NFL 2012 Discussion Thread

The only thing I would say is the criticism shouldnt be aimed at the refs themselves.

These guys are doing their best, and they are being exposed at a level where the intensity and exposure is just way over what they are trained or equipped to do.

Its now at the stage that these men are being humiliated, the game is being reduced to a laughing stock, and I genuinely dont know if I want there to be a Week 4

_

And the Green Bay decision was absolutely awful. But I was more upset with the helmet to helmet hit on the Raiders WR that left him dazed and badly hurt. Not even a flag.

I am not saying that the hit happened because of a replacement ref (although all the players are getting angrier and more frustrated)

But I am saying if a foul that blatant and that violent does not even get a flag, dont fucking sit there in your office and preach about player safety, Goodell. Your actions have PROVED that you absolutely DO NOT GIVE A FUCK.

If Goodell had an ounce of shame he would resign now and create a path of reconciliation, but he wont.

He doesnt give a shit about fans.

He doesnt give a shit about the integrity or history of the game.

He doesnt give a shit about fairness

He doesnt give a shit about creating situations where players arent being protected and serious injuries are more likely.

All he cares about is money, money, money.

He is scum, and he deserves to be horsewhipped out of office.

_

I'm sorry if that comes across as angry, but one of the greatest sports in the world is being made a laughing stock, and all this smarmy cunt can do is talk down to fans and players with absolute contempt.

 

Yes, a frame that occurs after the play has ended. Whoever rolls away with the ball is totally irrelevant to who was in possession when the ball was downed.

//edit: A better view Borla

 

In no way is this the only frame that matters. Other views plainly show that when Jennings touches the ground, he is clutching the ball to his chest, with one of Tate's hands under Jennings' arm, on the ball. As they continue, to the ground, Tate rolls over towards Jennings, bringing his other hand onto the ball. Jennings was plainly on the ground, still clutching the ball BEFORE Tate gets a second hand on the ball. At that point, Jennings has established possession by rule, and it requires Tate to wrest it from him before the whistle. Simply continuing to hold the ball while Jennings does does not make it a simultaneous catch.

As for respecting the referees' judgement from the instant replay, take a look at where they place the ball on the 1-and-a-quarter yard line on the Packer's previous scoring drive. While not a TD, it was plainly a first down, inside the one-yard line when the receiver stepped out of bounds. That the Packer's went on to score is in spite of, not because of, the refereeing.

 

hahahaha omg

hahahahaha

trying to prove it was a legit TD catch by the last pic posted by the goodell fanboi... omg...that's almost as funny as being a lingerie bowl reject. I guess by Tate having his arm on the arm of Jennings...well that CLEARLY means it's possession! TD! Wait..touchback..no...touchdown!

Oh wait, we can review it...but we won't. Oh yeah... also! we know Tate was beating the shit out of the defenders but we're going to pretend he didn't because we wouldn't want to fuck up yet another pass interference call, even though we would be spot-on in this case.

Oh by the way, we know we're a billion dollar industry and all that, but we're going to support this ref decision because well, we would hate to admit to being wrong about anything.

Oh...and we're also going to continue to fuck over our biggest commodity. Our fans.


........................


I'm gonna go puke now. Actually sticking up for the packers makes me sick, but jesus...that call makes me want to puke worse.

 

Possession isn't a game of one hand vs. two. The ball is also being clutched to Tate's torso. In no way does Jennings have 100% control of that ball as they come to ground.

 

Who is to say they haven't? Could the refs throw a game?

Nah.

Well maybe.

The NFL needs to remove even the suspicion of this occurring.

 

Everyone keeps saying that the only way to change this is by boycotting - as in stop watching. I don't think there's any real way to stop this mess unless Goodell and his cronies pony up the cash to the "real" refs. They need to understand that people aren't watching for the competitive nature of the game now, they're watching to see the circus act they put in place. People (including players) are frustrated by this whole ordeal but the way the league is handling it suggests that they really don't care about what they've built over several decades. They've long spouted this ideal that the NFL has cultured a game of pure competitiveness and by them insulting the intelligence of its fans, players and coaches, perhaps they really only care about saving a few bucks. So are people going to stop watching? No. Will the players strike? Absolutely not (since there is no mechanism in place with the exception of the union being in jeopardy) but they are becoming more vocal despite the threat of fines which speaks volumes - or it should speak volumes.

The league isn't going to come out and apologize and say "OOPSIE! MAH BAD!" under any circumstance. So we're going to be stuck with bad calls, unfair outcomes and general resentment until this mess is fixed and an agreement is struck. The league will do anything to stretch its own rules in order to save face even if it insults our collective intelligence.

ESPN claims that anywhere from $150-$250 million in bets were shifted just from this one game alone, so Vegas has stepped in to a degree, but all this will accomplish is a shift in the odds so the house can retain money and not lose so much due to bad calls and poor judgement. Do I think some of these refs are likely to throw or alter a call in order to make cash? Absofuckinglutely. They're HS refs and/or lingerie league rejects. They really don't have much to lose in this situation because none of them have been good enough for the league to consider hiring them on a more permanent basis and after this is over, they'll never officiate college or professional games again.

 

Too bad the NHL is locked out...could be a good tag line for them..."The NHL. Where the officiating is better than football."

 

I dont have a problem with Bilicheat being fined on any occasion really.

 

Not much of a shock with Bill's fine.

I hope the "real" refs understand that when they DO come back, they'll be scrutinized more than ever just for the simple fact that people saw how bad it could get. Maybe this is a good thing...

 

There were definitely cheers, and the little bit of the game I watched seemed to have an air of firmer control than with the replacement refs (probably just my imagination). I'm still disappointed in a league that would use admittedly sub-standard officiating, publicly admit that it adversely affected the outcome of at least one game (at least several in my opinion), yet say they would allow the records to stand. If I were a shareholder in the Packers, I'd be looking at possible legal action. Given the very small number of games played, a swing of one game from loss to win could have a major impact on the standings, and the team's success that year, and hence my investment.

 

Imagine if they miss the playoffs by one loss.

 

That's one of the major issues. The play-offs are BIG money to a team, and since the Packers are publicly owned (I believe), it could have a major impact on my stock price.