Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Just wondering


Bozarden

Recommended Posts

When the returner touches the Ball outside of the endzone and proceeds to run into the endzone and Take a knee shouldnt this be ruled a safety? Because that clearly happened in our game against baltimore last week and it was rouled a touchback

It happened with 3.30 left in the 3rd quarter, just after our field goal, if anyone wanted to Take a look themselves.

I know this is Bears week but i just found that play really Strange and cant get it out of my head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If momentum takes them into the endzone it is not ruled a safety. They rule was actually changed because it happened to IIRC Doug Evans on an INT.

Not sure it's similar.

But what happened to Evans happened to Thomas Davis in 2007 vs the Cowboys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the returner touches the Ball outside of the endzone and proceeds to run into the endzone and Take a knee shouldnt this be ruled a safety? Because that clearly happened in our game against baltimore last week and it was rouled a touchback

It happened with 3.30 left in the 3rd quarter, just after our field goal, if anyone wanted to Take a look themselves.

I know this is Bears week but i just found that play really Strange and cant get it out of my head

 

I thought the same thing at the time. I was freaking out about it because f*ck momentum that should be a damn safety. Returners need to have the awareness to get out of the end zone if their own momentum takes them back in, before kneeling the ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it too but then the commentators didn't even touch on it. The returner was clearly in the field of play it took a weird hop he touched it and then went back in the endzone I thought it was clearly a safety but they didn't even mention why it wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That's neither on Ickey nor Bryce, that's a coverage sack. There were plenty of examples where he drifted into pressure or didn't move in the right direction, but on this play we sent two men out deep and Max Protected with both TEs and the RB staying back to block. Both receivers were completely covered down the field with zero checkdown options and the pass rush got home. Bryce took a deep drop back due to the PA and to let the receivers get deeper. That was the play design This sack isn't "Clearly on the QB". There were plenty of examples where Bryce drifts in the pocket or bailed toward pressure last season (open up a random clip from the Jags game for examples), but this is not one of them. Blame Frank and his dumbass playcalling/design for sending two slow receivers who don't get open well on deep routes with no other options on this one.
    • Some things look horrible but you had the position covered. Some things look horrible because they really were.
    • Well this one is more like it, 28-3 Falcons in the 3rd before I just stopped.  Sorry.  Bryce lovers: watch the Chicago game not this one. Bet the farm on Bryce.
×
×
  • Create New...