The 2014 "Around The League" Thread

[HurricaneDovs]

After the first step, Bryant is going to the ground. He has no balance, he is falling. He made a leaping catch and went to the ground. He had to maintain control during the fall, but he didn't. As Pereira said, the ground can cause an incomplete pass.

If I understand you right, I agree with you. I hear people talking about how he took 3 steps, but I think most of those were just Dez landing after jumping in the air. It's not like he landed, planted, and turned up field.

[L.M.]

I felt like Dallas represented the best chance for overthrowing the dread Seahags. They gameplanned well for their victory last time and would have confidence.

GB is going to be chopped into fishbait up there!

[LSIGRAD09]

I felt like Dallas represented the best chance for overthrowing the dread Seahags. They gameplanned well for their victory last time and would have confidence.

GB is going to be chopped into fishbait up there!

Especially with a gimpy Rodgers.

[fallforward3y+]

If you don't like the rule, that's okay - but the call was good.

I agree. It's like with the Calvin Johnson dropped TD versus the Bears back in 2010. The rule to me seems like a bad one and it should have been a catch, I think the same thing about this one.

However, by the rule, in both cases I believe by the rule it was not a completed catch so the call was correct IMO.

[fallforward3y+]

I applaud Garret's guts and Dez's athleticism. I don't think there was enough to overturn the ruling on the field, and I absolutely hate that officiating seems to be part of the most game-changing critical plays in a game. Please God, let the Broncos play without their interference today!

I think it's the 'Calvin Johnson' rule that meant it wasn't a completed catch. I wanted Dallas to win, but it seems like the correct call to me. As I said in my above post, I think the rule should be different, but by the rule I think that the call was correct.

Either way, it was a very good display of athleticism by Dez. However, I don't like the play call. I think going for it on 4th down was a good idea given the situation, however the deep pass call was a bad idea. The thing about applauding gutsy calls for me is that they often seem boneheaded, and while gutsy, they often seem strategically bad for a team. I'd rather a coach show good strategy than gutsiness. IMO there are times that are good for aggressive/risky play calls, and times when they aren't a good idea.

It was a good time for a gutsy call to go for it on 4th down IMO, but a bad time to take a deep shot to the end zone.

On 4th&2, it's better to call a run or a shorter pass IMO, have a better chance of living to fight another down.

[L.M.]

I think it's the 'Calvin Johnson' rule that meant it wasn't a completed catch. I wanted Dallas to win, but it seems like the correct call to me. As I said in my above post, I think the rule should be different, but by the rule I think that the call was correct.

Either way, it was a very good display of athleticism by Dez. However, I don't like the play call. I think going for it on 4th down was a good idea given the situation, however the deep pass call was a bad idea. The thing about applauding gutsy calls for me is that they often seem boneheaded, and while gutsy, they often seem strategically bad for a team. I'd rather a coach show good strategy than gutsiness. IMO there are times that are good for aggressive/risky play calls, and times when they aren't a good idea.

It was a good time for a gutsy call to go for it on 4th down IMO, but a bad time to take a deep shot to the end zone.

On 4th&2, it's better to call a run or a shorter pass IMO, have a better chance of living to fight another down.

I agree. I listened to Ron Pereira's explanation on th epost-game show and the ruling was correct but the rule is stupid. And yes, a run would have sufficed to move the chains -probably, but maybe they felt that GB was anticipating exactly that and would defend that option more.

[fallforward3y+]

I agree. I listened to Ron Pereira's explanation on th epost-game show and the ruling was correct but the rule is stupid. And yes, a run would have sufficed to move the chains -probably, but maybe they felt that GB was anticipating exactly that and would defend that option more.

They may have been anticipating it, however a shorter more high percentage pass would have been better in that situation IMO. I just don't think it was a good time to call a deep pass to the end zone. Granted, it did almost work, but most of the time that kind of call probably wouldn't, IMO it's too risky to throw a deep pass on a down where if it doesn't work, you give it to the other team in good field position.