Champs interception against the Chargers

[SpiritGuy]

I didn't see this posted anywhere so here it is. Mods, if this is already out there go ahead and delete.


NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said that even if the replay system had been working during the first quarter yesterday, the interception by Denver's Champ Bailey would not have been reversed.

"The ruling on the field would not have changed," Aiello wrote in an e-mail response to several queries. "Replay could have determined only whether or not the pass was complete (but not who possessed it) ... Replay cannot be used in this case to determine who had possession of the ball so the ruling on the field would have stood."

The play in question was a pass from Philip Rivers to Chris Chambers that both Chambers and Bailey appeared to have their hands on. But replays appeared to show that Chambers, by rule, had the ball in his right arm when his left elbow hit the ground. Bailey arose with the ball afterward, though, and ran to the end zone.

After some consultation, the officials ruled that Bailey had intercepted the ball but was down by contact at the 29-yard line.

Chargers coach Norv Turner challenged the call, but it was never reviewed. The replay was available in the booth upstairs but not on the field monitor. After waiting the required two minutes for the feed to be repaired, referee Ed Hochuli explained at the time that the play would stand. (guess the Chargers can be thankful for the malfunctioning equipment because they didn't lose their time out!)

Aiello explained that there was an "issue" with the server (and backup server) that supplies the feed to the field monitor. The issue was fixed with about three minutes to play in the first half. Aiello said a technician from the company that makes the servers will go to Denver this week and that all replay technicians will receive a memo with guidelines for troubleshooting the particular problem should it arise again.

Two local replay technicians are hired by the NFL to work each game

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/weblo...lped/?chargers

[Dukes]

Charger fan/Bronco haters will still be in denial.

[RhymesayersDU]

Interesting stuff.

[SpiritGuy]

Charger fan/Bronco haters will still be in denial.

Not much anyone can do about that! After all look who they're cheering for. LOL

[Broncobiv]

Charger fans should feel better that even with replay, the play would not have been overturned.

But they will still be pissed because they feel the refs blew the call in the first place, and SD should have had a completion.

[CasinoRoyal]

Doesnt matter,

Games over the INT has already counted and there still 0-2

People wanna keep crying about it then ehhhhh

[hades]

It's not any worse then the old "tuck rule" that got Brady to the SB a few years back.

[Gcver2ver3]

am i the only one to that thinks the refs made the right call was made the 1st time on that pick?

i don't believe chambers had control when he fell to the ground...i think he and champ were fighting for it while on the ground and that champ took it away while never allowing the ball to hit the ground...

[Broncobiv]

am i the only one to that thinks the refs made the right call was made the 1st time on that pick?

i don't believe chambers had control when he fell to the ground...i think he and champ were fighting for it while on the ground and that champ took it away while never allowing the ball to hit the ground...
Well the point is that if they're on the ground, somebody has to have possession of the ball. If they both have it equally, tie goes to the offensive player. The only way it's an INT is if Champ ripped it out and Chambers was losing possession of it in mid air, before his elbow hit (which I still think is a possibility).

[Rock Chalk]

No, Chambers caught it, his elbow hit, they both hit the ground (bodies) and then the ball came loose.

It was a bad call.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Chambers never had control of the ball and Champ did. The ball never hit the ground so it was an INT.

[Rock Chalk]

Chambers never had control of the ball and Champ did. The ball never hit the ground so it was an INT.

Dude Chambers had control of the ball.

Get over it.

[wandlc]

Sorry Alec you are wrong. The replays don't show that Chambers has possession, just that his hand is on the ball, not under his control. The ball is below his hip before his forearm hits the ground. The only thing conclusive from a replay is that the ball doesn't hit the ground. A reverse angle view would be nice showing exactly what Bailey's hands are doing.

[Rock Chalk]

Dude Ive seen the replay about 3 dozen times. I recorded the game. He had CLEAR possession of the ball, made a football move. His freakin forearm hit the ground THEN Champ swats the ball out.

You people are homers. That was a bad call and we got a good break on it.

[Kaylore]

Dude Chambers had control of the ball.

Get over it.

No he really didn't. They showed the play and explained it. Randy Cross was wrong (surprise).

[BroncoInferno]

Dude Ive seen the replay about 3 dozen times. I recorded the game. He had CLEAR possession of the ball, made a football move. His freakin forearm hit the ground THEN Champ swats the ball out.

You people are homers. That was a bad call and we got a good break on it.

It is not clear in the least. None of the angles showed enough where you could conclusively overturn the play. None. And I am not a homer, I call it like I see it.

[CasinoRoyal]

Alec is wrong.

It was a bang bang play and it should have stood as called. INT

[Gcver2ver3]

Dude Ive seen the replay about 3 dozen times. I recorded the game. He had CLEAR possession of the ball, made a football move. His freakin forearm hit the ground THEN Champ swats the ball out.

You people are homers. That was a bad call and we got a good break on it.

i am a homer...(is that so wrong?)

but that has nothing to do with you being wrong...

i have watched the game and the replay many times also...

chambers didnt have control of the ball...you fell for those still photos that CBS announcers kept trying to show of him down with the ball...

but in motion he never kept control...champ wins...

end...

[Rock Chalk]

And I do too. The only reason that play was ruled a pick in the first place is because the ref that ruled on it was BEHIND the back of Champ and had an obstructed view.

Chambers CLEARLY had possession of the ball.

The ONLY people who say different are the people on this board.

[Rock Chalk]

i am a homer...

but that has nothing to do with you being wrong...

i have watched the game and the replay many times also...

chambers didnt have control of the ball...you fell for those still photos that CBS announcers kept trying to show of him down with the ball...

but in motion he never kept control...champ wins...

end...

In motion he made a football move, HAD COMPLETE CONTROL of the ball, his arm hit, he was down by contact.

End of ****ing discussion. Next thing youa re going to argue is that the TD he caught over Paymah wasnt complete which it was.

[Kaylore]

The ONLY people who say different are the people on this board.

And the people who are paid to officiate the game. It looks like a contested ball to me and Champ gets it before his arm hits. End of story.:approve:

[Northman]

It wouldnt of been reversed because it was inconclusive.

[Rock Chalk]

And the people who are paid to officiate the game. It looks like a contested ball to me and Champ gets it before his arm hits. End of story.:approve:

Agreed, but again the official who made the call had an obstructed view.

I watched that replay several times in real time speed and Chambers had control of the ball, made a football move. Thats a completed pass. At that point then you look at when his arm hits the ground and guess what, Champ doesnt rip it out.

It doesnt matter because as you said it couldnt be overturned, moreover the game is over and we won so I dont really give a **** but that was a bad call by the ref who made it.

[Broncojef]

It is not clear in the least. None of the angles showed enough where you could conclusively overturn the play. None. And I am not a homer, I call it like I see it.

Hell more than half of the time I see every angle they have and the announcers, myself and most every other person viewing the game sees something clearly one way and the ref will call it the other. Seems hit or miss either way to me. I'm just glad we got the breaks for once and its nice to see LT, Norv and every other Charger whining about something again, they seem in their element when in that state.

[Gcver2ver3]

In motion he made a football move, HAD COMPLETE CONTROL of the ball, his arm hit, he was down by contact.

End of ****ing discussion. Next thing youa re going to argue is that the TD he caught over Paymah wasnt complete which it was.

actually it wasn't...

and no he didnt have control...you fell for the still photo job they tried on everyone...

i care less what others say outside this board (or on this board for that matter), i have eyes and i know what i saw...he picked it...

done...

[BroncoBuff]

Put me down for "not" an interception.

[Rock Chalk]

actually it wasn't...

and no he didnt have control...you fell for the still photo job they tried on everyone...

i care less what others say outside this board (or on this board for that matter), i have eyes and i know what i saw...he picked it...

done...

Dude you have no reading comprehension. I didnt watch any still photo. I saw one slo motion replayt then I replied it on DVR about 10 times since then and it was a completed pass.

You know what you saw? Thank god you are not a ref because you would be ****ty.

[Gcver2ver3]

Dude you have no reading comprehension. I didnt watch any still photo. I saw one slo motion replayt then I replied it on DVR about 10 times since then and it was a completed pass.

You know what you saw? Thank god you are not a ref because you would be ****ty.

HE PICKED IT...

say it...

[ZONA]

Alec, Champ didn't swat the ball........lol

I've watched it about a dozen times also and my take is that it really could have gone either way. Chambers starts to gain control of the ball and on his way down, Champ also had a piece of the ball but as they both get closer to the ground, it appears as if Champ has started to pull the ball closer into his body and away from Chambers. By the time Chambers' arm hits the ground, the ball clearly looks like it is to the right (and slightly below) his right hip but both of Champs arms were firmly grasping it. After they have hit the ground, Champ twists his body to rip it free. It's one of those things where you just have to say, at what point does Champ have more of the ball then Chambers. I thought he had more control over it before the arm hit the ground because Champ had both arms on the ball while Chambers had only one.

It truly is a case where it could have been called either way it was so close and either side would have a case. There is no way in hell you could call that a bad call because even in slow motion it's hard to tell exactly who had most of the possesion, let alone real time.

[enjolras]

Dude Ive seen the replay about 3 dozen times. I recorded the game. He had CLEAR possession of the ball, made a football move. His freakin forearm hit the ground THEN Champ swats the ball out.

You people are homers. That was a bad call and we got a good break on it.

The 'football move' language has been scrubbed from the rule book this year. It is now an 'element of time', which means if you possess the ball at all (more or less) it is a completion. No more having to come down, and actually do something. A lot of things that where incomplete last year will be fumbles this year.

As part of the rule change there is another new rule: When going to the ground during a catch (such as this play) the receiver must possess the ball all the way to the end of the play. If the ball comes out at any point (including a defender dislodging it) it is incomplete.

So in this case, it should have probably been an incompletion. The Chargers player did not hold on to the ball all the way through the process of going to the ground. So even if it wasn't a pick, it sure as hell wasn't a completion.

[CasinoRoyal]

Poor alec trying to hard to defend his personal truth.

BANG BANG PLAY

[Broncobiv]

As part of the rule change there is another new rule: When going to the ground during a catch (such as this play) the receiver must possess the ball all the way to the end of the play. If the ball comes out at any point (including a defender dislodging it) it is incomplete.

So in this case, it should have probably been an incompletion. The Chargers player did not hold on to the ball all the way through the process of going to the ground. So even if it wasn't a pick, it sure as hell wasn't a completion.
Well no, to be ruled an incompletion, the ball has to hit the ground. Sure, Chambers didn't hold onto the ball through the process of going to the ground, but Champ did. Impossible for that play to be ruled incomplete because the ball never touched the ground. It's either a catch or a pick. Those are the only 2 options.

[CasinoRoyal]

Actually both players had there hands on the ball ( one hand ) as they went to the ground.

[Broncobiv]

Actually both players had there hands on the ball ( one hand ) as they went to the ground.
Yeah, it probably should have been ruled that they both had possession. And in that case, possession goes to the receiver. But I can also see how it looked like Chambers lost the ball to Champ in mid air before his elbow hit.

[CasinoRoyal]

Yeah they say when both players go to the ground with the ball its suppose to be the Wideouts ball.....

But its still something that i think would not have been over turned in a replay.

IDK though thats just my guess.....

It goes down as an INT for champ though and thats what matters the most.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Agreed, but again the official who made the call had an obstructed view.

I watched that replay several times in real time speed and Chambers had control of the ball, made a football move. Thats a completed pass. At that point then you look at when his arm hits the ground and guess what, Champ doesnt rip it out.

It doesnt matter because as you said it couldnt be overturned, moreover the game is over and we won so I dont really give a **** but that was a bad call by the ref who made it.

look closely at the replay, it is Champs hands on the ball and Chambers hands around Champs hands. The only reason the ball never touched the ground is because Champ had control of the ball.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Well no, to be ruled an incompletion, the ball has to hit the ground. Sure, Chambers didn't hold onto the ball through the process of going to the ground, but Champ did. Impossible for that play to be ruled incomplete because the ball never touched the ground. It's either a catch or a pick. Those are the only 2 options.

Exactly, Chambers never had the catch fully secured and the ball never hit the ground and came up in Champ's possession. That is what an INT is.

[Florida_Bronco]

It was a pick.

End of story.

[enjolras]

Well no, to be ruled an incompletion, the ball has to hit the ground. Sure, Chambers didn't hold onto the ball through the process of going to the ground, but Champ did. Impossible for that play to be ruled incomplete because the ball never touched the ground. It's either a catch or a pick. Those are the only 2 options.

My understanding of the new rule (I'd have to dig out the language to be sure) is that if the receiver is down by contact while going to the ground then the ball is dead. However, for it to be ruled a catch he has to complete the catch all the way to the ground.

So under the new rule you can have a incompletion without the ball itself touching the ground.

[Broncobiv]

My understanding of the new rule (I'd have to dig out the language to be sure) is that if the receiver is down by contact while going to the ground then the ball is dead. However, for it to be ruled a catch he has to complete the catch all the way to the ground.

So under the new rule you can have a incompletion without the ball itself touching the ground.
I don't think I've read what you read, so I can't argue for sure. But that would be the most bizarre thing I've ever seen. The ball never hits the ground and eventually comes to rest in a player's hands, but it's ruled incomplete? And how can a receiver be ruled down by contact when they don't possess the ball? You see plays like that all the time, when a ball is tipped around and a player laying on the ground eventually corrals it, and it's ruled a catch (or INT depending on who caught it). Heck, look at Tory Holt's TD this weekend. He would've been "down by contact while going to the ground". But the ball definitely wasn't dead.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/m3AbDENJ6EA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/m3AbDENJ6EA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[enjolras]

It does seem weird... I'm gonna dig around a bit. I want to see if I can find the actual rule wording. I think the key is that the ball is possessed first, not just deflected.

[FireFly]

Well the point is that if they're on the ground, somebody has to have possession of the ball. If they both have it equally, tie goes to the offensive player.

Thats a good point. To me, it looked like Champ only came close to possession after Chambers was down, but even it was 50/50, it probably should have been Chambers ball.

[Atwater His Ass]

It was a completed pass to Chambers and a 50/50 possesion battle at the time Chambers was down by contact, i.e. should have remained SD's ball.

This was clearly shown on the replay. The fact that it wouldn't have been overturned by replay doesn't mean it wasn't a bad call. You know why? Because it was the wrong call to begin with.

[Broncoman13]

And I do too. The only reason that play was ruled a pick in the first place is because the ref that ruled on it was BEHIND the back of Champ and had an obstructed view.

Chambers CLEARLY had possession of the ball.

The ONLY people who say different are the people on this board.

Sorry brother but I don't think you can say "clearly" in this case. I think it was a blown call but it was close, not clear. The real deal, when Chambers forearm hit the ground, I think he still had possession of the ball. Not really worried about it at this point though, what's done is done!

I have an extra ticket for the game this weekend. Give me a shout if you're interested. I know you were looking for a bunch to take the fam, can't help you there but I can help you with a nice ticket for yourself and a ride out.

[TheReverend]

Agreed, but again the official who made the call had an obstructed view.

I watched that replay several times in real time speed and Chambers had control of the ball, made a football move. Thats a completed pass. At that point then you look at when his arm hits the ground and guess what, Champ doesnt rip it out.

It doesnt matter because as you said it couldnt be overturned, moreover the game is over and we won so I dont really give a **** but that was a bad call by the ref who made it.

Making a football move has nothing to do with possession anymore. They changed it to a "period of time".

[TheReverend]

The 'football move' language has been scrubbed from the rule book this year. It is now an 'element of time', which means if you possess the ball at all (more or less) it is a completion. No more having to come down, and actually do something. A lot of things that where incomplete last year will be fumbles this year.

As part of the rule change there is another new rule: When going to the ground during a catch (such as this play) the receiver must possess the ball all the way to the end of the play. If the ball comes out at any point (including a defender dislodging it) it is incomplete.

So in this case, it should have probably been an incompletion. The Chargers player did not hold on to the ball all the way through the process of going to the ground. So even if it wasn't a pick, it sure as hell wasn't a completion.

Well, beat me to it.

[400HZ]

If half the Bronco fans here plus every national personality that has commented on it sees the play as a completed pass and not an int then, well, do the math. Half of you probably think Jay threw a forward incomplete pass at the end, too.

[Northman]

If half the Bronco fans here plus every national personality that has commented on it sees the play as a completed pass and not an int then, well, do the math.

Yea, im sure there are some doom and gloomers who just cant grasp that bad calls happen. At the end of the day the Chargers had more than their fair share of chances to not only stay in the game but win it themselves but didnt come through. So either your team and those fans are going to man up and move on or you can sit and wallow, cry, and pout about it for the rest of the year. Good lord, what a bunch of drama queens.

[Bladerunner]

I saw that as a completed pass...even if it was a shared possession (which I don't think it was until after Chamber's elbow was down)...it should have been a completion for SD...Aiello says that the shared possession occurred before DBC, and maybe so, but it looked like a catch to me...

[sixtimeseight]

If half the Bronco fans here plus every national personality that has commented on it sees the play as a completed pass and not an int then, well, do the math. Half of you probably think Jay threw a forward incomplete pass at the end, too.

Ok, I like math. How about this one: 39 > 38, true or false?

[400HZ]

Ok, I like math. How about this one: 39 > 38, true or false?

True.

True of false? Game won on a technicality.

Worth bragging about? Apparently.

[Merlin]

True of false? Game won on a technicality.
I wend and checked the win/loss record and for the life of me could not find a column for "won on technicality".
You guys have much bigger problems...your D stinks. Hell, even Denver's D looked overall better than your D in that game. If your coach continues to pout and whine, I'll be happy.

[sixtimeseight]

True.

True of false? Game won on a technicality.

False.

Worth bragging about? Apparently.

True.

[Inkana7]

Waaaa.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Ok, it has passed and nothing more is going to come from talking about blown calls even though it was an INT.
The only stats that matter now are these.
Denver is 2-0 atop the AFC West
San Diego is 0-2 bottom of the AFC West

[lander]

You guys are still talking about this? Even we've moved on.

[JJJ]

The pick, like the entire game itself, a farce. Enjoy the gifts from refs.

Bolts are moving on to the Jets and will try and even this score in December.

[Northman]

The pick, like the entire game itself, a farce. Enjoy the gifts from refs.

Bolts are moving on to the Jets and will try and even this score in December.


Try being the key word there.

[TheManeMan]

SD fans, tell me how my ass tastes?

-Shaq

[Crushaholic]

It certainly looks like a "tie goes to the runner" situation and should have been Chambers ball. HOWEVER, Champ displayed more heart and determination in one play than the whole defense did throughout the entire game (not that I'm surprised in the least).

[Irish Stout]

You guys are still talking about this? Even we've moved on.

No you haven't you keep posting on our boards about it.

You know what I say to those who want to keep whining about it: "its tough, now get over it." Life ain't always fair ladies, but this game was way more fair than most peoples' lives.

It certainly looks like a "tie goes to the runner" situation and should have been Chambers ball. HOWEVER, Champ displayed more heart and determination in one play than the whole defense did throughout the entire game (not that I'm surprised in the least).

Crush - hows Topeka these days? I left Topeka about a year and a half ago... I miss Bullfrogs sometims. - This entire thread was started to show that even if a replay had followed, the play on the field would've stood... but you're right, if the refs had bionic eyes and could watch live action at super slow speed so that they could process exactly what is going on, then they would have most likely immediately ruled it Chambers ball. However, I can't even figure that out and I've seen replay like 8 times now.

[JJJ]

Try being the key word there.

Actually farce was the key word.

[sixtimeseight]

Actually farce was the key word.

Bolts are moving on to the Jets

Too bad their fans aren't.

[Bladerunner]

True.

True of false? Game won on a technicality.

Worth bragging about? Apparently.

it's a little more complicated than that (and i think you know this)...the game wasn't won on a techicality...rather the game was allowed to continue on a techinicality...the Chargers weren't given a loss by the refs, they were placed in another opportunity to lose...

San Diego by all accounts was denied a victory on that play, but they weren't given a loss on it. They ultimately achieved that by giving up the TD, 2 pt, and because River's put Chamber's just wide on the sideline.

[Dedhed]

In motion he made a football move, HAD COMPLETE CONTROL of the ball, his arm hit, he was down by contact.

End of ****ing discussion. Next thing youa re going to argue is that the TD he caught over Paymah wasnt complete which it was.Falling hardly constitutes a football move.

[Dedhed]

The pick, like the entire game itself, a farce. Enjoy the gifts from refs.

Bolts are moving on to the Jets and will try and even this score in December.

31 points in a half hardly makes for farce.

[Bronx33]

True.

True of false? Game won on a technicality.

Worth bragging about? Apparently.



Answer this truthfully , had the bronco been on the losing end on that play would you be here talking it up with your pals saying tough shyt blah blah blah ect ect we had to read all the BS beofre the game was even played from drive by chugger fans?

remember be truthful now i know what the answer is so just take all the comment with a grain of salt since it apparently bothers you that bronco fans are having fun at your expense since you were suppose to pound us by all reasonable rights.

[BlaK-Argentina]

and because River's put Chamber's just wide on the sideline.

Were you guys as scared as I was that the defense was going to let them get in FG range with 24 seconds left? The kickoff scared the crap out of me too. Buuut... damn, 24 seconds, no TOs and I STILL wasn't sure that the defense would hold.

That Chambers play was really close.

[400HZ]

Answer this truthfully , had the bronco been on the losing end on that play would you be here talking it up with your pals saying tough shyt blah blah blah ect ect we had to read all the BS beofre the game was even played from drive by chugger fans?

remember be truthful now i know what the answer is so just take all the comment with a grain of salt since it apparently bothers you that bronco fans are having fun at your expense since you were suppose to pound us by all reasonable rights.

You mean if the play had been recorded as a fumble recovered by San Diego and the game ended?

I wouldn't have talked too much ****. Holding Denver to zero second half points would have potentially been a big boost for our squad, but still, we were counting on a Superbowl caliber defense this season and so far it hasn't even been close. You all saw the same problems we did.

San Diego winning the game because Cutler dropped the ball would be a hollow (although hilarious) victory. Hypothetically, a good argument could be made that the Chargers lucked into a win. I wouldn't deny it, I would just point out that Cutler committed two consecutive critical red zone turnovers and that cost Denver the game. You could say that the Chargers did nothing to earn the last TO and of course you would be right, but don't blame us for Jay's slippery hands, blame him. The loss would be on Jay Cutler's poor execution late in the game, not on a stellar performance by the Charger defense. I don't think any Charger fans would have a problem admitting that. There would still be plenty of anger directed at our defense.

The portion of the game that I would talk some smack about would be Phillip Rivers outperforming Jay Cutler in crunch time. Really, that's still true, because Jay did throw a terrible pick and then literally fumble the game away. Unfortunately he got bailed out by horrendous officiating, and the argument is worthless when you have a big fat 0'fer in the W column.

[azbroncfan]

You mean if the play had been recorded as a fumble recovered by San Diego and the game ended?

I wouldn't have talked too much ****. Holding Denver to zero second half points would have potentially been a big boost for our squad, but still, we were counting on a Superbowl caliber defense this season and so far it hasn't even been close. You all saw the same problems we did.

San Diego winning the game because Cutler dropped the ball would be a hollow (although hilarious) victory. Hypothetically, a good argument could be made that the Chargers lucked into a win. I wouldn't deny it, I would just point out that Cutler committed two consecutive critical red zone turnovers and that cost Denver the game. You could say that the Chargers did nothing to earn the last TO and of course you would be right, but don't blame us for Jay's slippery hands, blame him. The loss would be on Jay Cutler's poor execution late in the game, not on a stellar performance by the Charger defense. I don't think any Charger fans would have a problem admitting that. There would still be plenty of anger directed at our defense.

The portion of the game that I would talk some smack about would be Phillip Rivers outperforming Jay Cutler in crunch time. Really, that's still true, because Jay did throw a terrible pick and then literally fumble the game away. Unfortunately he got bailed out by horrendous officiating, and the argument is worthless when you have a big fat 0'fer in the W column.

I'd say that is an accurate post.

[theAPAOps5]

Hmmm Jay won the game on two clutch plays. I wouldn't say Phillis Rivers did that.

Keep crying 400hz its clear thats the Charger way.

[Sassy]

You mean if the play had been recorded as a fumble recovered by San Diego and the game ended?

I wouldn't have talked too much ****. Holding Denver to zero second half points would have potentially been a big boost for our squad, but still, we were counting on a Superbowl caliber defense this season and so far it hasn't even been close. You all saw the same problems we did.

San Diego winning the game because Cutler dropped the ball would be a hollow (although hilarious) victory. Hypothetically, a good argument could be made that the Chargers lucked into a win. I wouldn't deny it, I would just point out that Cutler committed two consecutive critical red zone turnovers and that cost Denver the game. You could say that the Chargers did nothing to earn the last TO and of course you would be right, but don't blame us for Jay's slippery hands, blame him. The loss would be on Jay Cutler's poor execution late in the game, not on a stellar performance by the Charger defense. I don't think any Charger fans would have a problem admitting that. There would still be plenty of anger directed at our defense.

The portion of the game that I would talk some smack about would be Phillip Rivers outperforming Jay Cutler in crunch time. Really, that's still true, because Jay did throw a terrible pick and then literally fumble the game away. Unfortunately he got bailed out by horrendous officiating, and the argument is worthless when you have a big fat 0'fer in the W column.

If Rivers outperformed Jay...he would have won the game by AT LEAST leading his team far enough down field for the winning FG if not a TD.

When it came down to CRUNCH TIME as you say...even with the fumble/call Jay got that ball in the endzone for a TD and between 3 defenders to a rookie WR for the conversion...

[400HZ]

Hmmm Jay won the game on two clutch plays. I wouldn't say Phillis Rivers did that.

Keep crying 400hz its clear thats the Charger way.

Cutler lost the game on two boneheaded plays. If not for Hochuli's blunder, he wouldn't have had the opportunity to make two clutch plays because the game would have ended on his second screw up. Credit to him for capitalizing on the mistake.

[Sassy]

Rivers had opportunities to convert...even with our crappy D he didn't.

[theAPAOps5]

You are right 400hz. River did outplay Cutler in the second half. But Cutler came up when it was clutch even if it shouldn't have been that way.

I won't count the first call as game changing as it was early in the game and no one knows if Denver doesn't score later on. The Defense was playing at least at a medicore level at that point.

[400HZ]

If Rivers outperformed Jay...he would have won the game by AT LEAST leading his team far enough down field for the winning FG if not a TD.

When it came down to CRUNCH TIME as you say...even with the fumble/call Jay got that ball in the endzone for a TD and between 3 defenders to a rookie WR for the conversion...

Failing to march a team down the field into fieldgoal range with 28 seconds and no timeouts to work with is hardly an epic failure.

Certainly not on the level of throwing the ball into a defenders gut in the red zone and dropping the ball on the next trip down.

[Fedaykin]

That call was hardly the only screw up that affected the game. Screw ups happened in favor of both teams. For instance, the blatant holding and personal foul on the TD pass in the first half:

[400HZ]

You are right 400hz. River did outplay Cutler in the second half. But Cutler came up when it was clutch even if it shouldn't have been that way.

I won't count the first call as game changing as it was early in the game and no one knows if Denver doesn't score later on. The Defense was playing at least at a medicore level at that point.

True on both levels.

[Florida_Bronco]

Cutler lost the game on two boneheaded plays.

Thats not what the scoreboard says.

[Kaylore]

Failing to march a team down the field into fieldgoal range with 28 seconds and no timeouts to work with is hardly an epic failure.

Certainly not on the level of throwing the ball into a defenders gut in the red zone and dropping the ball on the next trip down.

Throwing a five yard swing pass that Sproles runs for a TD because we're in a zone blitz isn't exactly something Rivers can say "he" did. Sproles was the reason you guys were in that game, not Rivers. In fact he missed several throws down in the red zone. He didn't really look all that clutch to me either.

Oh and there's another TD on a zone blitz covering a back that everyone thought we'd never see again once Coyer was gone!

[400HZ]

Thats not what the scoreboard says.

How many times did I say "hypothetically" in my post? Good job reading.

[400HZ]

Throwing a five yard swing pass that Sproles runs for a TD because we're in a zone blitz isn't exactly something Rivers can say "he" did. Sproles was the reason you guys were in that game, not Rivers. In fact he missed several throws down in the red zone. He didn't really look all that clutch to me either.

Oh and there's another TD on a zone blitz covering a back that everyone thought we'd never see again once Coyer was gone!

Rivers checked down. The previous series, Cutler failed to do this and committed a turnover. Maybe a checkdown turning into a huge gainer isn't a great, MVP worthy personal feat for a QB, but it is smart football.

[theAPAOps5]

Actually that INT was his 3rd or 4th read so Cutler checked down too.

[Florida_Bronco]

How many times did I say "hypothetically" in my post? Good job reading.

Ummm, zero.

Cutler lost the game on two boneheaded plays. If not for Hochuli's blunder, he wouldn't have had the opportunity to make two clutch plays because the game would have ended on his second screw up. Credit to him for capitalizing on the mistake.


???

[400HZ]

That call was hardly the only screw up that affected the game. Screw ups happened in favor of both teams. For instance, the blatant holding and personal foul on the TD pass in the first half:

Tell that to Mike.
http://gazettebroncos.freedomblogging.com/2008/09/15/shanahan-praises-officials/

[400HZ]

Ummm, zero.



Try again.

[Florida_Bronco]

Try again.

Unless you can find the word hypothetically in that post, then you are wrong and I am correct.

[Sassy]

Tell that to Mike.
http://gazettebroncos.freedomblogging.com/2008/09/15/shanahan-praises-officials/

Did you happen to read the last two sentences of that ;D

[400HZ]

You mean if the play had been recorded as a fumble recovered by San Diego and the game ended?
I wouldn't have talked too much ****. Holding Denver to zero second half points would have potentially been a big boost for our squad, but still, we were counting on a Superbowl caliber defense this season and so far it hasn't even been close. You all saw the same problems we did.

San Diego winning the game because Cutler dropped the ball would be a hollow (although hilarious) victory. Hypothetically, a good argument could be made that the Chargers lucked into a win. I wouldn't deny it, I would just point out that Cutler committed two consecutive critical red zone turnovers and that cost Denver the game. You could say that the Chargers did nothing to earn the last TO and of course you would be right, but don't blame us for Jay's slippery hands, blame him. The loss would be on Jay Cutler's poor execution late in the game, not on a stellar performance by the Charger defense. I don't think any Charger fans would have a problem admitting that. There would still be plenty of anger directed at our defense.

The portion of the game that I would talk some smack about would be Phillip Rivers outperforming Jay Cutler in crunch time. Really, that's still true, because Jay did throw a terrible pick and then literally fumble the game away. Unfortunately he got bailed out by horrendous officiating, and the argument is worthless when you have a big fat 0'fer in the W column.

I understand that the Broncos won the game, Florida Bronco. Really.

[400HZ]

Did you happen to read the last two sentences of that ;D

And like i said, good on Jay for capitalizing on the situation.

[Florida_Bronco]

I understand that the Broncos won the game, Florida Bronco. Really.

That is not the post I quoted.

[400HZ]

Actually that INT was his 3rd or 4th read so Cutler checked down too.

Then he should have gone to his 5th read and chucked it at Carlos the peanut vendor.

[400HZ]

That is not the post I quoted.

Do you know what we're talking about?

[Florida_Bronco]

Do you know what we're talking about?

Why yes I do. Incase you missed it, I quoted a post of yours and corrected it. You then went on about how you said "hypothetically" and I showed that to be false. You then posted a different post than the one I quoted to try to make your point.

You've already boarded the fail plane, are you honestly going to aim for first class?

[Fedaykin]

Failing to march a team down the field into fieldgoal range with 28 seconds and no timeouts to work with is hardly an epic failure.

Certainly not on the level of throwing the ball into a defenders gut in the red zone and dropping the ball on the next trip down.

If not for a poorly thrown pass to a wide open Chambers on the sideline at the 30, the Chargers would have easily had the comeback. However, Rivers didn't put it where Chambers could catch it in bounds.

[400HZ]

Why yes I do.

No, obviously you don't. Let me reiterate. I am fully aware that the Broncos won the game last Sunday, Florida Bronco. I am fully aware of this. We were discussing what reactions would be if the Hochuli fumble situation had not occured. The hypothetical basis for the argument was spelled out clearly enough in Bronx33's question and in my answer that anybody with a functional brain and a 5th grade reading level could understand what we were talking about. Do you need additional clarification?

[Florida_Bronco]

No, obviously you don't. Let me reiterate. I am fully aware that the Broncos won the game last Sunday, Florida Bronco. I am fully aware of this. We were discussing what reactions would be if the Hochuli fumble situation had not occured. The hypothetical basis for the argument was spelled out clearly enough in Bronx33's question and in my answer that anybody with a functional brain and a 5th grade reading level could understand what we were talking about. Do you need additional clarification?

Well I was mistaken. You skipped right past first class and hopped in the pilots seat.

Congrats on an amazing feat.

[400HZ]

Well I was mistaken. You skipped right past first class and hopped in the pilots seat.

Congrats on an amazing feat.

Thankyou for your contribution to our discussion.

[Florida_Bronco]

Thankyou for your contribution to our discussion.

I'll just let the quotes speak for themselves.

[400HZ]

I'll just let the quotes speak for themselves.

Clever idea. Why let the obvious nature of the topic subsist when you can turn it into a pointless circle-jerk over the semantics of a topic that sailed right over your head?

[sixtimeseight]

Ladies and gentlemen, for the 3rd straight year, the Chargers have won the hypothetical Super Bowl. Let's call off the rest of this hypothetical season, because once again, the best 0-2 team to ever play the game has hypothetically won the rest of their games on the way to the hypothetical championship. This is the most dominant hypothetical performance I've seen since the best 9-7 of all time hypothetically destroyed all comers in the hypothetical playoffs of 2005.

Let's all take a moment to bask in the glow of the Chargers' (very real) trophy case filled with all their hypothetical Lombardis:
http://www.emmitt22.com/gifs/empty-case.jpg

[Florida_Bronco]

Ladies and gentlemen, for the 3rd straight year, the Chargers have won the hypothetical Super Bowl. Let's call off the rest of this hypothetical season, because once again, the best 0-2 team to ever play the game has hypothetically won the rest of their games on the way to the hypothetical championship. This is the most dominant hypothetical performance I've seen since the best 9-7 of all time hypothetically destroyed all comers in the hypothetical playoffs of 2005.

Let's all take a moment to bask in the glow of the Chargers' (very real) trophy case filled with all their hypothetical Lombardis:
http://www.emmitt22.com/gifs/empty-case.jpg

:rofl: :wiggle: :notworthy :thumbsup: !Booya!

[400HZ]

:rofl: :wiggle: :notworthy :thumbsup: !Booya!

At least your friend there can think and provide some wit. That makes one of you.

[Florida_Bronco]

At least your friend there can think and provide some wit. That makes one of you.

If your posts are the measure of wit, then I'll take that as a compliment.

[400HZ]

If your posts are the measure of wit, then I'll take that as a compliment.

Well bumbling into a conversation featuring a simple concept that you somehow fail to process sure isn't what I would call wit.

[Florida_Bronco]

At worst, I can quote the correct posts, which is more than you can say.

[400HZ]

At worst, I can quote the correct posts, which is more than you can say.

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/43.gif

[NW Bolt Fan]

SD fans, tell me how my ass tastes?

-ShaqI thought your name was Ed.

[crazyhorse]

During the NFL network segment on NFL officiating broadcast every wednesday night, Mike P. the head of officiating never intimated the call would be upheld. When Spiro said the call was obviously wrong Mike never challenged him on it. He olny said that he was upset the way things happened for the Chargers. Unfortunately, Aiello is not the head of officiating and his opinion isn't the last word on right or wrong calls.

Though Mike P. never directly said the call would be overturned, he didn't challenge Spiros assertion that it was obviously the wrong call. His body language would indicate he agreed with Spiro and was sorry for the breakdown of his officials and equipment in that game.

I think you would be hard pressed to find many outside the Bronco fan community to agree that Chambers wasn't down by contact with possession.

Fact is however, the play stands as it is and no amount of belly aching is going to change that. But the arguement that Bailey actually made the play called on the field is a reach of epic proportions.

I mean......come on.

As an AFC West rival, if the refs could have screwed both teams, I would have been happier with it. But I am willing to settle for the Chargers getting screwed. Although had the Chargers won the game like they should have, the race in the West would be more interesting.

[CasinoRoyal]

Fact is the shyt is over with and you all are still arguing about it.

Call is what the call was and well...It hasnt changed.

[Inkana7]

Man, 400 is looking pathetic in this thread.

[TheManeMan]

I thought your name was Ed.

Well in that case...how about if I signed it...

Mike, or Jay, or Brandon, or Eddie?? cuz you guys all should know how their asses taste...

[boltaneer]

*yawn*