1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Stoney's He-Man Steeler Haters NFL Playoff Thread ... No Yinzers allowed

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Dec 29, 2014.

  1. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Terrell Suggs:

    "Like I always said, Carson Palmer got hit in his knee in 2005 but there was no rule made. Then Tom Brady got hit in his knee and all of a sudden there is a ruleand possible suspensions, excessive fines - it's just getting ridiculous."

    Oop is awesome when he's wrong.
     
    old_tony likes this.
  2. ColdCat

    ColdCat Well-Known Member

    Until a week ago I thought it was too late to reverse a call once you announced it and started walking it off. Never underestimate the power of Jerry Jones and the Party Bus! It's never too late!
     
  3. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    LTL, Suggs got it wrong. The NFL did modify the rules regarding low hits on quarterbacks after Palmer's injury. They modified them again after Brady's injury.

    The first changed prohibited a hit on a quarterback below the knees unless the defender was blocked into him. The second made it a penalty for a defender who is on the ground to lunge and hit the quarterback below the knee.

    Here is a story about the rule change after the 2005 season, published before the rule had become official.

    http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/032306/jag_21428643.shtml

    And here is a story from later that offseason with a list of rule changes, including the one protecting quarterbacks from low hits.

    http://profootball.scout.com/story/556118-nfl-rule-changes-for-2006
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2015
  4. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

  5. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Mmmmm hmmm and it was totally called that way too!

    Anyway, I'm done with this tangent. So great that the Steelers are out of the playoffs and I don't want to bring them back in.
     
  6. murphyc

    murphyc Well-Known Member

    I think he got a piece of the second one. But yeah, I was amazed he was able to get over the line twice. One of the more bizarre FG attempts I've seen in some time.
    If I were a betting man (I'm not), I'd be betting on the Seahawks against the Packers.
     
  7. exmediahack

    exmediahack Well-Known Member

    Cut. That. Meat.
     
  8. joe king

    joe king Active Member

    You and everyone else not living in Wisconsin.
     
  9. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Broncos defense having a bit of trouble coping with Luck.
     
  10. murphyc

    murphyc Well-Known Member

    On that Dez catch, let's say it's ruled a catch. Dallas has first-and-goal on the 1. Odds are, they score a TD with around three minutes left. At most it's 29-26 (if they go for 2 and get it). As gassed as that Dallas D was looking in the fourth, does anyone really think the Cowboys would have been able to prevent GB from scoring at least a FG, likely more? To me, GB was going to win regardless of that call.
     
  11. Vombatus

    Vombatus Well-Known Member

    Well, that's a bit of a reach, but agreed GB still had a good chance of winning.

    I prefer the outcome of Dez and Dallas feeling like they got jobbed.

    Oxnard Party Bus time!
     
  12. amraeder

    amraeder Well-Known Member

    The play that had the hold on Welker - Manning had the wheel route WIDE open. If he hits it, it's a TD (probably later in his progression and he never got to it. But man, he was open)
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page