The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Rooting for KC.  If you boo Santa, I root for the other team.

Go Philly.

This is one of those weird games where I don't know who I'm rooting for. I'm probably partial to KC, but what almost always happens is that at some point during the game I'll find myself rooting for one team and not really be able to explain why *that* team and not the other.

I had to go all the way back to 1968 to find a reason to root for one team over another.

I don’t care too much about the winner. I know a guy who’s an eagles fan so I’d be happy for him if the Eagles won. I really just want a good game.

In general I can't stand Eagles fans but I have a super amount of respect for Jalen Hurts. The guy is the epitome of a team player since his days at Alabama. Not many people could have backed up Tua their senior year after getting pulled in the national Championship game but he did it without showing any negativity. On the other hand big fan of Mahomes and Andy Reid so regardless of who wins it won't bother me.

Don't really care either way.

Great first half. Hope Mahomes is okay.

Just want to say that I absolutely LOVE that touchdown by AJ Brown. Just wow. Great throw, but the coverage was all over it and with most receivers, that would have been a bit dangerous  and at the very least a heavily contested catch. But AJ makes it look easy. He locates the ball early, pretends to undercut the defender as if the ball were short, which causes the defender to break on that point. Then AJ just turns his hips up the field again for the easy catch.

I hate these halftime shows.

You don’t need to call that man. Come on.

Pretty weak call. Man the refs have been in KC’s pocket all playoffs. Pretty weak.

God Kelce is a repulsive guy

I dislike him

Just more ammunition for the “NFL is rigged” conspiracy theorists to call upon.

Yeah sometimes I entertain that idea. Obviously I think it’s too hard to outright fix it but the league can lean on a few calls and skew it.

Mahomes is the more marketable star but who knows.

It was a great game and kinda sucks Hurts didn’t get a legit shot because of that call. I think there needs to be reforms regarding PI and Holding, it’s becoming a problem.

Rewrite the holding and illegal contact rules to say,

"If, in the referee's judgement, the hold does not significantly impact the receiver, the ref should not throw the flag"

Maybe this is an argument for having a sky judge, or somebody with a second opinion.

Anybody got any other ideas?

It’s as good as any, I seriously think there’s gotta be some kind of overhaul here. Maybe defensive holding shouldn’t be an automatic first down or in some cases it just has a no play? I don’t know the thing is in the game tonight like technically it could be considered holding but the dude wasn’t gonna catch that pass anyway and in a game like this it’s lousy that it was called.

Maybe PI shouldn’t be a spot foul either. I don’t know but officiating in these playoffs was atrocious.

This is already how the rule currently exists.

If the officials called holding that they did not believe affected the play, there would be a flag on literally every down.

Is it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIbNQblAIqU

In this video, it says, "ANY GRAB OF THE JERSEY"

However, this is NOT how the rule is enforced.  Referees will NOT call ANY grab of the jersey.  They will judge how long the grab was for, how much it affected the receiver's ability to run his route, and if the defender tried to make a play on the ball.

My proposal is to put this outright in the rulebook.

For the record, I didn't agree with the late hit call out of bounds in the AFC title game either, but that's another story.

Also, HE DIDN'T EVEN GRAB THE JERSEY!!!!  NOW I'M LIVID!!!!  We were robbed of a thrilling finish to the Super Bowl.

You can see the jersey grab at 25:10-25:11 of this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXU353fwRk&t=1504s

I don't think the NFL purposely tries to rig games, even when they probably want certain outcomes. However, I absolutely think one or two refs will do what they can to change the outcome of a game when possible. Not on the behalf of the NFL, but probably for gambling reasons.

The DB, James Bradbury, admitted to it after the game.
"It was a holding. I tugged his jersey. I was hoping they would let it slide," he said after Super Bowl LVII.

I'd be more upset they gave up a 10 point lead than one single play I might not agree with.  

Actually I think we need a change to the rules around the use of the red flag. In my opinion if the offense tries to run a hurry up play the other team should be allowed to throw the red flag and have a chance to review the play and determine whether or not they really want to challenge the play or not. If they do the normal rules apply, if not they can pick up the red flag and decide not to challenge. That would put an end to this BS about running a quick play to prevent the other team from challenging. Another possibility would be to just allow a challenge after a single play is run. If you challenge and win the challenge the play that was run is wiped out by the challenge, if you lose the challenge both the play and the quick play stand. After a year it would never even be an issue anymore as there's no benefit to try running a quick play if the other team still has a chance to challenge.

On the hold call, I believe the rule of thumb is does the hold impede the WR's progress. If it does then it's considered a hold, if not then it's not. I think you can clearly see on that play the WR's progress was impeded by the hold therefore a good call. It's pretty close, but not nearly as bad as some fans want to try to make it. Not being either a Philly or KC fan, I can see that call going either way.

Like the call that solidified KC making the Super Bowl in the first place, it sucks when and how it happened, but it was the correct call.

I'm really surprised that KC elected not to score.   They played it well.  I get falling down the first time, but I thought they might've tried to run it in on 3rd down. 

I think that's pretty conspiracy theory there. The refs can't just get some plays wrong innocently from time to time? Does bias play a role? Maybe, but I don't think the refs are doing it for gambling purposes. That's a lot to actually think about during a moment. Their job is hard enough to try to imagine how they would be thinking "When can I call something that will benefit me without drawing too much attention?"

I actually think the refs do a pretty good job now except for the call of roughing the passer. That's the one that literally the refs don't know how to call. I'd say they get about 50% of those calls wrong which is just horrible.

I think a conspiracy would be all the refs getting together for a point shaving scandal or something. I just think some human beings are taking opportunities to make money. Certainly possible they are just dumb or have a personal bias, but never discount money.

I get what you are saying but third dwn was all about positioning of the ball for the kicker. They played the clock more than points and it paid off.

^ Yeah, I can't argue the result.

I just think that trying to run it in on third down up the middle -- that gives you two chances to score instead of just the one.  You could miss the kick, though unlikely.


The field conditions were bad.

That's a whole nother story. With all the money floating around it's rediculous that any NFL surface be this bad let alone the Super Bowl. No excuse IMO. 

But you risk having the ball stripped.

Yeah but when the FG is a chip shot, this is not really an issue as power is not a concern. You could even slip a little and still make it when it's short and between the hashes.

Fair enough. It could happen. I don't think it does very often if ever.

If you score a TD on third down, PHI gets the ball back down 7 with ~50 seconds left.
By kicking a FG, PHI got the ball back down 3 with 6 seconds left.
The second scenario is FAR superior to the first for KC.

Yes, you can miss the FG (in which case the game goes to OT).  You can also have a turnover by trying to punch it in (which can potentially cost you the game in regulation).  Every choice carries some risk.

League-wide conspiracies would never, ever be worth it.  It's dumb.

Whatever benefit you think a league may be gaining from these various conspiracies is definitely not worth the penalty if this conspiracy is uncovered: that league ceases to exist.  Seriously, if the NFL were found to be orchestrating the outcome of games at a league level, that would be the end of the NFL.

Nobody is arguing that there wasn't a jersey grab, the argument is that it was not enough to warrant a penalty.

That's my feeling.  It didn't really restrict his route all that much.  X does FAR worse than that all the time and never gets flagged. \

Edit:  Before this post, I'd only seen the replay that doesn't show the jersey grab.

Again, I've seen FAR worse not called many times.

Hey, they spent 2 YEARS cultivating that turf just for a week of use. In retrospect, maybe the NFL shouldn't have gone with turf developed specifically for golf?

(And this was all on the NFL, by the way, and not the Cards or their ground keeper.)

https://twitter.com/okstate/status/1624918439381942279?s=20&t=GNAlBD2G2GtH8spnt4oSeg

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35625308/super-bowl-2023-experimental-grass

Yeah, that gloating did not age well.

Grabbing a jersey is a bright line hold.  Absolutely no reason to make it complicated.

Perhaps the teams just need to figure out the right cleats to use? I don't really know anything about the grass or the cleats the teams were using, but they can make a BIG difference and sometimes you have to find the right ones.

Not always.  MANY jersey grabs are not called.

Speaking of which I liked what Philly tried to do on the last play. I absolutely hate that stupid multi lateral play that almost never works. Too bad that Hurts doesn't really have the arm for it, but what you're really hoping for there is a pass interference penalty where the game can't end and you might have either a chance at a FG or another hail mary into the endzone.

Who has a better arm, Tua or Hurts?  That pass was severely underthrown; you would think someone on Philly would know how far he could throw the ball. lol

Seems to me it would have been smarter of the NFL to install that field at the start of the season, as opposed to laying it down four weeks before the game.

IMO pass interference calls should just be 10 yard penalties with automatic first down; unless there is an egregious penalty (like tackling the guy before the ball even gets there).

I think "casual pass interference" vs "severe pass interference" just makes the problem worse.

We already have defensive holding vs. pass interference depending on whether the ball is in the air.  I think that's good enough.

Skip Bayless disagreed with the call on his show

Mmhm. I think the automatic first down on dholding should be changed and just a 10 for PI

First part sounds good, second part, I don't think so

The defender hoped he'd get away with it, but he fully admitted that he held and that the ruling was fine. It can be hard to tell from the video exactly how much the holding affected the route, especially considering there was a change of direction, but it really doesn't take much to cause the receiver to lose a yard.

Honestly, it's kind of hard discussing the validity of a penalty when the offender has admitted guilt.

Two words:

XAVIEN


HOWARD

You keep saying this and it makes you seem like a bit an idiot, so please moderate your use.

As for X's use of hands, well, look at ANY good cornerback and you'll find the same. I'm not seeing anything particularly different with X compared to others. The simple fact is that corners have a tendency to get as close to the line as they can and since this line varies from ref to ref, good corners will push the envelope a bit more against certain refs.

Could we wish for greater consistency in refereeing? You bet, but your constant "but X" is tiresome.

I'm curious ... I don't think most of you are country music fans so I was wondering if you guys liked Chris Stapleton singing the national anthem and if so ... was that your first time hearing him sing? He's one of the few today who bring that old school sound and is very popular.

Oronde Gadsen, Channing Crowder, and Marc Hochman are discussing how impressed they were and that he killed the national anthem. Hoch and Crowder were surprised as they hadn't heard him but Oronde said he could't believe they've never heard Tennessee Whiskey.

Funny you should ask.

I hate country music.  It's just not my thing at all.

But, I heard so many people saying how good he was so I listened to the performance.  And it was quite good.  It's still not my style, and while country-ish, it felt more bluesy to me but I thought he was really good.  I think that he's one of these guys where I can respect his talent, while realizing that I'm just not going to personally connect with the style.

I like country music quite a bit. Not nearly as much as classic rock and alternative, but I have several country playlists. One of them has 5-6 Stapleton songs on it, including Tennessee Whiskey, Broken Halos and Sometimes I Cry.  I enjoyed his take on the National Anthem a lot...thought it was one of the better versions I have heard in quite a while.

The genre of music that I really don't have a whole of of interest in are pop like Taylor Swift (I honestly cannot name a single song from her) or Rihanna...or rap music of pretty much any style.

I mostly listen to country. I like Stapleton’s stuff. But he didn’t kill the Star Spangled Banner. He murdered it, like everyone one else who sings it just to hear themselves sing. I’m a traditionalist. The Star Spangled Banner was written as a waltz. Meant to be played and sung as a waltz. Example. Listen to the way the USMC band or any other military branch band plays the Star Spangled Banner. They do it right. It should take less than 2 minutes to perform. Do it right or don’t do it.

Rewrite the rules, but take the referee's judgement bit out as much as humanly possible. It's what leads to inconsistencies and what's the most frustrating aspect of this.

The NFL have modified or tweaked the rules in the name of fairness over the years, but have increasingly allowed these inconsistencies to happen this way. The last ones were ridiculous, whereby a defender simply by turning his head to see the ball constitutes a genuine attempt at playing the ball (which in my opinion is rubbish - at a bare minimum there should be some contact by a defender with the ball to even have this excuse). Players are coached to do this and routinely get away with it, so on the odd occasion a flag gets thrown everyone wonders why now, and not every other time during the game? Defenders are also coached to grab the moment they think they could get beat, hoping they get away with it or at worst it draws a holding penalty instead of PI. The way the rules are being refereed has allowed this to happen.

It used to be black and white in regards to PI back in the 1980s-1990s - if a defender touches the receiver a yard beyond the line of scrimmage before the ball hits his hands, a flag gets thrown. There was no such thing as incidental contact (including things like tangles of legs). The only exception is if the defender (genuinely) has a clear path to intercept the ball and are attempting to do so in which case they effectively become the receiver - or if the offensive player instigates contact (as in an offensive PI/pick play).

To be honest I'd prefer that to the mess we have now, because at least it should be more consistent. Say there is no such thing as (passing) defensive holding, and make PI a minimum 10 yards or spot of the penalty whichever is longer. Sure you will have defensive players and coaches bitching about it being too hard on them, but they will adjust to it like everything else (as they should, they are paid enough for it). People will bitch about the number of penalties initially handed out too, but the game will open up more offensively, and eventually the defenses will adjust to it so it should eventually even out.

I'm also not a fan of country music, but I really liked the anthem - it definitely had notable elements of blues and soul as much as country, so I'm not surprised it appealed to a wide audience.

I have a two word reply to this, but it may be considered personal abuse so I'll leave you to work out what it is.

(I'll give you a clue - one of the words begins with an F )

In my opinion the reason that PI is such a problem is because offensive pass interference isn't called nearly enough. You see push offs by WR's all the time that go unpunished. If you started to call that everytime the offensive player put his hands on the defensive back to get seperation, then you wouldn't have the problem with the defensive back grabbing onto WR's to stay close. Call it both ways equally and you would see a far cleaner game and fewer PI calls.

I’m against the national anthem it’s a terrible song and I always skip that part.

Also, country music was dying by the 80s and was pretty much dead by mid 90s. Still love some classics though.

I fully, 100% disagree.

The Star Spangled banner is best when filtered through whoever is performing it.  Not only is it musically interesting, but it's the very meaning of America.  You bring your own personal flavor.  This piece of music is close to me.  I've played it literally hundreds of times when I was in various levels of band.  I've gone so far as to write my own arrangement.


As for cool versions, check out this arrangement by Igor Stravinsky:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbHnDs8W36E&t=67s

It's traditional as hell, but he really stresses the dissonant notes.  At 1:06, his griminess on the word "land" is so good.  It feels like it was written by a Russian Immigrant and that's what makes it great.

The rule is specifically written for the referees to make judgements.  If it wasn't, it wouldn't be humanly possible to cover a receiver. 

"Beyond the five yard zone, incidental contact may exist between receiver and defensive back"  The ref judges if the contact with incidental

Actions that do not constitute pass interference include:

"Laying a hand on a receiver THAT DOES NOT RESTRICT HIM"  It's the referee's judgement if the receiver was restricted.

Stapleton is on my shuffle Playlist. Anyone that thinks country music is dead needs to stop listening to country music radio and find the good stuff.