GatewayRedbirds.com

letsgocards89 wrote:Rams Fans: I'm curious about your take on Sam Bradford. STL seems to be divided. One group insists that it's poor O-line play and a lack of weapons holding him back from taking the next step. The other group says that a good QB would overcome and make his receivers better, and that 2013 is the final straw.

What say you?

letsgocards89 wrote:

Vidor wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:

Vidor wrote:So I posted in the other thread, per Deadspin, looks like the Tuck Rule is going away. That was called correctly in the Snow Bowl game but it's a really stupid rule.

One of the worst calls in the history of professional sports. A royal screwing courtesy of the NFL.

No, it wasn't. Per the rule, it was called correctly. It's just that the rule is asinine.

No, it was not called correctly. The tuck portion of the rule had no bearing on that particular play. It was used to ensure that the Patriots kept the ball.

Section 22 Rule 3 Article 2 of the NFL rule book addresses the forward pass. Note 2 refers to the action of "tucking" the ball and when it is or is not a fumble.

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

However, there was no attempt to "tuck" the ball during this play. There *was* a successful attempt by Brady to recock his arm in preparation for a pass attempt. Note 3 of Rule 3 defines the "recocking" of a pass attempt.

Note 3: If the player loses possession of the ball while attempting to recock his arm, it is a fumble.

The officials reviewed the play long enough to find some technicality in the rule book and a story with which to spin it when the correct call was completely obvious.

"The rule is very specific," Pereira said. "We have to make our decision based on the rule. Intent doesn't factor into the rule. Does the ball come out after [the quarterback's] arm is going forward and before he tucks the ball back into his body? If so, then it's an incomplete pass."....

....Under the rule, a quarterback's throwing motion begins when he raises the ball in his hand and begins to move his arm forward; that motion doesn't end until the quarterback tucks the ball back against his body, making him a runner. If the ball comes loose any time in between, it's an incomplete pass, not a fumble. Only if the quarterback reloads -- and raises the ball again to start a new throwing motion -- can he fumble, as long as the ball is knocked loose before his arm begins to move forward again.

Vidor wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:

Vidor wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:

Vidor wrote:So I posted in the other thread, per Deadspin, looks like the Tuck Rule is going away. That was called correctly in the Snow Bowl game but it's a really stupid rule.

One of the worst calls in the history of professional sports. A royal screwing courtesy of the NFL.

No, it wasn't. Per the rule, it was called correctly. It's just that the rule is asinine.

No, it was not called correctly. The tuck portion of the rule had no bearing on that particular play. It was used to ensure that the Patriots kept the ball.

Section 22 Rule 3 Article 2 of the NFL rule book addresses the forward pass. Note 2 refers to the action of "tucking" the ball and when it is or is not a fumble.

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

However, there was no attempt to "tuck" the ball during this play. There *was* a successful attempt by Brady to recock his arm in preparation for a pass attempt. Note 3 of Rule 3 defines the "recocking" of a pass attempt.

Note 3: If the player loses possession of the ball while attempting to recock his arm, it is a fumble.

The officials reviewed the play long enough to find some technicality in the rule book and a story with which to spin it when the correct call was completely obvious.

That's just not correct.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01828.html

"The rule is very specific," Pereira said. "We have to make our decision based on the rule. Intent doesn't factor into the rule. Does the ball come out after [the quarterback's] arm is going forward and before he tucks the ball back into his body? If so, then it's an incomplete pass."....

....Under the rule, a quarterback's throwing motion begins when he raises the ball in his hand and begins to move his arm forward; that motion doesn't end until the quarterback tucks the ball back against his body, making him a runner. If the ball comes loose any time in between, it's an incomplete pass, not a fumble. Only if the quarterback reloads -- and raises the ball again to start a new throwing motion -- can he fumble, as long as the ball is knocked loose before his arm begins to move forward again.

And here's the play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHEQtASq9BI

Brady clearly tucks the ball back, does not finish tucking the ball back, and does not "reload". The call was correct. It is the stupidest rule in the NFL, arguably the stupidest rule in all of sports, and deleting it from the rule book is years overdue. I was so sure that was a fumble when I watched it live that I flipped to a different channel and was confused when I flipped back and saw the Patriots still had the ball. But, per the rule, it was not a fumble.

Freed Roger wrote:Ouch, Jay Cutler. No fair.

I know what you mean about the years rolling by without measurable improvement. Bradford seems smarter than Cutler though, and even though he's been beaten down with losing and o line - unlike Cutler he hasn't been on team yet with high expectations. As far as I know he's staying healthy.

I don't see Bradford becoming a statitistical juggernaut -Fisher likes a balanced game. The ideal would be he become like Joe Flacco, rather than Cutler.

letsgocards89 wrote:Rams Fans: I'm curious about your take on Sam Bradford. STL seems to be divided. One group insists that it's poor O-line play and a lack of weapons holding him back from taking the next step. The other group says that a good QB would overcome and make his receivers better, and that 2013 is the final straw.

What say you?

letsgocards89 wrote:Dumervil and faxgate are quite an intriguing storyline as well. I can't wait to see how this ends.