NFL GDT: Week 15

[Canada4Gold]

Not total doom and gloom for the Raiders. They're going to have to beat the Eagles now, but if they can win out the Titans probably lose out, Buffalo will lose to the Pats, if Miami can win out including beating Buffalo in week 17 the Raiders will get in. It's a LOT to go their way, but the most unrealistic part of it is probably Oakland winning out

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Ball slipped out.

Which is why it's a risk to reach for the cone. He had the first down but went for it all and paid.

 

[Hire Sather]

So is this a new rule this year? I don't recall it ever happening until 3 times this year

 

[misterchainsaw]

In case you're wondering, what needs to happen for Oakland to still make it is they win out, Buffalo loses out, Miami wins out, Tennessee loses out, and Baltimore does not lose out.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

Would you still have gone for the TD if you were Carr or would you have just gone out of bounds?

 

[kingsholygrail]

This is one of the worst rules. I loathe the idea of turning the ball over without the defense ever establishing possession.

Well, the problem is where do you put the ball? All other fumbles out of bounds remain with the possessing team at the spot of where it went out of bounds. Obviously you can't just give the offense a free touchdown for fumbling it through the endzone.

 

[Canada4Gold]

This is one of the worst rules. I loathe the idea of turning the ball over without the defense ever establishing possession.

I agree, you fumble the ball into and out of the endzone then it probably should go back to your possession at the point you fumbled it

 

[Canada4Gold]

In case you're wondering, what needs to happen for Oakland to still make it is they win out, Buffalo loses out, Miami wins out, Tennessee loses out, and Baltimore does not lose out.

Exactly, and that's probably all favoured to happen except Oakland winning out(But Eagles without Wentz almost lost today to the Giants), and probably Miami's 2 wins. But even Miami's 2 wins aren't incredibly unrealistic. I still like their chances more than Dallas'

 

[mouser]

This is one of the worst rules. I loathe the idea of turning the ball over without the defense ever establishing possession.

Is it that difficult to teach players not to fumble the football?

 

[Canada4Gold]

Is it that difficult to teach players not to fumble the football?

So why don't we punish players when they fumble the ball out of bounds on other parts of the field as well?

 

[GKJ]

So is this a new rule this year? I don't recall it ever happening until 3 times this year

It’s always been the rule, and one that’s never made any sense. If he fumbled the ball reaching for the first down, and it goes out of bounds, you keep the ball where you fumbled it. Why should the fact that it’s the end zone change the scope? Why should that cost you possession and points if the other team never recovers the ball?

 

[Captain Bowie]

Gotta say nothing feels better than laying a complete BEAT DOWN on the Hawks.

 

[misterchainsaw]

Exactly, and that's probably all favoured to happen except Oakland winning out(But Eagles without Wentz almost lost today to the Giants), and probably Miami's 2 wins. But even Miami's 2 wins aren't incredibly unrealistic. I still like their chances more than Dallas'

At Arrowhead seems like a tough matchup for the Dolphins. Stranger things have happened, sure, but that's also a lot of relative chalk to hold (especially with the Jags possibly resting starters in that week 17 game against the Titans).

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Would you still have gone for the TD if you were Carr or would you have just gone out of bounds?

I thought he was going to go out of bounds. Hero ball tho.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Well, the problem is where do you put the ball? All other fumbles out of bounds remain with the possessing team at the spot of where it went out of bounds. Obviously you can't just give the offense a free touchdown for fumbling it through the endzone.

Don't they go to the spot the ball was lost if fumbled forward? Putting the ball at the one or wherever it was fumbled seems reasonable, not?

Rams got screwed by this rule against the Hawks earlier this year too.

 

[GKJ]

Well, the problem is where do you put the ball? All other fumbles out of bounds remain with the possessing team at the spot of where it went out of bounds. Obviously you can't just give the offense a free touchdown for fumbling it through the endzone.

At the spot where you lost possession. Not automatically give it to the other team.

 

[Tecumseh]

well that rule will certainly be changed

I disagree. The NFL has a long history of doubling down on terrible rules.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Duron Harmon has 13 interceptions in his career. 10 in the 4th quarter. That's pretty clutch.

 

[Canada4Gold]

At Arrowhead seems like a tough matchup for the Dolphins. Stranger things have happened, sure, but that's also a lot of relative chalk to hold (especially with the Jags possibly resting starters in that week 17 game against the Titans).

Not so sure the Jags will rest their starters. If they win this week a bye week would still be completely in play for them by either a Pats or PIT loss, not overly likely, but I don't think you assume and just give up.

 

[EpochLink]

What a series of clusterf***s that was on the final drive, SMH.

 

[StreetHawk]

Would you still have gone for the TD if you were Carr or would you have just gone out of bounds?

It was 3rd and 3 from the 8. With 30 seconds to go and 1 time out. Fg ties the game. Td wins it.

Once he hit the 5 yard line he had the first. But he stretches out with the ball in his left hand. As a QB, that's not something he would do much unlike a wr it RB going for the goal line.

But 1sr and goal from the 3 with 30 seconds and a timeout, your QB goes out of bounds.

That gives you 2 throws and a run into the end zone to win the game.

 

[StreetHawk]

At the spot where you lost possession. Not automatically give it to the other team.

Then they should change the entire fumbling rule. If it goes out of bounds regardless of where it goes back to the spot of the fumble.

So, offences don't get the benefit if they fumble.forwards.

I think the touchback rule is fine the way it is. Makes offensive players more responsible for making smart decisions at the goal line rather they try for the glory. Hero or the goat.

 

[GKJ]

Then they should change the entire fumbling rule. If it goes out of bounds regardless of where it goes back to the spot of the fumble.

So, offences don't get the benefit if they fumble.forwards.

I think the touchback rule is fine the way it is. Makes offensive players more responsible for making smart decisions at the goal line rather they try for the glory. Hero or the goat.

It shouldn’t he hero or goat, rules are in sports are supposed to be what’s fair. Reaching for a pylon has nothing to do with strategy or ‘smart decisions,’ they’re trying to make a play and shouldn’t be put at a disadvantage based on a BS technicality.

 

[StreetHawk]

It shouldn’t he hero or goat, rules are in sports are supposed to be what’s fair. Reaching for a pylon has nothing to do with strategy or ‘smart decisions,’ they’re trying to make a play and shouldn’t be put at a disadvantage based on a BS technicality.

And if the offense loses the ball through their own end zone it's a safety, not back to where they lost the ball if it was striped out at the 4 yard line.
Seems like if the ball goes out within the field of play offense keeps the ball. If it goes out through either end zone it goes to the defense ( safety then the fee kick).

 

[GKJ]

And if the offense loses the ball through their own end zone it's a safety, not back to where they lost the ball if it was striped out at the 4 yard line.
Seems like if the ball goes out within the field of play offense keeps the ball. If it goes out through either end zone it goes to the defense ( safety then the fee kick).

You can’t spot the ball in your own end zone though, the field of scrimmage is 100 yards long. That’s why it’s a reward for the defense to get 2 points but yet not a touchdown because they never got possession of the ball. It’s not really even that severe of a penalty for the offense, in some extreme cases it’s even worth it. The 2 points is the only difference, otherwise the penalty is essentially the same 100 yards on either end but not within the 100 yards separating it.