Super Bowl LII

[El Guapo]

Good game. Sorry to lose it, of course, but at this point any Patriots titles are gravy, so... what can you do.

Enjoy Matt Patricia, Detroit.

Detroit is where NFL careers come to die. Sorry, Matt. You will not be able to escape the vortex of fail.

Well, he's off to a good start by helping the Patriots set a new record for points scored and yards gained by a losing team.

[Kurth]

Great game, but I have no idea how the first reviewed Philly TD stood. He clearly bobbled and then touched out of bounds.

But congrats, Philly. Now please don’t burn down your city.

Is it a problem for the NFL that no one knows what a catch is at this point? Basically when I saw the first contested catch happen I was like, "Well, that *looks* catch-like to me, but Cris Collinsworth is saying it's definitely going to be overturned...but then it's upheld, so... shrug."

No. It’s a problem for Chris Collinsworth that he doesn’t understand the rule, though. That should be a prerequisite to announcing a Super Bowl. I don’t think the rule is all that hard to apply in most instances. The two in question last night were not even close.

On the first, Clement had two feet with control. The fact that the ball had a very small amount of movement at the end of the playing while he was going out of bounds was not enough to overturn the call on the field.

The Ertz TD was even easier - like, by a long shot. He caught the ball coming across the field, took two steps and then turned the ball upfield toward the end zone. He took another step, dove, crossed the plain, and lost control when he hit the ground. He caught the ball and became a runner. At that point, all he has to do is break the plain. If you go back and look at the Jessie James no-TD, they’re not even close to the same. Collinsworth is just bloviating.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Great game, but I have no idea how the first reviewed Philly TD stood. He clearly bobbled and then touched out of bounds.

But congrats, Philly. Now please don’t burn down your city.

Is it a problem for the NFL that no one knows what a catch is at this point? Basically when I saw the first contested catch happen I was like, "Well, that *looks* catch-like to me, but Cris Collinsworth is saying it's definitely going to be overturned...but then it's upheld, so... shrug."

No. It’s a problem for Chris Collinsworth that he doesn’t understand the rule, though. That should be a prerequisite to announcing a Super Bowl. I don’t think the rule is all that hard to apply in most instances. The two in question last night were not even close.

On the first, Clement had two feet with control. The fact that the ball had a very small amount of movement at the end of the playing while he was going out of bounds was not enough to overturn the call on the field.

Except very similar plays all season where the balls move (i.e. not completely secured) before the player goes out of bounds have been ruled non-catches. Since they were all overturned by the same person making the rulings last night, why was the TD last night allowed to stand but not all the others this season? The lack of consistency in the rules is what is most frustrating, IMO.

[Kurth]

Wow, ended up being a much better game than I expected. Congrats to Philly fans, stay classy...


https://www.dailywire.com/news/26739/wa ... exit-modal
https://radio951.iheart.com/featured/br ... ting-poop/



Words do nothing...

Despite breathless reports from The Daily Wire that “The chaos in Philadelphia, an overwhelmingly Democratic city, was so bad that reports surfaced that the National Guard was deployed to put an end to the mayhem.Nothing to see here” (their emphasis, not mine), In the streets after Super Bowl win, Philly cops kept Eagles fans in check

The largest groups of people along Broad Street began to disperse just before 2 a.m., leaving a trail of crushed cans, shattered glass, and toilet paper littering the streets.

But despite an occasionally chaotic end to the night, the celebration of the Eagles’ victory was largely a peaceful affair. Officers hung back and let the public jubilation play out, stepping in only to avert the most unruly behavior and to prevent the beer-fueled masses from injuring themselves.

Some appeared eager to get in on the revelry themselves. They high-fived fans streaming out of Broad Street bars and stood by as men and boys set off fireworks in the streets around City Hall. Others – eager to capture the once-in-a-lifetime moment in Philadelphia sports history – shot selfies and videos on their cellphones.

[Kurth]

Great game, but I have no idea how the first reviewed Philly TD stood. He clearly bobbled and then touched out of bounds.

But congrats, Philly. Now please don’t burn down your city.

Is it a problem for the NFL that no one knows what a catch is at this point? Basically when I saw the first contested catch happen I was like, "Well, that *looks* catch-like to me, but Cris Collinsworth is saying it's definitely going to be overturned...but then it's upheld, so... shrug."

No. It’s a problem for Chris Collinsworth that he doesn’t understand the rule, though. That should be a prerequisite to announcing a Super Bowl. I don’t think the rule is all that hard to apply in most instances. The two in question last night were not even close.

On the first, Clement had two feet with control. The fact that the ball had a very small amount of movement at the end of the playing while he was going out of bounds was not enough to overturn the call on the field.

Except very similar plays all season where the balls move (i.e. not completely secured) before the player goes out of bounds have been ruled non-catches. Since they were all overturned by the same person making the rulings last night, why was the TD last night allowed to stand but not all the others this season? The lack of consistency in the rules is what is most frustrating, IMO.

The fact that the Clement TD was ruled a TD on the field is what made that one a no-brained, imo. I think it was a 55/45 call, but once the call was made on the field, there was no way it was getting overturned on replay.

As far as comparing that to other catch/no-catch calls this season, it would be awesome if someone compiled a series of GIFs where we could compare side by side by side. I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

[Jaymann]

This game had all the earmarks of just another Patriots victory - they got behind by ten points, got the lucky deflected interception, and started scoring touchdowns on every possession. But then a funny thing happened. The Eagles did not choke on offense, in fact they were making ballsy calls and succeeding. Even the refs sensed something (the same ones that openly cheered Brady when he throttled Bortles), and they allowed an Eagles touchdown to stand. Instead of going with "the ball did not survive the ground," they went with "the receiver became a runner." Then, after failing to sack Brady all day, the Eagles defense poked the ball away from mighty Brady, leaving him to throw an air ball with no tuck rule in sight. Unfortunately it means Brady will inevitably return for another go, but the mystique has been broken.

[morlac]

Wow, ended up being a much better game than I expected. Congrats to Philly fans, stay classy...


https://www.dailywire.com/news/26739/wa ... exit-modal
https://radio951.iheart.com/featured/br ... ting-poop/



Words do nothing...

Despite breathless reports from The Daily Wire that “The chaos in Philadelphia, an overwhelmingly Democratic city, was so bad that reports surfaced that the National Guard was deployed to put an end to the mayhem.Nothing to see here” (their emphasis, not mine), In the streets after Super Bowl win, Philly cops kept Eagles fans in check

The largest groups of people along Broad Street began to disperse just before 2 a.m., leaving a trail of crushed cans, shattered glass, and toilet paper littering the streets.

But despite an occasionally chaotic end to the night, the celebration of the Eagles’ victory was largely a peaceful affair. Officers hung back and let the public jubilation play out, stepping in only to avert the most unruly behavior and to prevent the beer-fueled masses from injuring themselves.

Some appeared eager to get in on the revelry themselves. They high-fived fans streaming out of Broad Street bars and stood by as men and boys set off fireworks in the streets around City Hall. Others – eager to capture the once-in-a-lifetime moment in Philadelphia sports history – shot selfies and videos on their cellphones.

Oh I agree. By most accounts it was a pretty civil Super Bowl Celebration. Well except the guy who woke up and released he ate horse poop the night before. Man wouldn't you hate to be him at the office this morning? "I tell you Steve, I had a great time, right up until I ate that horse shit...man don't know what I was thinking." nervous laughter while Steve spits his coffee everywhere.

[RunningMn9]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

[Isgrimnur]

Does anyone else have trouble believing that there wasn't a single incidence of offensive holding or pass interference in the entire game?

[ImLawBoy]

Does anyone else have trouble believing that there wasn't a single incidence of offensive holding or pass interference in the entire game?

Which leads to the question, was the game more or less enjoyable with fewer penalties? There's a balance between calling every ticky-tacky thing and just ignoring the rule book, of course. I don't know for sure whether they found that balance yesterday, but it sure was a fun game to watch (and I'm normally a big fan of defense).

[El Guapo]

One other mystery from the game is why Belichick benched Butler. He had the flu earlier this week, so missed some practice, but was otherwise healthy to play. But they played him on special teams only, not at all on defense, even though they clearly could have used him. No one's really saying what the issue was.

[LawBeefaroni]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

Guess what? You don't know what a catch is. The good news is, you're not alone. No one knows. So we go to a magical oracle called Video Review to tell us. Accept it or remain confounded.

[El Guapo]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

Guess what? You don't know what a catch is. The good news is, you're not alone. No one knows. So we go to a magical oracle called Video Review to tell us. Accept it or remain confounded.

I think it's possible to both accept it *and* remain confounded.

[El Guapo]

[LawBeefaroni]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

Guess what? You don't know what a catch is. The good news is, you're not alone. No one knows. So we go to a magical oracle called Video Review to tell us. Accept it or remain confounded.

I think it's possible to both accept it *and* remain confounded.

It is possible but it is not wise. Your chicken wings will not taste as good.

Not a catch:

[Isgrimnur]

[Kurth]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

Guess what? You don't know what a catch is. The good news is, you're not alone. No one knows. So we go to a magical oracle called Video Review to tell us. Accept it or remain confounded.

I think it's possible to both accept it *and* remain confounded.

It is possible but it is not wise. Your chicken wings will not taste as good.

Not a catch:

That OBJ no-catch is clearly distinguishable from the Ertz TD. I watch OBJ play and there's never a moment there where he's anything but a receiver trying to catch the ball, get two feet in bounds, and retain control. With Ertz, he clearly catches the ball, secures it, then turns up field and dives for the end zone trying to break the plain. It's apples and oranges.

The Clement catch earlier is much, much closer to the OBJ clip, except, unlike OBJ, Clement never actually lost the ball.

[Isgrimnur]

*plane

[naednek]

Obviously I'd like to see an Eagles win. I'd kind of dreading the disruption of Tuesday's provisionally planned victory parade, though.

Good news then, as it would allegedly be Wednesday.

Actually...

Thursday

[pr0ner]

*plane

Also not OBJ.

[pr0ner]

One other mystery from the game is why Belichick benched Butler. He had the flu earlier this week, so missed some practice, but was otherwise healthy to play. But they played him on special teams only, not at all on defense, even though they clearly could have used him. No one's really saying what the issue was.

Take this with a huge grain of salt, but...

[Isgrimnur]

He becomes an unrestricted free agent in March.

[LawBeefaroni]

I just don’t recall seeing anything as close as the Clement TD overturned after review.

Kelvin Benjamin v. New England Patriots.

I was rooting for the Eagles, but based on my understanding of the rule, that was clearly *not* a catch. Unlike the Ertz play, Clements was unable to establish himself as a runner in the field of play. He had control for an instant, but then the ball clearly moved around (i.e. he didn't actually have control), at which point his foot touched out-of-bounds. I was genuinely surprised that the play stood because it seemed like clear evidence.

The Ertz TD was the exact opposite and shouldn't have even been reviewed. He caught the ball, ran three steps and then dove for the end zone, clearly breaking the plane before the ball popped out. It wasn't even close.

Guess what? You don't know what a catch is. The good news is, you're not alone. No one knows. So we go to a magical oracle called Video Review to tell us. Accept it or remain confounded.

I think it's possible to both accept it *and* remain confounded.

It is possible but it is not wise. Your chicken wings will not taste as good.

Not a catch:

That OBJ no-catch is clearly distinguishable from the Ertz TD. I watch OBJ play and there's never a moment there where he's anything but a receiver trying to catch the ball, get two feet in bounds, and retain control. With Ertz, he clearly catches the ball, secures it, then turns up field and dives for the end zone trying to break the plain. It's apples and oranges.

The Clement catch earlier is much, much closer to the OBJ clip, except, unlike OBJ, Clement never actually lost the ball.

(That's Sterling Shepherd, not OBJ.) It's a lot like the Clement catch and that's why I chose it. Ertz's TD didn't trouble me in the least.

The thing that matters with Clement (and Shepherd) isn't whether he lost the ball, it's whether he controlled it before going out of bounds. I'm not saying either was or wasn't a catch because I don't know but I wouldn't say either had Control (tm) before stepping out.

The only fact is what The Video Review ruled. Clement was a catch, Shepherd wasn't.

[Daehawk]

Didn't watch the game but have been watching the commercials. Really loved the Kia one with Steven Tyler.

[El Guapo]

One other mystery from the game is why Belichick benched Butler. He had the flu earlier this week, so missed some practice, but was otherwise healthy to play. But they played him on special teams only, not at all on defense, even though they clearly could have used him. No one's really saying what the issue was.

Take this with a huge grain of salt, but...

That would fit with Belichick's MO, for what it's worth. I remember when he benched Welker for the opening drive of a playoff game against the Jets because Welker made a lot of veiled jokes about Rex Ryan's supposed foot fetish in a press conference.

It's a little weird, though. Even assuming that this story is true - it's hard to imagine that Eric Rowe suddenly represented a better option at corner than Butler in the Super Bowl.

[Zaxxon]

The thing that matters with Clement (and Shepherd) isn't whether he lost the ball, it's whether he controlled it before going out of bounds. I'm not saying either was or wasn't a catch because I don't know but I wouldn't say either had Control (tm) before stepping out.

The only fact is what The Video Review ruled. Clement was a catch, Shepherd wasn't.

What jumps out to me about your NYG example is that he's going to the ground untouched when he catches the ball. That means he then has to keep control after hitting the ground.

[Zaxxon]

Though I do agree with the general observations that 1) an oracle is involved in many NFL catch/no catch reviews, and 2) Cris Collinsworth frequently has issues recalling or accurately describing rules in effect on a given play. Which, see #1.

[El Guapo]

Though I do agree with the general observations that 1) an oracle is involved in many NFL catch/no catch reviews, and 2) Cris Collinsworth frequently has issues recalling or accurately describing rules in effect on a given play. Which, see #1.

My main takeaway from this is that my team lost because the referees were biased and made bad calls against them.

[Isgrimnur]

Though I do agree with the general observations that 1) an oracle is involved in many NFL catch/no catch reviews, and 2) Cris Collinsworth frequently has issues recalling or accurately describing rules in effect on a given play. Which, see #1.

My main takeaway from this is that my team lost because the referees were biased and made bad calls against them.

Your defensive coordinator could have done something other than make me wonder whether I hated his face more or less than Rob Ryan's.

[The Meal]

Good game. Sorry to lose it, of course, but at this point any Patriots titles are gravy, so... what can you do.

Enjoy Matt Patricia, Detroit.

Detroit is where NFL careers come to die. Sorry, Matt. You will not be able to escape the vortex of fail.

Well, he's off to a good start by helping the Patriots set a new record for points scored and yards gained by a losing team.

Last night is what happens when you get two Lions Head Coaches acting as Defensive Coordinators.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

One other mystery from the game is why Belichick benched Butler. He had the flu earlier this week, so missed some practice, but was otherwise healthy to play. But they played him on special teams only, not at all on defense, even though they clearly could have used him. No one's really saying what the issue was.

Take this with a huge grain of salt, but...

That would fit with Belichick's MO, for what it's worth. I remember when he benched Welker for the opening drive of a playoff game against the Jets because Welker made a lot of veiled jokes about Rex Ryan's supposed foot fetish in a press conference.

It's a little weird, though. Even assuming that this story is true - it's hard to imagine that Eric Rowe suddenly represented a better option at corner than Butler in the Super Bowl.

Also, it's a little weird for Butler to then state he had no idea why he was benched. Or why NE benched him on defense but not on special teams. Why remove him from only the part of the team where he plays the best?

[gameoverman]

On the first catch count me as someone who thought it'd be ruled no catch. I can sort of accept the argument that since it was called a touchdown on the field, and the replay is just ambiguous enough as to whether the ball is simply moving around vs him losing control, that you can't overturn it. I think a receiver is allowed to move the ball around. Of course the best way for a receiver to prove control is if the ball does not more around at all, but the receiver only needs that proof if the call is against him. If the call is in his favor to start with then it's a moot point.

The Eagles showed that the best chance to win these big games against the Patriots is to keep aggressive and keep applying pressure, and I don't mean a pass rush. They were scoring all the way to the last minute, even if they had to settle for fields goals it still helps. You can't get a lead and then coast on it. My favorite moment was when Foles played it off like "don't mind me, I'm just standing here" right before he caught the td pass.

[Kurth]

*plane

Thanks.

Also, Sterling Shepard, not OBJ.

Man, did I get anything right?

That’s like at work last week when I attempted to forward an email to 3 co-workers named Leah, Rachel and Michael, and (thanks to Outlook auto-fill) sent it to the wrong Leah, Rachel and Michael. Missing on one, sure. But it takes real skill to miss 3 out of 3.

[El Guapo]

*plane

Thanks.

Also, Sterling Shepard, not OBJ.

Man, did I get anything right?

That’s like at work last week when I attempted to forward an email to 3 co-workers named Leah, Rachel and Michael, and (thanks to Outlook auto-fill) sent it to the wrong Leah, Rachel and Michael. Missing on one, sure. But it takes real skill to miss 3 out of 3.

Also they were playing baseball.

[Isgrimnur]

Spinal contusion. Should be ok (compared to the “his legs don’t appear to be moving” comments) and back to Pitt this week.

I assume he’s out for the season with something like that, but who knows with sports medicine being what it is.

Not necessarily.

As many Steelers fans recall, Tommy Maddox suffered a similar injury in 2002 and missed only one game. Ben Roethlisberger was diagnosed with this in the final game of the 2009 season. Both QBs had a full recovery.

Deadspin

Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker Ryan Shazier attended tonight’s Penguins-Golden Knights game and stood for the crowd, more than two months after he suffered a spinal injury on a tackle attempt and just a few days after he was released from a local hospital’s rehabilitation center.

Two days ago, NBC’s Michele Tafoya reported that Shazier has movement in his legs and has begun an assisted walking routine, though he cannot yet walk on his own. Shazier later confirmed the report. At tonight’s game, he stood with help from those sitting next to him:

[msteelers]

That video is both incredibly heart-warming and horribly heart-breaking at the same time.

[Holman]

The parade yesterday (confession: I stayed home) was an amazing moment for the city: huge crowds, pride, relative peace and order, and tremendous memories.

Still, though, I love this tweet from a local journalist friend: