv3fj.png
    Jebus314maraji
  • RickRudeRickRude Registered User regular
    They should have ruled him short

    quovadis13Jebus314CarpyHeirObiFettTicaldfjamStabbity StyleTransportermarajiElvenshaeHappylilElf
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    GG Packers now please go beat Jimmy Garofolo and the Santa Clara Venture Capitalists

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    zepherinH3Knuckles
  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    Winning ugly is still winning!

    Go Pack Go!!!

    zepherinHeirNytewarriorXaquinJebus314H3Knuckles
  • HeirHeir Registered User regular
    Yeah he was a tad short, but there were missed calls all day so whatever.

    Jimmy G didn't have to wait all damn year to actually make an impact though. I hope he's still cut after this season. He takes up way too much cap space for how many passes he's dropped this year.

    camo_sig2.png
    zepherinA Dabble Of Theloniustinwhiskers
  • zepherinzepherin Registered User regular
    It was a pretty win. Green Bay played well. The refs didn’t lose Seattle the game they simply denied Seattle the Opportunity to try to come from behind.

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    zepherin wrote: »
    It was a pretty win. Green Bay played well. The refs didn’t lose Seattle the game they simply denied Seattle the Opportunity to try to come from behind.

    GB was going to get it on 4th if they went anyway. Would have been nice to see it happen though. Would have felt better

    wbBv3fj.png
    HeirJebus314marajiRickRude
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Lions Twitter is claiming that the official who spotted the ball on that first down was the same guy with both bullshit illegal hands to the face calls against Trey Flowers to hand the Packers that game early in the season.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    RingoTrajan45TicaldfjamShadowhopemarajiBobbleRickRudeElvenshaeSmurph
  • quovadis13quovadis13 Registered User regular
    Lions Twitter needs to get over it.

    HeirA Dabble Of TheloniusenlightenedbumzepherinTubularLuggagetinwhiskersKanachrono_travellerMorganVRickRude
  • zepherinzepherin Registered User regular
    Lions Twitter is the Detroit Lions of Twitter.

    KanaMorganVH3KnucklesmarajiElvenshaeTrajan45
  • Stabbity StyleStabbity Style Warning: Mothership Reporting Richland, WARegistered User regular
    quovadis13 wrote: »
    Lions Twitter needs to get over it.

    Speaking of needing to get over it, holy crap Eagles fans.

    SijLqhH.png
    Steam: stabbitystyle | uPlay: stabbitystyle | b.net: Stabbity#1528 | XBL: Stabbity Style | PSN: Stabbity_Style | Twitch: stabbitystyle
    maraji
  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    This was a good day of football.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    BlackDragon480Heir
  • admanbadmanb unionize your workplace Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    I tell you what it’s kind of frustrating to see someone actually make use of Jimmy Graham after we traded Max Unger to get him and then promptly wasted him for the entirety of his time in Seattle.

    He sucked ass in Seattle. Dropped so many fucking passes. And he only had 447 yards this year so it’s not like he’s suddenly popping off again.

    It was a bad trade but Seattle didn’t waste him.

    TicaldfjamzepherinGnizmoTheBlackWind
  • HeirHeir Registered User regular
    admanb wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    I tell you what it’s kind of frustrating to see someone actually make use of Jimmy Graham after we traded Max Unger to get him and then promptly wasted him for the entirety of his time in Seattle.

    He sucked ass in Seattle. Dropped so many fucking passes. And he only had 447 yards this year so it’s not like he’s suddenly popping off again.

    It was a bad trade but Seattle didn’t waste him.

    He's dropped a fuckton of passes this year too, including many that were basically gift wrapped for him. Still hope he's gone after this season.

    camo_sig2.png
  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    Eh given the yardage at worst packers would have needed an inch or two and where they were on the field they likely would have gone for it on fourth down so I doubt it matters much. One thing to note though is the yellow line on TV is not the official yard marker so the refs were watching the actual yard markers which was much closer to the spot. It was a judgement call but given how shielded the carry was from all angles it was pretty close one way or the other.

    Heir
  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    kaid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    Eh given the yardage at worst packers would have needed an inch or two and where they were on the field they likely would have gone for it on fourth down so I doubt it matters much. One thing to note though is the yellow line on TV is not the official yard marker so the refs were watching the actual yard markers which was much closer to the spot. It was a judgement call but given how shielded the carry was from all angles it was pretty close one way or the other.

    It’s not really worth getting heated over, but I watched all the replays. The side view from the marker had basically the top of his helmet at the marker when he hit the ground. Unless the ball was right in front of his face he was just short.

    And even though I agree the packers probably get the first on the next down, it just irks me when games end on a ref error instead of actual play. Anyways the packers definitely earned that win. Can’t really complain too much.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
    RickRude
  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    Eh given the yardage at worst packers would have needed an inch or two and where they were on the field they likely would have gone for it on fourth down so I doubt it matters much. One thing to note though is the yellow line on TV is not the official yard marker so the refs were watching the actual yard markers which was much closer to the spot. It was a judgement call but given how shielded the carry was from all angles it was pretty close one way or the other.

    It’s not really worth getting heated over, but I watched all the replays. The side view from the marker had basically the top of his helmet at the marker when he hit the ground. Unless the ball was right in front of his face he was just short.

    And even though I agree the packers probably get the first on the next down, it just irks me when games end on a ref error instead of actual play. Anyways the packers definitely earned that win. Can’t really complain too much.

    Yup and weird stuff like ball is ruled a fumble and a packer was the one who handed the ball to the ref after the play but did not conclusively gain possession of the ball?????

  • lwt1973lwt1973 King of Thieves SyndicationRegistered User regular
    "He's sulking in his tent like Achilles! It's the Iliad?...from Homer?! READ A BOOK!!" -Handy
  • CarpyCarpy Registered User regular
    According to the booth clear and obvious possession had to be established before the scrum started.

  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    quovadis13 wrote: »
    Lions Twitter needs to get over it.

    Yeah, for real. If the Lions maybe missed the playoffs by a single game, I'd get it. But they went 3-13. That call didn't matter in the long run.

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    kaid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    Eh given the yardage at worst packers would have needed an inch or two and where they were on the field they likely would have gone for it on fourth down so I doubt it matters much. One thing to note though is the yellow line on TV is not the official yard marker so the refs were watching the actual yard markers which was much closer to the spot. It was a judgement call but given how shielded the carry was from all angles it was pretty close one way or the other.

    It’s not really worth getting heated over, but I watched all the replays. The side view from the marker had basically the top of his helmet at the marker when he hit the ground. Unless the ball was right in front of his face he was just short.

    And even though I agree the packers probably get the first on the next down, it just irks me when games end on a ref error instead of actual play. Anyways the packers definitely earned that win. Can’t really complain too much.

    Yup and weird stuff like ball is ruled a fumble and a packer was the one who handed the ball to the ref after the play but did not conclusively gain possession of the ball?????

    In order to overturn an outcome there has to be enough evidence to reach a conclusion. The last view of the ball has no clear view of a possession and there is both a seahawk and packer on the ground within range to get possession. Since the ball is dead as soon as its possessed it doesnt matter who comes out of the scrum with it.

    If it had been ruled a fumble originally the original call probably would have been packers ball at which point a review would have have the call stay. But the review itself only gets to guess towards the original result.

    Its dumb that the packers lost their timeout as a result though. They were clearly right about the fumble even if a clear recovery wasnt possible to see. The incentive should be to throw the challenge flag here since it gives more time for a proper accounting of what happened. That or the booth should have asked for a review given how obviously it was a fumble so that a team doesnt have to risk a timeout

    wbBv3fj.png
    RickRudeJebus314Atlas in Chains
  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    RickRudeAtlas in Chains
  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

  • RickRudeRickRude Registered User regular
    They should have ruled him short
    ObiFett wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

    I understand both sides of it, but man does it seem wrong to lose a time out there when you were pretty much correct on challenging it

    ObiFettElvenshaeJebus314
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    RickRude wrote: »
    They should have ruled him short
    ObiFett wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

    I understand both sides of it, but man does it seem wrong to lose a time out there when you were pretty much correct on challenging it

    We just went through a whole season where PI was a chalengeable play and the field call was overturned something like 1% of the time. NFL rules suck.

    HeirElvenshae
  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    RickRude wrote: »
    They should have ruled him short
    ObiFett wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

    I understand both sides of it, but man does it seem wrong to lose a time out there when you were pretty much correct on challenging it

    We just went through a whole season where PI was a chalengeable play and the field call was overturned something like 1% of the time. NFL rules suck.

    Well we haven’t defined what a catch is in practice yet so how could we change pass interferences in hindsight? :rotate:

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    chrono_traveller
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    RickRude wrote: »
    They should have ruled him short
    ObiFett wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

    I understand both sides of it, but man does it seem wrong to lose a time out there when you were pretty much correct on challenging it

    We just went through a whole season where PI was a chalengeable play and the field call was overturned something like 1% of the time. NFL rules suck.

    Well we haven’t defined what a catch is in practice yet so how could we change pass interferences in hindsight? :rotate:

    Just because the reciever extended their arms and created separation it doesn't mean he pushed off and committed OPI.

  • RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    RickRude wrote: »
    They should have ruled him short
    ObiFett wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Yes losing the time out was a head scratcher. They contested that they thought it was a fumble and it was a fumble so the call on the field did change although the possession of the ball did not.

    The official explanation was that if the result of the play doesn't change due to the review, then it was a waste of time, therefore you lose your timeout.

    Which makes sense, I guess.

    I understand both sides of it, but man does it seem wrong to lose a time out there when you were pretty much correct on challenging it

    We just went through a whole season where PI was a chalengeable play and the field call was overturned something like 1% of the time. NFL rules suck.

    A lot of those non overturned calls seemed very much like the officials telling the coaches/owners to suck their dicks.

    RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
    Come Overwatch with meeeee
    Capt HowdyBlackDragon480Elvenshaemaraji
  • HeirHeir Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Hate when it ends on the refs. Seahawks had lots of opportunities, but it leaves such a bad taste to have such a clear fuckup.

    Eh given the yardage at worst packers would have needed an inch or two and where they were on the field they likely would have gone for it on fourth down so I doubt it matters much. One thing to note though is the yellow line on TV is not the official yard marker so the refs were watching the actual yard markers which was much closer to the spot. It was a judgement call but given how shielded the carry was from all angles it was pretty close one way or the other.

    It’s not really worth getting heated over, but I watched all the replays. The side view from the marker had basically the top of his helmet at the marker when he hit the ground. Unless the ball was right in front of his face he was just short.

    And even though I agree the packers probably get the first on the next down, it just irks me when games end on a ref error instead of actual play. Anyways the packers definitely earned that win. Can’t really complain too much.

    I saw a good view online that showed the yellow line and someone had drawn an orange line where the actual markers were. He was over.

    camo_sig2.png
    Shadowhope
Sign In or Register to comment.