Andy Reid got depantsed in the Super Bowl by Bruce Arians.
Bruce Fucking Arians and Tom Fucking Brady.
Well, you see, Andy Reid is an offensive genius, and how dare we question Andy Reid's genius in not running the ball and not utilizing the screen pass in the face of an epically brutal pass rush, a patchwork offensive line and a QB with a hurt toe?
How dare we question his geniusness?
__________________
Oh, and Spags? The "great Brady Killer"? They had his defense figured out by the 2nd quarter and he couldn't adjust it. He was Bob Sutton Jr. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
See, and when I thought the Chiefs were going to break records in this most recent Super Bowl, it didn't occur to me that it would be a record number of penalties in a half...
Wasn't it an amazing coincidence how the Chiefs were always getting flagged for holding and DPI...and Tampa couldn't get a penalty, even when Suh punched Mahomes in the face?
Such amazing coincidences...
It's so WWE, Okafor should have powerbomed Brady on the next series and took him out of the game. Seriously.
If they were just gonna throw flags on us for phantom infractions, and NOT call Tampa for anything (which is what happened), we should've went all Longest Yard on that ass.
Because it was obviously not unbiased in the way the refs called that game. It was terribly one-sided.
At what point did Suh punch Mahomes in the face?
If you are referring to the same play and consider that a "punch" that is laughable in the context of tackle football. Any quarterback who played not too long ago would consider that hit 2 hand touch compared to what happened previously in those situations. The quarterbacks were leveled if they exposed themselves like that in situations where defensive linemen could pickup speed. Suh appeared to be just trying to get Mahomes down with as little force as possible. Imagine Suh landing on Mahomes with full force/speed in that situation with I believe the game already over.
Okay for folks to bash Suh from some of his antics of the past. Some of the stuff he did at times with Detroit were cheap shots/dirty/maybe retaliation in some cases.
But I actually don't think Suh wants to be the one that seriously injures Mahomes needlessly. [Reply]
Originally Posted by stevegroganfan:
At what point did Suh punch Mahomes in the face?
They were both on the ground, Suh reached out and threw a hand right at Patrick's face. Patrick immediately turned toward the official with his arms outstretched like "what the HELL!? Where's the flag?" and the official just turned away...
You'd have to find the actual broadcast, I'm sure it's not on any of the "mic'ed up" highlight videos or anything...but it happened. [Reply]
Originally Posted by stevegroganfan:
At what point did Suh punch Mahomes in the face?
If you are referring to the same play and consider that a "punch" that is laughable in the context of tackle football. Any quarterback who played not too long ago would consider that hit 2 hand touch compared to what happened previously in those situations. The quarterbacks were leveled if they exposed themselves like that in situations where defensive linemen could pickup speed. Suh appeared to be just trying to get Mahomes down with as little force as possible. Imagine Suh landing on Mahomes with full force/speed in that situation with I believe the game already over.
Okay for folks to bash Suh from some of his antics of the past. Some of the stuff he did at times with Detroit were cheap shots/dirty/maybe retaliation in some cases.
But I actually don't think Suh wants to be the one that seriously injures Mahomes needlessly.
I remember the hit. It’s normally not called since both were sliding, but certainly could’ve been. By rule it was a foul
I also remember when Brady got a free 15 yards in the AFCCG when Chris Jones hit his shoulder. Laughable
Also interesting that you guys (with Steve Grogan) lost a playoff game 44 years ago to Oakland because one of your lineman hit Stabler in the head [Reply]
Originally Posted by Best22:
I remember the hit. It’s normally not called since both were sliding, but certainly could’ve been. By rule it was a foul
I also remember when Brady got a free 15 yards in the AFCCG when Chris Jones hit his shoulder. Laughable
He clearly hit Mahomes in the head, it was clearly a foul, and it was clearly not called.
And it was clearly in direct contrast to the 2018 AFCCG you referenced where Chris Jones tapped Brady on the shoulder and got a 15 yard flag for an illegal hit... [Reply]
I'm sure the NFL has one of its "pulse of the fans" people reading these threads and they know that KC fans will be eager to be back next year and primed. [Reply]
Originally Posted by GloryDayz:
I'm sure the NFL has one of its "pulse of the fans" people reading these threads and they know that KC fans will be eager to be back next year and primed.
I hate the world we live in. I really, really do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by stevegroganfan:
The first timeout was fine since it was 2nd and 10, the 2nd timeout was awful given it was 3rd and only 2. Richard Sherman said it best. Sherman said other than possible Aaron Rodgers, no one else other than Tom Brady he would want in 2 minute drill. Sherman said it was an idiotic decision or words like that.
If it was 3rd and 6 or more, I can see gambling but 3rd and 2 is just too hard to defend against a team that was averaging a ton of points since Kansas City last faced them. Brady and the Bucs had the run as a realistic option and could have passed short which they did or even surprised the Chiefs with a long ball like they did Green Bay before the half.
Ok, but they also didn't convert the 3rd down without a completely phantom DPI.... stopping the conversion doesn't necessarily mean it was a wise choice, but they bet on their defense and the defense made the stop. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Ok, but they also didn't convert the 3rd down without a completely phantom DPI.... stopping the conversion doesn't necessarily mean it was a wise choice, but they bet on their defense and the defense made the stop.
That's just not true though. And I don't mean in the sense of "if they interfered with them they didn't make the stop", I mean that in the sense of "none of this is accurate, that's completely revisionist history". The 3rd down play was to Gronk, it was a completed pass which was converted for a 1st down. The pass interference calls on that drive were on 1st and 10 and 1st and 9. You can argue those calls are not legitimate all you want, but them not occurring would NOT have resulted in a 4th down.
(As a side note, I know you won't agree with this at all and even if you rewatch the play will see it totally differently than I do, but a "phantom" DPI call would be one where there is no contact between the defender and the receiver, not one where the defender is playing the ball, stops playing the ball, dives forward, reaches out his arm, hits the receivers leg and by doing so trips him up. Just saying.) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
That's just not true though. And I don't mean in the sense of "if they interfered with them they didn't make the stop", I mean that in the sense of "none of this is accurate, that's completely revisionist history". The 3rd down play was to Gronk, it was a completed pass which was converted for a 1st down. The pass interference calls on that drive were on 1st and 10 and 1st and 9. You can argue those calls are not legitimate all you want, but them not occurring would NOT have resulted in a 4th down.
(As a side note, I know you won't agree with this at all and even if you rewatch the play will see it totally differently than I do, but a "phantom" DPI call would be one where there is no contact between the defender and the receiver, not one where the defender is playing the ball, stops playing the ball, dives forward, reaches out his arm, hits the receivers leg and by doing so trips him up. Just saying.)
Oops... I'm getting old, there were so many horrible calls in a short period of time, I forgot they made that 3rd and 2 all by themselves.
I did watch it several times right after it happened, and a few times in slow-mo, because after the first couple of horrible calls on the previous drive, I was in straight up denial that such a thing was happening.... I understand there was contact, but 1) the ball was probably uncatchable since it was 7 yards beyond where he got tripped up, so there's no DPI, and 2) it was incidental contact from tangling up feet, so there's no DPI.
Evans' foot hit Breeland's as they were both running and then his foot got caught under Breeland a bit as he was already falling down. There's no pass interference on that.
And there was only 24 seconds at that point, and still needed a DPI call where the ball hit the fucking back wall, which was far worse than the first one.
So, even with converting the 3rd down, I don't think it's a bad strategy by Reid.... it took two horrible non-existent calls, and even if the first one was somehow DPI, they still had a good chance at holding them to 3 if it weren't for the far worse 2nd DPI.
Reid was probably thinking they could possibly score 10 points between two possessions and make it 17-16, or at worse kick a FG to start the 2nd half and be within one possession... that was mostly the point. [Reply]
I was pretty upset when Reid called the first TO. You don’t challenge Brady that way. Both DPIs were bad calls imo. The 2nd was simply horrible. If neither are called best Bucs do is get a FG. If only one is called I still believe a FG is the likely scenario. Refs handed the Bucs between 11-14 points in the game. Game is close to the end without that. Worst SB officiating I’ve ever seen. Worst playoff officiating period and we have seen quite a bit. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Oops... I'm getting old, there were so many horrible calls in a short period of time, I forgot they made that 3rd and 2 all by themselves.
I did watch it several times right after it happened, and a few times in slow-mo, because after the first couple of horrible calls on the previous drive, I was in straight up denial that such a thing was happening.... I understand there was contact, but 1) the ball was probably uncatchable since it was 7 yards beyond where he got tripped up, so there's no DPI, and 2) it was incidental contact from tangling up feet, so there's no DPI.
Evans' foot hit Breeland's as they were both running and then his foot got caught under Breeland a bit as he was already falling down. There's no pass interference on that.
And there was only 24 seconds at that point, and still needed a DPI call where the ball hit the ****ing back wall, which was far worse than the first one.
So, even with converting the 3rd down, I don't think it's a bad strategy by Reid.... it took two horrible non-existent calls, and even if the first one was somehow DPI, they still had a good chance at holding them to 3 if it weren't for the far worse 2nd DPI.
Reid was probably thinking they could possibly score 10 points between two possessions and make it 17-16, or at worse kick a FG to start the 2nd half and be within one possession... that was mostly the point.
So please bear in mind that I do not expect you to believe any of this. But I want to throw it out there for your consideration anyway.
1) Evans was tripped at the 23, the ball hit the dirt at the 19. Had he been standing, he's 6'5". His arms are 35" long and he has a 37" vertical. A ball can be up to 12' in the air and be catchable. Ignoring loss of momentum, the ball landed within 12' of him, so no. Were he not tripped, that ball is by no means uncatchable. It lands in frame on the slow mo. And when in doubt, the rule is not err on the side of probably uncatchable.
2) The tangling of the feet is indeed incidental contact, which is permissible when Either both players are playing the ball, or neither is playing the ball. So the tangling of the feet, totally fine. However, not all incidental contact is permissible. The rule is, "Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball." Once the feet were tangled, the defender looked forward, and as he tripped dove out, slapped Mike Evan's ass and thigh, and tripped him up by doing so. As he did so, he was not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still looking for the ball. As such, it does not matter if that contact was incidental. It would still be impermissible contact and as such pass interference.
I can address the 2nd one as well if you like, but again I think there's little point. I don't even know if you have access to the video and can review my statements for accuracy. Would you agree that if the 1st ball was indeed well within Mike Evan's catch radius had he not been tripped, as I claim, and if the defender did indeed slap Mike Evan's ass and thigh as he was falling, while not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still playing the ball, such incidental contact would be impermissible according to the rules? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
So please bear in mind that I do not expect you to believe any of this. But I want to throw it out there for your consideration anyway.
1) Evans was tripped at the 23, the ball hit the dirt at the 19. Had he been standing, he's 6'5". His arms are 35" long and he has a 37" vertical. A ball can be up to 12' in the air and be catchable. Ignoring loss of momentum, the ball landed within 12' of him, so no. Were he not tripped, that ball is by no means uncatchable. It lands in frame on the slow mo. And when in doubt, the rule is not err on the side of probably uncatchable.
2) The tangling of the feet is indeed incidental contact, which is permissible when Either both players are playing the ball, or neither is playing the ball. So the tangling of the feet, totally fine. However, not all incidental contact is permissible. The rule is, "Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball." Once the feet were tangled, the defender looked forward, and as he tripped dove out, slapped Mike Evan's ass and thigh, and tripped him up by doing so. As he did so, he was not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still looking for the ball. As such, it does not matter if that contact was incidental. It would still be impermissible contact and as such pass interference.
I can address the 2nd one as well if you like, but again I think there's little point.I don't even know if you have access to the video and can review my statements for accuracy. Would you agree that if the 1st ball was indeed well within Mike Evan's catch radius had he not been tripped, as I claim, and if the defender did indeed slap Mike Evan's ass and thigh as he was falling, while not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still playing the ball, such incidental contact would be impermissible according to the rules?