Let me introduce you to the real Chris Simms

[Dirty Sanchez]

He was the best QB in that game. Brunell had a brutal game!

[Front Row]

I had no preference in who won the game, am not a Simms fan, and not trying to start an argument, but did anyone else think the Bucs might have gotten jobbed on that call? Looked to me like the receiver went up with 2 hands, caught the ball, brought it down to his chest, and got 2 feet down(and then a knee) before his elbow hit and he lost the ball. If the ball was moving, it looked like the result of him trying to secure it before hitting the ground. I understand the rule, and obviously the officials(as well as the 3 twits that were broadcasting the game, emphatically) felt he didnt make the catch. I guess I am of the opinion that if the rule is going to say the player must maintain control of the ball even after he crashes to the ground, they have to allow them a little leeway to adjust the ball a little bit so they can hang on to it when they hit the ground. I also feel that if they are going to award a TD to a guy who goes up, snatches the ball, barely drags his toes in the endzone before he and the ball go flying out of bounds, then they should award one on a play like the one in the game today. As soon as he came down with 2 feet, it should have been a TD, IMO, and the ball coming loose didnt matter cause it was after the fact.

 

This is an example of one of the the things I find frustrating about the way the games are officiated. Seems like on some plays, the perception of control/possesion/etc is loose and a TD is awarded. On others, it seems they get overly nitpicky and take a catch away when maybe it should stand. Thoughts?

 

The Bucs got robbed there! That was a TD all day,I couldn't believe they let the call stand either. Me thinks that Vegas pager went off & "helped" the ref's make that call. Simms was not up to the task yesterday though, his passes were off the mark all day. Grudens play action call on fourth and 1 was pretty dumb also, sheesh give it to Alstott, or sneak a yd; 1 fricken yd. to keep the drive goin.

[Ramhock]

You mean the pass that Paul MaGuire called "The Best Pass In The History Of The NFL"    It was a perfect pass, but Maguire and Theisman's comments make me laugh.

 

1253364[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Theisman said the key to Gregg Williams success as a DC, is that he has a good understanding of what the offense will attempt.

[skylive5]

Guy never had complete possession of the ball. You could see it moving. When he placed his hand over the top of it you can see it moving down and out. It was the right call. And the rules for pass completions in the EZ are the same as in the playing field. The ref explained that and so did the announcers. Did everyone have the sound turned off?

 

As far as Simms goes. The kid has guts, I'll give him that. The Washington D and some bad play calling are what did him in. Not his "can't win a big game'. What I saw is a QB that is going to do well in the NFL for quite awhile.

[nuke'em ttg]

sean saulsbury says simms was the best player on the field for both teams.....didn't get to watch much.....

[CaptainHook]

Guy never had complete possession of the ball. You could see it moving. When he placed his hand over the top of it you can see it moving down and out. It was the right call. And the rules for pass completions in the EZ are the same as in the playing field. The ref explained that and so did the announcers. Did everyone have the sound turned off?

 

As far as Simms goes. The kid has guts, I'll give him that. The Washington D and some bad play calling are what did him in. Not his "can't win a big game'. What I saw is a QB that is going to do well in the NFL for quite awhile.

 

1253849[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I agree, it was not a TD. The ball was clearly being juggled. BUT, I have heard in other games that the rules in the end zone are NOT the same as in the field of play. Take Jeremy Shockey's TD about a month and a half ago. He catches the ball, MAYBE gets two feet down, and then gets blindsided and drops the ball. The refs rule TD. It goes to replay and is upheld. I don't see the difference.

[quiet_tiger]

*** And the rules for pass completions in the EZ are the same as in the playing field. The ref explained that and so did the announcers. Did everyone have the sound turned off?

 

***

1253849[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

for me at least, there are separate questions about whether it was a catch under the rules and whether the rules should be changed so that it clearly is a catch. if you thought he was juggling it the whole time anyway, then it doesn't matter and you never thought he had possession at any point. but, if you thought he caught it, got two feet down in the endzone plus then a knee, it's a legitimate question as to why anything else should matter. maybe it should be different in the endzone than elsewhere on the field because the TD ought to occur immediately once the 2 feet and possession occur, or maybe not. certainly an interesting issue...

[skylive5]

I agree, it was not a TD.  The ball was clearly being juggled.  BUT, I have heard in other games that the rules in the end zone are NOT the same as in the field of play.  Take Jeremy Shockey's TD about a month and a half ago.  He catches the ball, MAYBE gets two feet down, and then gets blindsided and drops the ball.  The refs rule TD.  It goes to replay and is upheld.  I don't see the difference.

 

1253962[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

The difference is that Shockey had possession of the ball when his feet hit the ground and the ball coming out because of the hit was not a factor. Sheppard (sp?) never had possession.... it was moving all the time.... and he wasn't hit by a player, but the ground.

[CaptainHook]

The difference is that Shockey had possession of the ball when his feet hit the ground and the ball coming out because of the hit was not a factor. Sheppard (sp?) never had possession.... it was moving all the time.... and he wasn't hit by a player, but the ground.

 

1253978[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

And I agree, the guy yesterday never had posession. But the rules are CLEARLY different in the end zone, if you go by the Shockey play. In the field of play, you have to complete the catch, no matter if you get hit or not. Shockey did not do that. He had two feet down (maybe) before he got leveled. He certainly did not complete a "football move" which is the criteria to make a catch between the goal lines. If it's a sideline pass, you must hold on to the ball after you land out of bounds. Either way, the rules are different in the end zone.

 

Yesterday, I thought the guy MIGHT have had posession and two feet down, and started to juggle it after the tackle. It was clearly moving before his knee touched.

Edited January 8, 2006 by CaptainHook

[A Little Bit Special]

The NFL admitted that the refs blew that Shockey call.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2239970

 

So the ruling seems consistent to me.

[Ursa Majoris]

Just reading this thread it's clear this whole "what is a catch" thing needs to be addressed and simplified. IMO, we shouldn't be looking for reasons to take catches away, same as we shouldn't be looking for reasons to negate fumbles.

[CaptainHook]

The NFL admitted that the refs blew that Shockey call.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2239970

 

So the ruling seems consistent to me.

 

1254157[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

But then the NFL came back and said they did NOT admit that to coach Holmgren, and he was fined for saying it.

 

Teams would not be challenging whether or not its a TD if the rules were the same as between the goal lines. You have to complete the catch by not losing control of it or dropping it. If those same rules apply in the end zone, why are teams challenging it? He clearly dropped the ball.

 

I agree that the NFL needs to address this in the off season.

Edited January 8, 2006 by CaptainHook

[Swiss Cheezhead]

Capt Hook has it figured out. I agree completely with everything he said.

 

However, Hook (or anyone else who saw it) -- I only saw the replay once on SportsCenter. I wanna say I saw two feet touch the ground before the knee came down. I could be wrong, since I can't remember for sure, but is there a chance his FEET were down with possession? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

[CaptainHook]

However, Hook (or anyone else who saw it) -- I only saw the replay once on SportsCenter. I wanna say I saw two feet touch the ground before the knee came down. I could be wrong, since I can't remember for sure, but is there a chance his FEET were down with possession? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

 

1256427[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You see, that's what I thought. It was close. He did have two feet down. About the time the second foot touched, he was hit. The ball started to move, but I wouldn't call it "loose". It wasn't until his knee hit that he really lost control of it. I thought there was a chance they would rule it a TD. He did have posession (barely), with two feet down. I've seen that called a TD. I've seen it not called a TD. They really need to clean it up.

[Grits and Shins]

You see, that's what I thought.  It was close.  He did have two feet down.  About the time the second foot touched, he was hit.  The ball started to move, but I wouldn't call it "loose".  It wasn't until his knee hit that he really lost control of it.  I thought there was a chance they would rule it a TD.  He did have posession (barely), with two feet down.  I've seen that called a TD.  I've seen it not called a TD.  They really need to clean it up.

 

1256455[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I thought it was a TD.

[A Little Bit Special]

You see, that's what I thought.  It was close.  He did have two feet down.  About the time the second foot touched, he was hit.  The ball started to move, but I wouldn't call it "loose".  It wasn't until his knee hit that he really lost control of it.  I thought there was a chance they would rule it a TD.  He did have posession (barely), with two feet down.  I've seen that called a TD.  I've seen it not called a TD.  They really need to clean it up.

 

1256455[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, this is what I've heard announcers attempt to explain. If a player is falling to the ground or out of bounds he must maintain possession throughout the play. If he is upgright in the field of play, the traditional "two feet and a football move" is required for a completed reception.

 

So basically the ground cannot cause a fumble but it can cause an incompletion.

[CaptainHook]

Ok, this is what I've heard announcers attempt to explain.  If a player is falling to the ground or out of bounds he must maintain possession throughout the play.  If he is upgright in the field of play, the traditional "two feet and a football move" is required for a completed reception.

 

So basically the ground cannot cause a fumble but it can cause an incompletion.

 

1256477[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

And I completely understand that. But I've seen it ruled differently in the end zone.

[rajncajn]

You see, that's what I thought.  It was close.  He did have two feet down.  About the time the second foot touched, he was hit.  The ball started to move, but I wouldn't call it "loose".  It wasn't until his knee hit that he really lost control of it.  I thought there was a chance they would rule it a TD.  He did have posession (barely), with two feet down.  I've seen that called a TD.  I've seen it not called a TD.  They really need to clean it up.

 

1256455[/snapback]

 

 

 

That's the key. The ball was moving & obviously not due to his arm movements. What sealed it is when the ball came out as he hit the ground. Had he had control of it he wouldn't have lost the ball at all.

 

As far as Simms goes, Blitz's "can't win the big game" bs has gotten about as insightful & relevant as Theisman's commentary. I think Simms has done more than enough to prove he can be a very good NFL QB.

[Swiss Cheezhead]

So basically the ground cannot cause a fumble but it can cause an incompletion.

 

1256477[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That's pretty much how I understand it...and it's ridiculous. Not only do I agree that the rule needs tweaking, I'd expect it to be done after this year.

[Buccsfan47]

I think you guys are higher than shmit!!

 

If you are rating that game on two tipped interceptions... you know as much about rating qb's as you do starting fantasy picks for the week. If I would have taken half of your dip-shmit advise to heart this last year I wouldn't have even made it to the play-offs. Get off your couch and get a life!!

 

The Buccs can't help it the refs got shmit in their eyes!! Blown calls on two fumbles, a sack, and a td!!

 

Can you say the Mobs calling the game and the NFL and Referree's are in their front pocket licking up spare change!!

 

Blow Me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Time to go back to just watching college ball! The NFL SUCKS!!

[skylive5]

I think you guys are higher than shmit!!

 

If you are rating that game on two tipped interceptions... you know as much about rating qb's as you do starting fantasy picks for the week.  If I would have taken half of your dip-shmit advise to heart this last year I wouldn't have even made it to the play-offs.  Get off your couch and get a life!!

 

The Buccs can't help it the refs got shmit in their eyes!!  Blown calls on two fumbles, a sack, and a td!!

 

Can you say the Mobs calling the game and the NFL and Referree's are in their front pocket licking up spare change!!

 

Blow Me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Time to go back to just watching college ball!  The NFL SUCKS!!

 

1256944[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Wow! Now tell us how you really feel.

 

Sorry to see you go.... even though I never knew you were here to begin with.

[Big Talker]

Whatever the ground can or can't do, it doesn't matter in this case. The receiver clearly had the ball in his hands when his knee hit the ground. Hello?? That's a TD. When has it ever NOT been a TD?

 

I'm not a Bucs fan. I was rooting for the Redskins to win. That said, I can't for the life of me understand why the refs did not rule the play a TD.

[Swampnuts]

Simms is the real deal, and the Buccaneers NOW know it. The kid played well despite zero protection. He didn't panic, he's got some scrambling ability, and he made the throw he had to make to tie that game.

 

He put up a helluva lot better performance and showed a lot more heart than little Eli did. Simms is a better QB than 8-10 NFL teams are putting out as starters.

[Jolly Rodgers]

Simms is the real deal, and the Buccaneers NOW know it.  The kid played well despite zero protection. He didn't panic, he's got some scrambling ability, and he made the throw he had to make to tie that game. 

 

He put up a helluva lot better performance and showed a lot more heart than little Eli did. Simms is a better QB than 8-10 NFL teams are putting out as starters.

 

1257000[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I totally agree with you. I had my doubts about Simms all year but he really showed me something that game. Sure he had 2 INTS but that is because his O-line sucks and he never has any protection. Also, he was hands down the best offensive player on the field that game. He did run one in for a touchdown which kinda made me laugh. If it were not for blown calls (2 fumbles) and that Shep Touchdown being called incomplete we would be talking how great Simms played.

 

Also, who the heck is Buccsfan47? I've been defending the Bucs all year on this board and I didnt even know you exisited. As for you comments, the Bucs have no one to blame but themselves. They played sloppy on offense and their o-line did not show up to play. Nice knowing ya!

[Swiss Cheezhead]

Wow! Now tell us how you really feel.

 

Sorry to see you go.... even though I never knew you were here to begin with.

 

1256950[/snapback]