Author Topic: Patriots 2017 season  (Read 23132 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #495 on: January 23, 2018, 12:21:24 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #496 on: January 23, 2018, 12:23:23 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Pats going "white" for Super Bowl even though they are technically the home team and could've worn blue.

Kinda makes sense from a superstition standpoint.  Pats have won their past two Super Bowls wearing white.
Apparently the 11 of the last 13 SB winners wore the white uniform, too.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #497 on: January 23, 2018, 12:24:00 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5896
  • Tommy Points: 17
Pats going "white" for Super Bowl even though they are technically the home team and could've worn blue.

Kinda makes sense from a superstition standpoint.  Pats have won their past two Super Bowls wearing white.

Yes, makes sense from a superstition standpoint, but they're my least-favorite Pats uniform.

Pats going "white" for Super Bowl even though they are technically the home team and could've worn blue.

Kinda makes sense from a superstition standpoint.  Pats have won their past two Super Bowls wearing white.
I wish they'd wear the old 1986 uniforms

I like these a lot, but I don't know if any team will ever wear an alternate or throwback uni in the Super Bowl (or in any playoff game). I really like the blue alternates they had this year—I think they were part of the "color rush" series of NFL uniforms.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #498 on: January 23, 2018, 12:24:33 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5896
  • Tommy Points: 17
Pats going "white" for Super Bowl even though they are technically the home team and could've worn blue.

Kinda makes sense from a superstition standpoint.  Pats have won their past two Super Bowls wearing white.
Apparently the 11 of the last 13 SB winners wore the white uniform, too.

Not trying to nitpick, but according to ESPN it's 12 of the last 13 winners.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #499 on: January 23, 2018, 12:27:18 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Kevin McHale
  • ************************
  • Posts: 24087
  • Tommy Points: 1060
  • What a Pub Should Be

Pats going "white" for Super Bowl even though they are technically the home team and could've worn blue.

Kinda makes sense from a superstition standpoint.  Pats have won their past two Super Bowls wearing white.
I wish they'd wear the old 1986 uniforms

I like these a lot, but I don't know if any team will ever wear an alternate or throwback uni in the Super Bowl (or in any playoff game). I really like the blue alternates they had this year—I think they were part of the "color rush" series of NFL uniforms.

I like the Pat the Patriot throwbacks too but the one time they wore those in the Super Bowl (when they weren't throwbacks), they got absolutely destroyed by the Bears.  Also, every Super Bowl the Patriots have won have been with the new logo & these unis which have been around since 2000.

49ers in Super Bowl XXIX are the only team I can recall that have worn throwbacks in the Super Bowl and that was during the 75th anniversary season when teams were wearing throwbacks left & right.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #500 on: January 23, 2018, 12:40:04 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Not a fan of the redcoat uniforms (and yes, I know that was the original color). I think the navy ones look a lot nicer. But then again, I also like the Flying Elvis logo, so what do I know...

On a related note... the 49ers have throwbacks?! They've quite literally have the same uniform throughout their entire history, except they couldn't make up their mind about whether they want white or gold pants.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #501 on: January 23, 2018, 01:28:11 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5896
  • Tommy Points: 17
Not a fan of the redcoat uniforms (and yes, I know that was the original color). I think the navy ones look a lot nicer. But then again, I also like the Flying Elvis logo, so what do I know...

On a related note... the 49ers have throwbacks?! They've quite literally have the same uniform throughout their entire history, except they couldn't make up their mind about whether they want white or gold pants.

One change I seem to remember them making was adding dropshadows to their numbers at some point.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #502 on: January 23, 2018, 02:07:04 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Not a fan of the redcoat uniforms (and yes, I know that was the original color). I think the navy ones look a lot nicer. But then again, I also like the Flying Elvis logo, so what do I know...

On a related note... the 49ers have throwbacks?! They've quite literally have the same uniform throughout their entire history, except they couldn't make up their mind about whether they want white or gold pants.

One change I seem to remember them making was adding dropshadows to their numbers at some point.
Yes, there seems to have been that one time when they switched from horizontal stripes on their sleeves to vertical stripes on their shoulder pads for a short while... but all in all, it all looks pretty similar.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #503 on: January 23, 2018, 02:07:46 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5608
  • Tommy Points: 22
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
The ball moving is not out of possession if possession was already established. Every player that gets tackled has the ball move on them. His knee hit and he turns all the way onto his back and slides  and the oppossing player rips it out when on the ground. If the oppossing player doesnt swipe at it there that ball isnt coming out thats more than enough to establish he has control. It's clear cut unless there is angle that showshis hand completely off.
Mock "trade deadline" team: Blazers.
PG-Lillard, Napier, Baldwin
SG-McCollum, Connaughton, Wilcox
SF-Fournier, Harkless, Layman
PF-Aminu, Davis
C- Nurkic, Leonard, Collins

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #504 on: January 23, 2018, 02:29:07 PM »

Offline sdceltsfan

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 345
  • Tommy Points: 45
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
The ball moving is not out of possession if possession was already established. Every player that gets tackled has the ball move on them. His knee hit and he turns all the way onto his back and slides  and the oppossing player rips it out when on the ground. If the oppossing player doesnt swipe at it there that ball isnt coming out thats more than enough to establish he has control. It's clear cut unless there is angle that showshis hand completely off.

How is it being argued that this wasn't a fumble? Lewis had possession, lost it on the way to the ground. At that point he no longer has the rule of "the ground not being allowed to cause a fumble" on his side. So when he hits the ground for that split second where it looks like he has the ball before Jack rips it and turns, there is no "down by contact" in Lewis favor. It is a simple scrum, complicated by one moment of slow motion, where Lewis is freeze framed with the ball on his hip, laying on the ground.

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #505 on: January 23, 2018, 02:56:02 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3992
  • Tommy Points: 725
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
The ball moving is not out of possession if possession was already established. Every player that gets tackled has the ball move on them. His knee hit and he turns all the way onto his back and slides  and the oppossing player rips it out when on the ground. If the oppossing player doesnt swipe at it there that ball isnt coming out thats more than enough to establish he has control. It's clear cut unless there is angle that showshis hand completely off.

I've seen everything from "shouldn't have been a fumble" to "Should have been a Jags TD." Despite being a Pats fan, I think this is one that they got right, after learning more about it.

First:
Quote
Recovering a fumble is similar to completing the process of a catch, and when the ball came out, Lewis never regained total control prior to the ball being taken by the defender. This is a good “stands” call in replay.

But also:
Quote
Looking back to the fumble recovery by the Jaguars early in the 4th quarter, there is a question as to whether Myles Jack is down by contact.

Whenever a ball is stripped from a player in possession on the ground, it is down by contact and no fumble. In this case, the ball was not in possession but taken from an opponent’s hands, so this is deemed as “contact” by the Patriots as Jack begins to take control.

Is it possible that there was no hand-to-hand contact? Yes, but there is no way that can be perceived, so the officials are instructed to treat this as down by contact.

The contact, by the way, only has to occur when a player is beginning to secure the ball. It is held until the player finishes establishing control, and is dead at that point.

This was correctly ruled as down by contact on the recovery.

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #506 on: January 23, 2018, 03:35:30 PM »

Offline green_bballers13

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2202
  • Tommy Points: 268
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
The ball moving is not out of possession if possession was already established. Every player that gets tackled has the ball move on them. His knee hit and he turns all the way onto his back and slides  and the oppossing player rips it out when on the ground. If the oppossing player doesnt swipe at it there that ball isnt coming out thats more than enough to establish he has control. It's clear cut unless there is angle that showshis hand completely off.

Huge Pats fan. Massive. I would get rid of my house, wife, and dog today if thats what it would take to get Brady to play for another 5 years.

That was a fumble. It wasn't close. He lost the ball before any part of his body (besides his feet) hit the ground. The Pats got lucky that the ref blew the whistle b/c it could have been a TD the other way.

Now, Brady prob would have pulled another rabbit out of his arse, but that would have been a terrible turn of events.

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #507 on: January 23, 2018, 04:24:13 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5896
  • Tommy Points: 17
Something about this play that I haven't seen addressed anywhere: Lewis had three blockers in front of him, so why was he shifting toward the outside of the right-most blocker, instead of staying basically centered behind the three of them? The fumble might not even happen if he'd done that.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #508 on: January 23, 2018, 04:30:53 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33141
  • Tommy Points: 5416
Something about this play that I haven't seen addressed anywhere: Lewis had three blockers in front of him, so why was he shifting toward the outside of the right-most blocker, instead of staying basically centered behind the three of them? The fumble might not even happen if he'd done that.
I said the same thing when watching. Wondered why he didn't speed up and head down the sideline where blockers had it sealed. He instead slowed down and ran more towards the center of the field(not completely just more right than left towards the sidelines behind the bevy of blockers).

Re: Patriots 2017 season
« Reply #509 on: January 23, 2018, 04:37:37 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5608
  • Tommy Points: 22
I don't even know how the Jags were even awarded the fumble to begin with. The guy never took his hand off the ball, his knee hit he then turned over onto his back then the guy ripped it out.

By the book he already had possession so to technically to lose possession it must full come out of his grasp which it didn't.
When the ball started getting dislodged, that's when the fumble began. So he was deemed to have had no control when his knee hit the ground. Therefore it's a loose ball and the Jags came up with it. Having one hand on the ball is not always enough.
The ball moving is not out of possession if possession was already established. Every player that gets tackled has the ball move on them. His knee hit and he turns all the way onto his back and slides  and the oppossing player rips it out when on the ground. If the oppossing player doesnt swipe at it there that ball isnt coming out thats more than enough to establish he has control. It's clear cut unless there is angle that showshis hand completely off.

Huge Pats fan. Massive. I would get rid of my house, wife, and dog today if thats what it would take to get Brady to play for another 5 years.

That was a fumble. It wasn't close. He lost the ball before any part of his body (besides his feet) hit the ground. The Pats got lucky that the ref blew the whistle b/c it could have been a TD the other way.

Now, Brady prob would have pulled another rabbit out of his arse, but that would have been a terrible turn of events.

With the first quote it doesn't address the fact he didn't lose the ball till on the ground. Ball moving doesn't matter. We have seen it how many replays on would be fumbles? It has to be out of his hands before he hits the ground.
Mock "trade deadline" team: Blazers.
PG-Lillard, Napier, Baldwin
SG-McCollum, Connaughton, Wilcox
SF-Fournier, Harkless, Layman
PF-Aminu, Davis
C- Nurkic, Leonard, Collins