Be good to see Garoppolo become the next great 49ers Qb. It is a franchise with a rich history of great Qbs from Albert, Tittle, Brodie, Deberg, Montana, and Young. Grew up watching Brodie and we all know where Montana stands on the list of All-time greats. Will be fun to see Garoppolo start slinging the ball downfield like those guys did. -- Al
Nfl season 2017-2018 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter zblang
- Start date
Warrior
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Messages
- 15,195
Yeah pretty sure they actually have to sign him first as he's on the last year of his rookie deal.............and the price goes up with each win.
jazzeum
Four Star General
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2005
- Messages
- 38,386
Jason,
They look like a different team with him at the helm. It just goes to show you the importance of a good QB. Happy for you and all Niner fans.
Brad
Panzer ace
Lieutenant Colonel
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,985
If they can't sign him to a long term deal they will use the franchise tag on him. On the plus side, as of today the Niners have the most cap space of any team going into the 2018 season.
jazzeum
Four Star General
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2005
- Messages
- 38,386
Cashing in on sex abuse, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/...lights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront
He should have to give a portion of his proceeds to his victims.
zblang
1st Lieutenant
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2013
- Messages
- 4,479
I can’t say I disagree on the face, but it’s the value of the team. To me cashing in on a crime is akin to a murderer writing a book about the crime and selling it. This is something that was owned. It didn’t gain value based on his crimes.
But, yes, that aside, it would be nice for the victims if they were compensated. I’m not holding my breath for a voluntary compensation however
But, yes, that aside, it would be nice for the victims if they were compensated. I’m not holding my breath for a voluntary compensation however
tdubel
Major
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2007
- Messages
- 6,583
Ok, I have not commented yet on the "Catch Rule" that was overturned against the Steelers. I wanted to wait to see and listen to the analysis and this is taking nothing away from the Pats as it was a great game, but I have to tell you, that rule is terrible, it is completely open to interpretation and I agree with ESPN that turning and trying to reach over the goal line is a football move and the rule needs to be clarified as same. He broke the end zone line clearly before being touched, his knee was down and he fell over, in the NFL, touchdown. I am not even sure how they could overturn the call on the field as according to the analysts, even the replay was not 100% conclusive as to timing and if he made a football move, etc. Sounds like a lot of malarkey to me.
AND this is not sour grapes, it is what it is, its a great game. If we would have made the second interception which was clearly in Sean Davis's hands, we would have won regardless. The season moves on and a lot of football left, maybe it will remotivate the Steelers in a positive way.
What I find a shame about plays like this, is it became more of the conversation rather than the fact that it was a great game. The NFL needs to get rid of some of these blatantly bad rules so that they do not affect the outcome of the game. It hurts both teams and the game.
TD
AND this is not sour grapes, it is what it is, its a great game. If we would have made the second interception which was clearly in Sean Davis's hands, we would have won regardless. The season moves on and a lot of football left, maybe it will remotivate the Steelers in a positive way.
What I find a shame about plays like this, is it became more of the conversation rather than the fact that it was a great game. The NFL needs to get rid of some of these blatantly bad rules so that they do not affect the outcome of the game. It hurts both teams and the game.
TD
Warrior
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Messages
- 15,195
Understood you're frustrated, but you've got this all wrong.
Breaking the end zone plain (or is it plane?) has nothing to do with it.
Making a football move has nothing to do with it.
His knee being down before being touched has nothing to do with it.
Forget the fact that it was a touchdown and think catch ONLY.
As a receiver, you have to complete the catch, ie, SURVIVE THE GROUND.
He clearly lost control of the ball as he hit the ground, ie, he did not SURVIVE THE GROUND, therefore it's an incomplete pass.
I heard Steelers fans screaming the ball should have been placed at the one where his knee went down then; no, not so, it was ruled incomplete.
There is no gray area here, it's black and white, he did not fully control the ball as he hit the ground.
Same as Dez Bryant did in the Green Bay game.
Same as Calvin Johnson did in the end zone when the ball hit the ground and came out.
Again, it's the rule and it eliminates the gray area.
tdubel
Major
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2007
- Messages
- 6,583
George, will respectfully disagree with you. My opinion and apparently now a lot of others, they were all catches. Additionally, my money and I am willing to bet this - that rule will finally be clarified, fixed, whatever you want to call it in the offseason. It is a terrible call. Again, not worth arguing, it is written and done, which is why I waited to even post it. End of day, like I said, I hope it motivates the Steelers to finish this season strong and give it a whirl in the playoffs.
TD
Warrior
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Messages
- 15,195
If they change the rule that losing control of the ball as you land is irrelevant and it's still a catch, then you're going to have a lot of fumbles that are recovered by the other team, then the *****ing will be "If they didn't change the rule, that would have been an incomplete pass, now we lost the ball, this sucks!!".................as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for.
If they didn't change it after the Dez Bryant fiasco that cost the Cowboys a playoff win, I can't see them changing it now.
But then again, like the tuck rule, since this benefited the Patriots, I'm sure it will be changed............:wink2:
mikemiller1955
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 17,490
George...Tom...
I'm confused too...
I always thought once the ball cross the goal line...
BAM!!!
automatic TD...
regardless if dropped or not afterwards...
regardless if slapped out of your hand afterwards...
regardless if you fumbled afterwards...
once the ball crosses the goal line...
it's a TD...
not talking about a catch in the end zone that didn't survive the ground...
but a rushing TD...
I'm confused too...
I always thought once the ball cross the goal line...
BAM!!!
automatic TD...
regardless if dropped or not afterwards...
regardless if slapped out of your hand afterwards...
regardless if you fumbled afterwards...
once the ball crosses the goal line...
it's a TD...
not talking about a catch in the end zone that didn't survive the ground...
but a rushing TD...
tdubel
Major
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2007
- Messages
- 6,583
That is my point, he squeezed the ball clearly, turned and reached for the end zone, crossed into it. What they are saying according to the long diatribe I read at ESPN which was the NFL transcript is that they determined that he had to go to the ground because he didn't make a football move and therefore "The Catch" rule applied. Whereas a runner, is making a football move by running into the end zone and then if he fumbles, so be it, still a TD, there is no "Possession" rule to apply.
Like I said, its over and done with, but there is a lot of chatter already on the Competition Committee and the owners that they want it reviewed especially with regards to scoring plays, so I think it will be changed in some manner.
Take this for what its worth, but the other "complaint' is that the review took an inordinate amount of time, they reversed the call on the field, was their overwhelming evidence? I don't know, again that is a judgment call. I took it as this - if they are saying he made no football move, then they applied the Catch rule correctly as it is written. I just think its a horsecrap rule and their interpretation was horsecrap. BUT as I said before, if the Steelers would have taken care of business and intercepted the ball, this doesn't occur or if we would have not thrown a screwball interception with 3 secs to go, we would have had a FG try OR if the Ref would have dropped a flag for defensive holding on that play in the endzone, we would have had a shot. End of day, none of that occurred and those are the breaks.
If the Steelers sufficiently recover and get motivated here, it sure gives them some momentum to finish with along with the return of Brown and Haden. IF all of this occurs, I like our chances to be in the hunt for the SB.
And yes George - the Patriots are part of the controversy certainly not by choice, that was my point earlier, all of this crap takes away from what was a truly terrific football game, it is a shame anyone had to lose and I would say that if we won.
TD
Panzer ace
Lieutenant Colonel
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,985
I think it works like this:
If a rule benefits your team in a particular game then it is perfect as is and there is no need to change it. If the rule hurts your team in a particular game then the rule needs to be changed/overhauled.
If a rule benefits your team in a particular game then it is perfect as is and there is no need to change it. If the rule hurts your team in a particular game then the rule needs to be changed/overhauled.
jazzeum
Four Star General
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2005
- Messages
- 38,386
It’s called being a fan!
tdubel
Major
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2007
- Messages
- 6,583
TRUE THAT! Main reason I waited a few days to post. I truly believe it should be clarified for the benefit of the league as a whole. It is too controversial to begin with and I will be the first to say I don't know what the right answer is. What I forgot to post is that earlier this year I think in a Steelers game, Xavier Grimble had a similar situation where he scored, then lost the ball on a catch - play reviewed but stood as a TD b/c they determined he made a football move. My big problem with any rule like this is the consistent interpretation issue.
Back to regularly scheduled programming - week 15 there are some interesting games and playoff implications, should be a fun finish!
TD
mikemiller1955
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 17,490
I'm not referring to that play specifically (Pitt/NE)...just in general...there were 3 instances of TD's reversed this week over this...and at least 1 last week...somebody has to come up with something that makes sense and stick to it...the fans get mad when the rules are interpreted ambiguously...everybody wants a fair consistent ruling and a fair game...unless you cheat at solitaire...
Warrior
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Messages
- 15,195
Mike,
Most importantly, did the line stay at Patriots -2.5 as if so, you won 27-26.5 then, right?
That's all that matters..............:wink2: