Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by iamhubby1

  1. 2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

    He was the same guy he has always been. 

    If you are crowing about a 13/24 for 129 yds and no TD's....I mean, I don't know what to say. 

    Name any average QB in the NFL that would be acceptable.


    So, because it didn't meet your standards. Everyone else is wrong? Got it.


    Why not add the 4 drops? 


    We won, and you still gotta be you.

    • Poo 1
  2. 1 minute ago, mwright350 said:

    This calling players expendable as it relates to them getting injured poo is shameful. 


    A lot of people have noticed this post. I wonder if anything will come of it? I've seen him post worse though.

  3. 2 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

    Defend your position. 

    He threw the ball well. 

    He ran the ball well. 

    He checked into several good plays.


    What exactly did you have a problem with today?



  4. 2 minutes ago, glenwo2 said:

    I have a bit of a problem with people who say that someone is expendable after getting hurt like they did.

    It's just so douchey to say.    🤷‍♂️


    He's said worse.

  5. 15 minutes ago, frankw said:

    For Sam and any other player who went to a school you have a personal connection to. Meanwhile you identify our only MVP in franchise history as a sulking petulant little girl because he hated losing. Spare us the moral stand.


    My  God you've gone off the deep end. She wasn't even here when Cam was, and has never said a bad thing about him. You should maybe log off if you cannot talk to people in a calm manner.

    • Pie 1
  6. 9 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

    That's my point. The discrepancy between Cam and Brady/Rogers etc. is so obvious, it undermines the notion the refs are seeking to be fair, since it's obvious that in at least some cases they are not. If they are not seeking to be fair in every case, they should not be extended the benefit of the doubt automatically in other cases. 

    Any rule involving the term "football move" when the term is poorly defined gives biased refs too much cover and allows the league to point and shrug and say the officials are just enforcing the rules.  The TD rule that applies when a player crosses the plane of the endzone is the most simple and objective, and should apply in all cases. A player leaving the endzone who catches the ball inbounds and has control of it for even an instant before moving out of bounds should be considered to have scored a touchdown. Period. Anything else is unnecessary and highly suspect mumbo jumbo.


    It's like "What is a catch". Who knows. Instant replay is the devil.

    • Pie 1
    • Beer 1
  7. 1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

    Yes but fan bases of small media markets not named Green Bay are right. And you're missing or misinterpreting my point about QB officiating: Yes the NFL is protecting SOME QB's hard. Any argument that the NFL was protecting Cam Newton hard is absurd on it's face. They blatantly allowed him to be headhunted and Ed Hochuli (fug you Ed) told him he wasn't old enough to get that call. The discrepancy between the lattitude defenders are given when going after Newton vs say Brady or Rogers was and is beyond absurd.

    If the NFL will allow an obvious and blatant level of discrepancy between the way some QB's are officiated vs others, the notion their crews are biased in other areas cannot be simply dismissed out of hand.


    I feel like you've backed me into a corner here. Yes Cam got beat up. So no, refs don't protect everyone the same way. 

  8. 2 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

    I understand where you are coming from but I could quite easily argue that DJ had possession and control when he caught it while going out of bounds and any ruling by the refs to the contrary is arbitrary subjectivity. Who is to say he didn't make a "football move" while going out of bounds since in your own words the definition includes "anything really" It's a garbage rule with vague standards and arbitrary and imo biased enforcement. I don't see how you can in one sentence claim that the definition of a "football move" includes anything, and then claim he didn't make one during the entire course of catching that ball.

    I'm not so much taking issue with you, as with the absurdity of the rule itself. 

    And if you think NFL refs are never biased, please. Any objective study of the way star elite QB's are officiated vs all others has to bend over backwards not to see the glaring discrepancies in officiating for things like roughing the passer. If there is bias there, it's hard to argue there isn't or can't be bias elsewhere.


    I'll give you  that the NFL is protecting QBs hard. But that other stuff is just fan speak. Every fan base thinks the refs hate them.

  9. 14 minutes ago, bigdavis said:

    It's okay.  Exhalation accomplished.

    If "playing myself" is being a supporter of the team, rather than an outright hater, then so be it.  I haven't lived this long being negative.


    I don't mind getting crap. Cuz it matters not. I just enjoy football, and usually talking about it.


    There's still a bunch of us who are not ready to jump off that cliff. Thankfully, there are still folks to chat with.

  10. 5 minutes ago, joemac said:

    Absolutely pathetic comment. Terrible. We need to do better. I hope Sam or anybody from the team doesn’t actually read the tripe we post here. 


    And we won. 

  11. 5 minutes ago, 1usctrojan said:

    It is, not surprising, unfortunately.  Over the years I’ve had the great pleasure to speak to a number of our former players, including several that ended up in the Pro HOF…every one said the same thing, the NFL is strictly business, they play for the money, that college is where they played with their love and heart.  NFL fans only think of them if they win, and when you’re not useful anymore, they move on. Major reason why a player like Troy Polamalu will not participate in Steeler reunions, but he does visit his alma mater and is there when asked to come.

    It’s the Roman rabble in the coliseum mentality.


    Unfortunately you may be right.

  12. 3 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

    If they lose the ball when they hit the ground they had to have “made a football move” in the end zone with possession. Jump, catch, hit the ground has required not losing the ball for over a decade. 


    If you make a catch, go to the ground, and lose the ball. That is an incomplete pass.


    If you catch a ball, make any sort of Football Move. That is a catch.


    If you are on the sideline, get 2 feet down, but drop the ball when you hit the ground. That is an incomplete pass.

  13. 1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

    If this is the case, I don't honestly remember it ever being invoked when watching other games. I have seen plenty of guys lose the ball on the way down, but I could swear I've seen plenty of guys catch TD passes as they go out of bounds, fall out of bounds, ball pops lose AFTER they hit the ground, and it's still considered a TD. 

    Honest question: When a receiver catches the ball in the endzone, not going out of bounds, exactly how long must he maintain possession of the ball before it is a TD? Til both feet are down right?

    My understanding has always been this is immediately a TD and whatever happens afterwards is irrelevant. A defensive player cannot knock the ball loose after the fact. And this whole notion of a "football move" I've heard this term batted around for years without anyone ever being able to satisfactorily describe it. It sounds like a load of hogwash the league has concocted to give their officials room to call things inconsistently and hide behind a vaguely defined term.

    It sounds very much like what you are describing is one rule for what amounts to a TD when a player is in the endzone not going out of bounds, and a different standard for when he is.


    If you make a "Football Move" turn to run, take a step, anything really. It is considered a catch.


    In the End Zone. If you catch a ball, and take a step or two. Then go out of bounds. You are allowed to drop the ball. You had possession, and control. That is all you need in the EZ. You made a football move. 


    DJ got 2 feet down, but did not control the ball through contact with the ground. Hence, incomplete. He made no football move.

  14. 5 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

    Watched a hundred similar TD catches over a lifetime of watching football. Don't ever recall a player making a catch like that being ruled incomplete when he still had the ball as he hits the ground. I watched the replay multiple times.  Both feet are clearly inbounds and there is no clear evidence he does not have control at any point before he hits the ground. Never seen that be ruled an incompletion. 

    You say you must maintain possesion, but if you are on the ground out of bounds and had possession all the way down, exactly how @#%$ing long are you expected to lay there to prove you've "maintained possession"? When the play happens inbounds the moment the ball crosses the goal line in the possession of an offensive player it is a TD and anything afterwards is irrelevant. You cannot review the replay and say there is definitive evidence DJ did not have control of the ball before he hit the ground. Once he hits the ground it should be a TD, or you have an arbitrary and highly subjective rule.

    I maintain it was a highly irregular initial ruling that flies in the face of anything I can recall having seen, and that upholding the call upon review was absurd. 


    You  have maintain control after contacting the ground. I should have said that the first time. I just thought folks were aware of this.

  15. 2 minutes ago, 1usctrojan said:

    Wow.  I hope that was the last play of Sams’ Panthers career…..you get a high draft pick with your 1st, but if you don’t fix that line, your rookie will be expendable even if you don’t wish it.  Backup gig is not bad in the NFL.

    Maybe that was Brady’s plan, so he can get his own young QB. 


    Pretty sad comment don't ya think? Really make one wonder.

  16. 1 minute ago, KillerKat said:

    It does not matter how clean the hit is. Clean or not, the rule states you are supposed to give the Receiver a chance to run and the defender did not. It should have been a penalty. Maybe you shouldn't be telling others to learn the rules?


    lol This is the second time you've said this. It is not true.


    And  you sure have a hard time with folks that don't agree with you.

  17. 4 minutes ago, frankw said:

    Should have been a penalty. Same with the hit on Robby Anderson. But now we're set with PJ Walker so what's done is done.


    Neither one of those were penalties. Learn the rules.


    Runners don't get protected, and Sam was a runner. And Robby got hit with shoulder pads well within the strike zone. Sheesh.


    Same with DJs TD drop. Some of you expect the Panthers to get every dang call. And go all ham when we don't.

    • Poo 1
  • Create New...