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!

     

Turner/Boston admit that the refs screwed us in SB50


Mol3m4n
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Proudiddy said:

Yup.  And although we were getting similarly disadvantaged in SB50, a lot of these early calls actually reminded me of how the NFL jobbed us in the playoffs back in 2013 against the Niners, because the calls aimed at completely taking away our physicality so the Niners could have their way with us.  I think there was a bad personal foul call on Mitchell early, some ticky-tack def holding calls, and then I remember one of the Niners took a cheap shot and one of our guys went to confront them and Boldin instigated the whole thing and they didn't throw a flag until our guy retaliated...  from that point on, we played passive.  That's what happened last night.  As you said, it's not just taking away one team's ability to be physical, it's taking away their ability to compete altogether in a very physical sport.  And coaches can yell all day, "keep playing, we can't control the refs" but when the penalties are 9 to 1 against you and of the nature they were last night, meanwhile Brady's taunting Mathieu and Mathieu's gets flagged, they're getting 2nd and 3rd chances to score off of penalties, and on defense they aren't just holding but completely piggyback riding your receivers before the ball even gets there, it gets pretty demoralizing...  as a player, there's no way you feel you can play with the same intensity, because you know you're going to get called for it and your effort won't matter.  It really is pathetic.

 

49ers coronation playoff game @BofA. The exact SAME thing! The 49ers figured it out and blatantly took advantage.

I said on this here site after that game that the refs flew in on the 49ers jet.

There was also a big budget commercial that aired with the 49ers and Seahawks playing for the division.

Not the Panthers, and wouldn't you know?! The TV was correct.

Storylines. Do we have a good enough one?

Edited by rippadonn
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

Officials in all sports at major levels receive "areas of emphasis" or "rules clarifications" from their league/conference.  Their official purpose is to clarify gray areas in the rules or spell out how to handle situations that happened on the field/ice recently (and, in the case of a bench clearing brawl, prevent the causal factors from escalating).

That is what they were meant for.  They have been used for all sorts of things.  MLB has used it over the years to do things like redefine the strike zone without changing the rule that defines the strike zone.  If there is grief, the umpires take it, not the league.  The league keeps its hands clean and nobody is any wiser about their motivations.  The players and coaches will figure it out about the second or third different crew they see having changed their tendencies.

Teams scout officials just like they do opponents.  They have data on which officials tend to call which penalties/fouls or be more lax in the enforcement of others.  In baseball, the pitcher knows full well what the plate umpire's tendencies regarding the strike zone are before he goes out to pitch.  That has been going on for years.  What such an "area of emphasis" does is alter those tendencies. 

If I had to guess what we saw yesterday, because of the consistency of the three defensive backfield officials in the strictness of their view of defensive holding (which is not supported by their previous games), it was that the league issued an "area of emphasis."

The league would, if they are ever called on it, say they were simply advising the officials about something they wanted heightened awareness of, and they never expected it to be a major factor in the outcome.  The league official's nose to grow as he trots that out to see if it flies.

Are they ensuring that one team wins the game?  Nope, they could still lose.  But they are giving them an edge.  In this case, an edge that could only be reasonably be expected to go one direction.

Yep. It's what the league has been doing for years now to encourage more offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sgt Schultz said:

I said this elsewhere, but it is worth saying again.  Under Goodell, the NFL has moved away from sports and into sports entertainment.

heck, I'd argue sports is more legit today than probably any other time in history. 

back in the day? White Sox type poo? Yeah, they weren't millionaires like today.   You know back in the day all sorts of people were willing to help dictate outcomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CRA said:

heck, I'd argue sports is more legit today than probably and other time in history. 

back in the day? White Sox type poo? Yeah, they weren't millionaires like today.   You know back in the day all sorts of people were willing to help dictate outcomes.

I don't know.  When was the NBA rigging game 6's to ensure game 7's, 2002? 

It is a lot harder today for someone outside to buy an outcome.  You are right, you'd have to put a lot of money on the table to get a professional athlete's attention. 

I am not questioning the integrity of the officials, either.  While NFL officials are not full-time, they are well paid and worked hard to get where they are. 

Even those officials in any sport who are notoriously bad and have bad attitudes are not biased about it. But, if the league tells you they want unnecessary roughness penalties or else, what are they going to do?

In the NBA's case, they wanted game 7's and they apparently had at least one referee that was willing to toe the party line.  They did not get called on that until they had another referee facing gambling charges (not on NBA games, to my knowledge), and he was aware of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Roger Goodell has been the worst commissioner in the history of sports. 

 

16 hours ago, Proudiddy said:

Yup.  Absolute piece of poo.  

The emphasis on image rather than it being about the game has resulted in a complete undercutting of any credibility the league ever had.  From the destruction of the Spygate tapes, the handling of the Ray Rice situation, the blatantly bad officiating in big games, and all the other garbage that has shown Goodell has no moral compass and cares only about the bottom line, it just makes it hard to enjoy many games of consequence anymore.

 

Ehhhh, it's really hard to blame Goodell. He is just doing exactly what all these owners want and being the "bad guy" so that fans and the general public blames him for stuff like this rather than the owners. It's the owners who have let the league deteriorate over the last few decades who are to blame, not Goodell. If it wasn't Goodell as commissioner, it'd just be someone else having the exact same effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Billacheat told his OLmen to hold in the SB starting in early 2000s, "They never call it". Think of it, was there a OL holding called in this one?

Ive been at the fishy stage, not full tintfoil hat, but also can not unsee some of those awful calls.  Facts are their are story lines the NFL hope happens and certain teams they prefer in the playoffs(ones in big media/dallas). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, xPariahx said:

SIIIKKEEE, Q is a CIA psychological operation to make people telling the truth look crazy and to poo on the constitution and eventually get communist normys to deem people telling the truth as terrorists. The majority of you on this board have proven it to be correct. It takes a lot of talent to see what have seen and turn it into the complete opposite of what you know you have seen. Keep gettin played by the 1 percent who are smarter than you because they give you all of your thoughts and opinions.

Bro what circles are you running in where normies are communists

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2021 at 10:19 PM, Proudiddy said:

Well, it was obvious.  The NFL goes with the best/most interest-drumming storylines.  And the way they influence games is by neutering one team early to where they become more passive and fall behind.  When you let one team play with maximum physicality and tell the other they can't, it makes for a dramatically different game, and one in which the team that isn't favored falls behind and and has little hope of getting back in it.  

It was really sad to see how this game played out tonight, but the NFL had their yes men do what they wanted done early, and that was enough.  The NFL is a crooked, disgusting, absolute poo organization.

If you watch Packers games you see this concept alot.  They just give the Pack a little nudge here and there to get them over the hump, then the Packers run with it from there. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
    • Won’t stop until people stop buying overpriced poo.
×
×
  • Create New...