Football question

[BCSooners]

if the ball on this play ended up on the ground everyone would agree that it is an incomplete pass ..

what happened is no different except the ball ended up with the DB clear INT

I agree

 

[SoonerBounce13]

1) it’s the only play that’s being discussed lol
2) you said “if a player catches it, takes steps, then falls he’s down when his knee touches the ground.” That’s not true.

LOL i'm talking hypotheticals to prove a point. Obvioulsy poorly.

For your #2 you are just arguing semantics now. I'm sorry for saying falls down instead of assuming you would know I meant tackled

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I agree

Then what is your point?

 

[BCSooners]

Then what is your point?

That your points made no sense.

 

[mict085]

think about it this way if there was no db and the wr fell and the ball came out it is 100% NOT a catch ..

That’s not what happened. The “completing the catch” has gotten out of hand and is ridiculous. Rewarding the defense for stealing the ball after the player is down is not good football.

The WR had possession and was down by contact. Play over. Completion of the catch after the fact should’ve never been considered.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

That’s not what happened. The “completing the catch” has gotten out of hand and is ridiculous. Rewarding the defense for stealing the ball after the player is down is not good football.

The WR had possession and was down by contact. Play over. Completion of the catch after the fact should’ve never been considered.

Did you forget the basic rule of not having possession until you make a football move?

 

[SoonerBounce13]

That your points made no sense.

You just dont' want to hear it.

If the receiver would have made a couple of steps and then been tackled and the ball ripped after his knee touched the ground, you would be correct.
That isn't what happened though. The receiver never had possession by rule

 

[BCSooners]

You just dont' want to hear it.

If the receiver would have made a couple of steps and then been tackled and the ball ripped after his knee touched the ground, you would be correct.
That isn't what happened though. The receiver never had possession by rule

Yes I don’t want to hear incoherence, then you say it was hypothetical.

I never argued whether it should’ve been a catch or INT. Just that your argument made no sense.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Yes I don’t want to hear incoherence, then you say it was hypothetical.

I never argued whether it should’ve been a catch or INT. Just that your argument made no sense.

It makes perfect sense. If you notice I said if A receiver...
It was clearly a hypothetical trying to show that if you take out the defender taking possession it would have been incomplete.

Go grab a snickers, you are arguing just to argue

 

[BCSooners]

It makes perfect sense. If you notice I said if A receiver...
It was clearly a hypothetical trying to show that if you take out the defender taking possession it would have been incomplete.

Go grab a snickers, you are arguing just to argue

We’re talking about 1 specific play, and you bring up a hypothetical that was pointless. “If A receiver has the ball knocked to the ground it’s incomplete”, no s***.

 

[WaymanFan]

Maye got absolutely manhandled by Will Anderson and the Texans defense. Stroud was terrible, but so was Maye. This perfectly illustrates the inferiority of passer rating. Maye may have been a little better, but 100 vs 20 passer rating is exponentially more egregious.

Maye got stripped in the first quarter, which was is what lead to Houston taking the lead on a 27 yard touchdown drive. He also had another fumble that Houston recovered in FG range, though the Texans' RB fumbled away those points a few plays later. He also had two other fumbles, which were recovered, but were such large losses that they killed drives and took expected points off the board.

Sure, one fumble may not be his fault, but by the time you've been sacked 5 times and fumbled 4, you really need to have a little bit of pocket awareness.

Actually, the Pats OT got manhandled by Anderson, not Maye. The passer rating is what it is - a guide. If you were to tell me before the game a QB would throw 3 TDs to 1 INT and average 6.5 yards a throw, I would guess his passer rating would be around 100. We all know it's not a perfect system...it's a guide. As for QBR, if ESPN is hoping more people are going to rely on it, they will need to tweak that formula after this game. You will literally not find one person who watched that game who will say "Stroud was better than Maye". Not one...but his QBR was slightly better. I would tweak it to not fault the QB if he fumbles because his offensive line couldn't hold up their blocks for more than two seconds. A QB should at least have two seconds to throw the ball or get out of the pocket. True that Maye didn't have good pocket presence, but at some point, his offensive line needs to get part of that blame.

 

[BCSooners]

Actually, the Pats OT got manhandled by Anderson, not Maye. The passer rating is what it is - a guide. If you were to tell me before the game a QB would throw 3 TDs to 1 INT and average 6.5 yards a throw, I would guess his passer rating would be around 100. We all know it's not a perfect system...it's a guide. As for QBR, if ESPN is hoping more people are going to rely on it, they will need to tweak that formula after this game. You will literally not find one person who watched that game who will say "Stroud was better than Maye". Not one...but his QBR was slightly better. I would tweak it to not fault the QB if he fumbles because his offensive line couldn't hold up their blocks for more than two seconds. A QB should at least have two seconds to throw the ball or get out of the pocket. True that Maye didn't have good pocket presence, but at some point, his offensive line needs to get part of that blame.

Yeah that’s tough, not saying I don’t kind of agree. What about QB interceptions where the WR runs the wrong route?