The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-18-2012, 05:38 PM   #1226
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 23,125

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Princes of Tara
Default

How did the game become 30-23? Last I saw it was 24 to 16. Looks like we left a lot of points on the field. Who got stupid?
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:40 PM   #1227
DarkHorse
RPM Racer
 
DarkHorse's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 4,750

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kenny McKinley
Default

Rahim Moore is starting to really pick his game up!
DarkHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:42 PM   #1228
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHorse View Post
Rahim Moore is starting to really pick his game up!
He's been pretty damn good all season long actually...
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:42 PM   #1229
Bronco X
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vine View Post
This discussion no longer has to do with the Broncos, it has to do with judging football rules and the interpretation of rules. If you don't like the discussion, you don't have to participate.
Okay...

RB depth is the biggest issue facing this team.
Bronco X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:43 PM   #1230
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
How did the game become 30-23? Last I saw it was 24 to 16. Looks like we left a lot of points on the field. Who got stupid?
Turnover issues and a lot of field goals. That sums it up for the most part.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:45 PM   #1231
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 24champ View Post
I should have clarified, when was the last time the Broncos swept the division? 1998-99?
Yes I believe that would be the year. I'm pretty sure we dropped at least one division game in 2005.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:49 PM   #1232
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,993

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 24champ View Post
When was the last time that was done?
I'm guessing you'd have to go back to Jake the Snake and Mike Anderson on that one.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:54 PM   #1233
baja
Pat Bowlen
 
baja's Avatar
 
The best owner ever

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 58,897

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Cito's Sissys
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Action View Post
You guys can't be this....

Oh wait, I'm on the omane.

Let me also add that he got two feet down and his KNEE was down before the ball came out, so the play is dead regardless.

Anyone questioning that play is just blind.

The end.
The SD bench & coaching staff thought it was going to be overturned so there is that.
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:01 PM   #1234
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
I'm guessing you'd have to go back to Jake the Snake and Mike Anderson on that one.
Looked it up and that team dropped one in the division. Which means the '98-'99 season has to be the last time it happened. Honestly, I'm not sure it ever happened in any other season before that either, as they had to play eight division games back then.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:02 PM   #1235
That One Guy
Producer of Nonsense
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sun and Beachville
Posts: 14,066

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

I was trying to find the NFL statement and can't recall the exact player that the NFL responded to but did find this from an earlier article:

The rule comes from the effort to rectify the Bert Emanuel play from the 1999 NFC title game, when the catch was made, a portion of the ball struck the ground, but Emanuel never lost possession of it. Now, the ball may hit the ground as long as it doesn’t move — and as long as whenever a player going to the ground while catching the ball maintains possession through the act of going to the ground.
That’s what apparently happened with Tamme on Sunday night. He caught the ball near the end zone, and while crossing the plane also was falling and when he landed the ball squirted out.
The replay official — who is not a replacement employee — failed to buzz the referee for a closer look. If a closer look had been taken, a tough decision may have arisen.
Yes, the player crossed into the end zone while falling down. And, yes, he performed the so-called “second act” of lunging the ball forward, even though he already was in the end zone when he did.
Still, Tamme was going to the ground and he failed to maintain possession once he hit the ground. Despite multiple discussions and examples and analyses over the years, the rule continues to require possession through the act of going to the ground, with no example for breaking the plane of the end zone while falling or otherwise performing a second act. If you’re going to the ground, you’re required (per the rule book) to maintain possession after hitting the ground. Tamme didn’t.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ck-into-focus/

PFT has stayed on this back and forth all along but there's one example showing that the second act and endzone is not supposed to overrule the current catch rules.
That One Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:08 PM   #1236
DenverBroncosJM
Post here Vine
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Action View Post
There's no where that needs to be said, because once the ball crosses the goal line with possession the play is dead.

If they needed to specify it, they'd specify it under a special circumstance when the ball crosses the goal line...but there is NOT...

Ball crosses goal line with possession = play over.
Can we go back to July before this **** head was on the boards?
DenverBroncosJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:12 PM   #1237
Vine
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
I was trying to find the NFL statement and can't recall the exact player that the NFL responded to but did find this from an earlier article:

The rule comes from the effort to rectify the Bert Emanuel play from the 1999 NFC title game, when the catch was made, a portion of the ball struck the ground, but Emanuel never lost possession of it. Now, the ball may hit the ground as long as it doesn’t move — and as long as whenever a player going to the ground while catching the ball maintains possession through the act of going to the ground.
That’s what apparently happened with Tamme on Sunday night. He caught the ball near the end zone, and while crossing the plane also was falling and when he landed the ball squirted out.
The replay official — who is not a replacement employee — failed to buzz the referee for a closer look. If a closer look had been taken, a tough decision may have arisen.
Yes, the player crossed into the end zone while falling down. And, yes, he performed the so-called “second act” of lunging the ball forward, even though he already was in the end zone when he did.
Still, Tamme was going to the ground and he failed to maintain possession once he hit the ground. Despite multiple discussions and examples and analyses over the years, the rule continues to require possession through the act of going to the ground, with no example for breaking the plane of the end zone while falling or otherwise performing a second act. If you’re going to the ground, you’re required (per the rule book) to maintain possession after hitting the ground. Tamme didn’t.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ck-into-focus/

PFT has stayed on this back and forth all along but there's one example showing that the second act and endzone is not supposed to overrule the current catch rules.
Tamme play video

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthr...108799&page=50


From fan who loves pure competition and has a desire to see fair NFL rules applying to all situations, I think the Tamme touchdown should stand, I think the Chargers touchdown should have stood, and I think the Calvin Johnson play from a few years ago should have been ruled a touchdown.

Why can't the NFL make things simple, and state the rule that if a player controls the ball and gets two feet down, then it's a catch, regardless of whether he is in the endzone or not, and whatever else happens after two feet down are established with control of the ball?
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:13 PM   #1238
SonOfLe-loLang
Young Buck
 
SonOfLe-loLang's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 19,192

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Thunder (RIP)
Default

Guys, who gives a ****. We're arguing about this like it made a lick of difference
SonOfLe-loLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:14 PM   #1239
Vine
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBroncosJM View Post
Can we go back to July before this **** head was on the boards?
This coming from a waterboy?
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:15 PM   #1240
Vine
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
Guys, who gives a ****. We're arguing about this like it made a lick of difference
You are naive to think that such a situation will never arise in future games in the NFL.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:16 PM   #1241
That One Guy
Producer of Nonsense
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sun and Beachville
Posts: 14,066

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
Guys, who gives a ****. We're arguing about this like it made a lick of difference
It's top 2 (along with defenders being fined when offensive players drop their heads) in terms of obscure or vague rules which the NFL insists on enforcing despite the clear defiance of common sense. It's a huge drag on enjoyment of football at this point.
That One Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:16 PM   #1242
DenverBroncosJM
Post here Vine
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vine View Post
This coming from a waterboy?
Yup from 2006!
DenverBroncosJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:18 PM   #1243
SonOfLe-loLang
Young Buck
 
SonOfLe-loLang's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 19,192

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Thunder (RIP)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
It's top 2 (along with defenders being fined when offensive players drop their heads) in terms of obscure or vague rules which the NFL insists on enforcing despite the clear defiance of common sense. It's a huge drag on enjoyment of football at this point.
Yes, and this argument is so ****ing enjoyable
SonOfLe-loLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:21 PM   #1244
That One Guy
Producer of Nonsense
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sun and Beachville
Posts: 14,066

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
Yes, and this argument is so ****ing enjoyable
If it weren't for one guy being a condescending dick and swearing he knows the rules above all else, the conversation would've already died as just about everyone else agreed there's too much obscurity in the rules.

I mean, feel free to present a black/white explanation that would define whether or not that was a catch and end this discussion. We'd all appreciate it - sincerely.
That One Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:21 PM   #1245
Vine
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
Yes, and this argument is so ****ing enjoyable
There are 12 other active threads with messages being posted in all of them in the last 20 minutes, but yet, you come into this thread complaining about the topic of discussion? Why don't you discuss items in other threads or, even start your own thread on anything you want to be discussed?
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:25 PM   #1246
DenverBroncosJM
Post here Vine
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vine View Post
There are 12 other active threads with messages being posted in all of them in the last 20 minutes, but yet, you come into this thread complaining about the topic of discussion? Why don't you discuss items in other threads or, even start your own thread on anything you want to be discussed?
Good post ring of famer Vine!
DenverBroncosJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:27 PM   #1247
That One Guy
Producer of Nonsense
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sun and Beachville
Posts: 14,066

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBroncosJM View Post
Good post ring of famer Vine!
You're starting to embarrass yourself.
That One Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:35 PM   #1248
Drunken.Broncoholic
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

I see this has been a lively discussion. Pretty sure that's what message boards are for.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:36 PM   #1249
errand
Ring of Famer
 
errand's Avatar
 
Forgot more than you'll ever know

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Western NC mountains
Posts: 17,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Wilson View Post
How many dropped passes does this p***Y have all year? Seriously, get Manning someone that can ****ing catch the football, and a runningback that doesn't ****ing fumble. Unbelieveable.
so pray tell, where are you going to find a RB that never fumbles or a WR that never drops a pass? Un ****ing believable
errand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 06:43 PM   #1250
errand
Ring of Famer
 
errand's Avatar
 
Forgot more than you'll ever know

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Western NC mountains
Posts: 17,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maher_tyler View Post
When was the last time we saw the D and STs play this well?
Last week....
errand is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Denver Broncos