You know what it is, ultimately? I don’t think the officiating is favoring the Colts, full stop. I think the officiating in the NFL favors the passing game to a ridiculous degree nowadays. I don’t enjoy it. It makes the whole thing look like a crock. And in this game, where the passing game for one team is obviously stronger than the passing game for the other, it gives (to me) a de facto edge in terms of the officiating to the stronger passing game (ie, to the Colts).
I don’t think I can explain it better than that. But it’s an ongoing pet peeve of mine, and it’s on full display here. The NFL has decided that the passing game should reign supreme in their sport, and that decision is on full display tonight. And I find it irritating.
We would actually agree on the fact that the rules clearly favor offense and that aggressive defenses are punished. I’m all for protecting the players’ health (which is why I didn’t really have a problem with helmet to helmet calls), but ticky tack fouls are too often called.
But, and it’s an important but, I haven’t seen a single call tonight (and I haven’t watched the whole game) that made me shake my head. Reed’s second interception did have a pass interference and I’ve agreed with most of the other calls.
It’s pretty clear which team is playing better tonight (and catching the balls bouncing their way) and the officiating hasn’t been a determining factor.
Um, he’s supposed to tackle him legally. You know, not with his head, but with his arms, his shoulder, his body. Had he done so, no penalty. :rolleyes:
I thought I was the only fan who likes running football. Lets find another Barry Sanders. Then big goons are knocking each other down and playing football in the trenches. Blocking and tackling is what football should be about. Every year they make more rules protecting the QBs and wide receivers.
This. The NFL should just go to flag football if that’s what they want. The Ravens were making clean hard hits and getting called on it. They can’t really complain, because they should know that’s what the game is about these days. They probably would have lost anyway, they were just outplayed, but it’s annoying to see hard hits draw a flag.
Let’s dispel one meme right now: the idea that “hard hits” are a part of “real” football.
Watch film of the game as it was played back in the 40s and 50s. Yes, it didn’t have the passing element to the same degree. But it also did not have this idea that the way to tackle someone is to become a human projectile with the mission of destroying the opponent. Which is not to say that you didn’t get tackled; linebackers of the era were known for being nasty. But the emphasis upon tackles that upend and destroy a receiver or a running back is relatively new (and in my humble opinion is as much a result of the ESPN highlight phenomenom as the post-touchdown celebration dance, etc.).
There simply is no good reason to tackle someone by leading with a helmet, or by launching oneself through the air as a missile of destruction. Grab them and drag them to the ground.
Indeed. IIRC Baltimore announcers still don’t call the Colts the Colts, they are referred to strictly as Indy or Indianapolis. Interestingly I don’t remember the announcers bringing up that move and the remaining animosity in Baltimore.
But there is every reason to employ the big hit tactic in an effort to separate the receiver from the ball at the moment the ball gets to the receiver. That was the only call I remember really bugging me, the “defenseless receiver” one. Not that the rule itself bothers me, just that particular application of it. Murderin’ Ray was doing exactly what a defender should do when defending the pass.
And, again, he was doing it leading with his helmet. There wasn’t a problem with a hard hit at the moment the ball arrives and knocking it out. (Note: I do wonder about the "defenseless receiver thing though). It was doing it with your helmet aimed at his helmet.
And, to agree with DSYoung again, there is a world of difference between hard hits and illegal, meant to harm hits. When you have scores of ex football players with concussions, even serious brain injuries, something must be done to protect the players. And a rule that outlawing helmet to helmet hits does that. It’s not wimpifying the NFL, it’s an attempt to protect these guys.
From what I recall, Stabbin’ Ray Ray put in a clean hit. Sometimes the helmet to helmet contact happens because of the action the receiver takes to avoid the hit. I may be wrong though since I only watched it in real time, but I recall my reaction at the time was that the penalty was bullshit.
Anybody else find Dierdorf’s “turn in the barrel” description a bit odd? It seems like the kind of thing that somebody somewhere would bitch about being inappropriate. It kind of made me wonder if was like a bet that he could sneak it in somewhere. If so I congratulate him.
I must not understand something because I’ve seen receivers basically all out tackled when the ball is in the air and no flag thrown throughout the playoffs.
If I understand it correctly, the “defenseless receiver” rule applies when the receiver (not just the ball) is in the air, and cannot see the defender.
I still thinks it’s a stupid and inconsistently applied rule. At least they got rid ot the force out rule.
I thought the “turn in the barrel” discussion was odd too. It made me wonder if they knew the origin of the phrase. It wasn’t very flattering to the receivers. If anything, it was more applicable to the announcers themselves in that game, and their servicing of Peyton Manning (Peyton, Brady and Favre are the guys who announcers always get “in the barrel” for).
I only saw it real time also (and the replay they showed), and it looked to me that he led with his helmet and shoulder. I am willing to reconsider it if I saw something different in the replay or in slo-mo, because it’s just a first impression.
I agree with DSYoung on the fact that “hard hits” are not the end-game in football, and that the safety of the players needs rules such as the helmet-to-helmet rule (though, when I saw it, it looked clean). I do agree with others who have stated that the rules are indeed shifting towards favoring passing offenses, but this shouldn’t be a surprise as other sports (basketball and baseball, in particular) have changed rules or even the dimensions of their parks in order to have more offense, which of course, equals more attention and money from fans.
As for the games today, I’m really looking forward to the Dallas vs. Minnesota game. Pass rush for Dallas against Minnesota’s inconsistent offensive line should be interesting, and it will be interesting to see how Brett Favre handles the playoffs when he’s (seemingly) healthy. I think the Chargers are a sure thing over the Jets, but who knows, Sanchez may have matured way more than I give him credit for and they could pull off a solid performance. But, his maturation seems to have stepped him up to just making sure not to give the ball away, and that’s not going to win the game against the Chargers’ passing game. Anyway, should be a good day of football.
Wow, I never thought I would see the day, but the “most pathetic give-up-on-the-play attempt at a tackle by a Dallas Cornerback” award no longer belongs to Deion Sanders.
Indeed. IIRC Baltimore announcers still don’t call the Colts the Colts, they are referred to strictly as Indy or Indianapolis. Interestingly I don’t remember the announcers bringing up that move and the remaining animosity in Baltimore.