Week 7 Winners and Losers

[channtheman]

Also, MM whiffed on not challenging Jennings clear first down catch, we went for it on 4th down and failed. At that point, I thought we were going to lose the game, and we nearly did.

I think he would have lost that challenge. Jennings own momentum carried him past the first down marker (in the wrong direction). His forward momentum wasn't stopped by a defender, so I think that the spot goes to where the defender first affects his momentum, not to where he caught the ball.

Maybe so, but we'll never know. I think it was foolish to end the game with a challenge in your pocket where you could have used it.

This brings up another issue altogether. MM most likely did not want to challenge it because than he would not have had another challenge, even though he had 2 correct challenges already.

I don't understand why a coach loses a challenge even when he is right. You should be able to challenge as many times as you are right and you ONLY lose a challenge when you are wrong. For example, MM should have been able to challenge those first two plays with and still had 2 challenges left. Then he can easily decide to challenge the Jennings first down and if he is wrong, he still has one left for a possible fuck up (and this was very possible last night) with the refs.

[sharpe1027]

I don't understand why a coach loses a challenge even when he is right. You should be able to challenge as many times as you are right and you ONLY lose a challenge when you are wrong. For example, MM should have been able to challenge those first two plays with and still had 2 challenges left. Then he can easily decide to challenge the Jennings first down and if he is wrong, he still has one left for a possible fuck up (and this was very possible last night) with the refs.

Yeah, it makes no sense that a team should be punished for terrible refereeing.

[Bossman641]

Also, MM whiffed on not challenging Jennings clear first down catch, we went for it on 4th down and failed. At that point, I thought we were going to lose the game, and we nearly did.

I think he would have lost that challenge. Jennings own momentum carried him past the first down marker (in the wrong direction). His forward momentum wasn't stopped by a defender, so I think that the spot goes to where the defender first affects his momentum, not to where he caught the ball.

Maybe so, but we'll never know. I think it was foolish to end the game with a challenge in your pocket where you could have used it.

This brings up another issue altogether. MM most likely did not want to challenge it because than he would not have had another challenge, even though he had 2 correct challenges already.

I don't understand why a coach loses a challenge even when he is right. You should be able to challenge as many times as you are right and you ONLY lose a challenge when you are wrong. For example, MM should have been able to challenge those first two plays with and still had 2 challenges left. Then he can easily decide to challenge the Jennings first down and if he is wrong, he still has one left for a possible fuck up (and this was very possible last night) with the refs.

I was thinking the same thing last night. Each team should be allowed to keep on challenging until the call is upheld on 2 of them.

[Iron Mike]

I don't dislike Hawk, I just call it how I see it. Hes a MLB, hes suppose to lead the team in takcles. All Im saying is the guy is a wrap up tackler who gets pushed back 3 yards until help comes. I still believe Bishop is the better of the two.

Hawk is an ILB. Same as Bishop. If you call it the way you see it, how come you didn't jump on Bishop for making the winner's list--in part because of a gift interception? People see what they want to see. Neither guy really deserved the interception they got. Hawk had 11 tackles. Bishop had 8. Personally, I thought both guys played pretty well. There's no shame in allowing 4.7 yards/carry to Adrian Peterson. That's less than he's averaged in his career and this year. Especially behind the DL we threw out there. I thought Bishop and Hawk had a lot to do with Peterson not really going off.

BTW, Chilly loves to feed AP against us. His 28 carries last night tied his season high. Last year, he gave it to him 25 times in both games. His season high was 26. His career high is 30 carries in a game against us in 2008. He's fed Peterson the ball at least 25 times in each of the last 4 games against us.

I didn't mention Bishop off the winners list because he scored a TD in a 4 point game. I'm not saying Hawk had a bad game, just his play is just average to me. Yes he had more tackles then Bishop, but thats only because Capers used Bishop more in coverage even against Moss. Every tackle I saw him make he got pushed on his ass until help came.

Did anybody besides me notice that almost every time Hawk held Peterson up, it was Bishop that came in and knocked Purple Jesus backwards???

[Iron Mike]

WINNERS: Pack

LOSERS: Bares, Queens (Crackwagon tonight) :P



And that's all the people need to know!!!

[pbmax]

Also, MM whiffed on not challenging Jennings clear first down catch, we went for it on 4th down and failed. At that point, I thought we were going to lose the game, and we nearly did.

I think he would have lost that challenge. Jennings own momentum carried him past the first down marker (in the wrong direction). His forward momentum wasn't stopped by a defender, so I think that the spot goes to where the defender first affects his momentum, not to where he caught the ball.

Maybe so, but we'll never know. I think it was foolish to end the game with a challenge in your pocket where you could have used it.

This brings up another issue altogether. MM most likely did not want to challenge it because than he would not have had another challenge, even though he had 2 correct challenges already.

I don't understand why a coach loses a challenge even when he is right. You should be able to challenge as many times as you are right and you ONLY lose a challenge when you are wrong. For example, MM should have been able to challenge those first two plays with and still had 2 challenges left. Then he can easily decide to challenge the Jennings first down and if he is wrong, he still has one left for a possible fuck up (and this was very possible last night) with the refs.

I was thinking the same thing last night. Each team should be allowed to keep on challenging until the call is upheld on 2 of them.

No thanks. I don't need to watch 4 hour games.

[channtheman]

Also, MM whiffed on not challenging Jennings clear first down catch, we went for it on 4th down and failed. At that point, I thought we were going to lose the game, and we nearly did.

I think he would have lost that challenge. Jennings own momentum carried him past the first down marker (in the wrong direction). His forward momentum wasn't stopped by a defender, so I think that the spot goes to where the defender first affects his momentum, not to where he caught the ball.

Maybe so, but we'll never know. I think it was foolish to end the game with a challenge in your pocket where you could have used it.

This brings up another issue altogether. MM most likely did not want to challenge it because than he would not have had another challenge, even though he had 2 correct challenges already.

I don't understand why a coach loses a challenge even when he is right. You should be able to challenge as many times as you are right and you ONLY lose a challenge when you are wrong. For example, MM should have been able to challenge those first two plays with and still had 2 challenges left. Then he can easily decide to challenge the Jennings first down and if he is wrong, he still has one left for a possible fuck up (and this was very possible last night) with the refs.

I was thinking the same thing last night. Each team should be allowed to keep on challenging until the call is upheld on 2 of them.

No thanks. I don't need to watch 4 hour games.

Yes, I would rather a game decided by a bum call too!

[ThunderDan]

I don't dislike Hawk, I just call it how I see it. Hes a MLB, hes suppose to lead the team in takcles. All Im saying is the guy is a wrap up tackler who gets pushed back 3 yards until help comes. I still believe Bishop is the better of the two.

Hawk is an ILB. Same as Bishop. If you call it the way you see it, how come you didn't jump on Bishop for making the winner's list--in part because of a gift interception? People see what they want to see. Neither guy really deserved the interception they got. Hawk had 11 tackles. Bishop had 8. Personally, I thought both guys played pretty well. There's no shame in allowing 4.7 yards/carry to Adrian Peterson. That's less than he's averaged in his career and this year. Especially behind the DL we threw out there. I thought Bishop and Hawk had a lot to do with Peterson not really going off.

BTW, Chilly loves to feed AP against us. His 28 carries last night tied his season high. Last year, he gave it to him 25 times in both games. His season high was 26. His career high is 30 carries in a game against us in 2008. He's fed Peterson the ball at least 25 times in each of the last 4 games against us.

I didn't mention Bishop off the winners list because he scored a TD in a 4 point game. I'm not saying Hawk had a bad game, just his play is just average to me. Yes he had more tackles then Bishop, but thats only because Capers used Bishop more in coverage even against Moss. Every tackle I saw him make he got pushed on his ass until help came.

So a ball is thrown right to Bishop and there is no one between him and the endzone except Packers and that makes it great! I could have scored that TD!

Just saying!

[mission]

I wouldn't mind 4 hour games. I wait all week for the Pack to play and then it's all gone so quick.

[pbmax]

What no one realizes, is that despite all the technology and rule changes, dumb things happen at the same rate as 30 years ago. The errors are usually not as egregious, but they are replayed four thousand times on TV. Just look at the Miami game, the Johnson non touchdown and Shiancoe.

Replay should be used for boundary and scoring calls and that is it. And everyone plays to the whistle.

The dopes agitating for more replay in baseball because of the aborted no-hitter or the playoff calls argue that it won't make the games longer. Replay started in the NFL for boundary and possession calls I believe. Since it was adopted permanently, it has been expanded almost every year.

And no one is any happier, and no one thinks officiating has gotten better. Its just chasing after smaller (or sometimes dumber) errors.

[channtheman]

I think we will have to agree to disagree. I feel that the goal should be to get every call right, even if that extends the games a little bit.