Cam Sutton getting his first start

#76
#76
Didn't get to see this game as I got stuck with a pretty good Titans/Niners game, but I think we'll see a rematch of these two in the AFC title game.

Strange to say but the Jaguars matchup with the Pats better than anyone else.
 
#80
#80
HoptownVol said:
Good grief, this whole thing started because D4 said Cooks is the Pats #1 WR, which he is. Nobody made a comment about the Patriots #1 target, or most valuable receiver which Gronk obviously is. Do you people even read these threads FFS?
Click to expand...

Again, what D4H said was 100% correct, but these a-holes have it out for him for whatever reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#81
#81
CONGRATS to Cam Sutton on a good 1st start!

As to Gronk...Technically he's a TE and that's the position he's listed at playing.

FACTually, Gronk is just a BIG damn WR as we all know.

Gronk lines up all over the place and when he's on the field he's the number 1 passing target so he plays like all other WR's.

Nothing here for anyone to argue about.

I'm just happy that another good VFL is getting solid reps, is playing well and is making UT look better.

Proud of you Cam, keep up the solid work young man!

VFL...GBO!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#83
#83
volfanbill said:
Sutton wouldn't have been stopping Gronk either. When Gronk is on, he's the number one target. Brady was literally staring him down and throwing to him all night long.
Click to expand...

Eric Berry shut Gronk down like a red headed step child the first game of the season.
 
#86
#86
Biopsyman said:
Reminds me on a younger Eric Allen
Click to expand...

What a great comparison. Just watched some Eric Allen highlights. Very similar to Cam. They also look similar.

Wish I would have thought up of this comparison. It makes a lot of sense. And with Eric Allen being a borderline Hall of Famer, I can see Cam Sutton having a similar career.
 
#87
#87
HoptownVol said:
Good grief, this whole thing started because D4 said Cooks is the Pats #1 WR, which he is. Nobody made a comment about the Patriots #1 target, or most valuable receiver which Gronk obviously is. Do you people even read these threads FFS?
Click to expand...

You mean a TE and WR are different positions?! :crazy:

I never knew!
 
#88
#88
Literally one of the dumbest arguments I've ever encountered. Anyone play fantasy football? Anyone know of a great receiving tight end?
 
#89
#89
The Steelers were hosed by the NFL's rewriting of the rules of the game. The receiver was in full possession of the ball while advancing to the goal line and when the ball broke the plane. It was clear that impact with the ground caused the ball to loosen in his grasp, afterwards. For generations upon generations, that is/was a touchdown. Only by the NFL's perversion of the rules is it ruled otherwise. It's not football, anymore. It's NFL fauxball entertainment.
 
#90
#90
Tin Man said:
The Steelers were hosed by the NFL's rewriting of the rules of the game. The receiver was in full possession of the ball while advancing to the goal line and when the ball broke the plane. It was clear that impact with the ground caused the ball to loosen in his grasp, afterwards. For generations upon generations, that is/was a touchdown. Only by the NFL's perversion of the rules is it ruled otherwise. It's not football, anymore. It's NFL fauxball entertainment.
Click to expand...
The play isnt over when the plane is broken, that only applies to a runner. You cant drop the ball when you hit the ground. Period. Ask Dez Bryant.
 
#91
#91
K-town Vol Fan said:
The play isnt over when the plane is broken, that only applies to a runner. You cant drop the ball when you hit the ground. Period. Ask Dez Bryant.
Click to expand...

You would be wrong and if not the rule is wrote wrong. If that ball was caught on the 10 and the receiver jumps into the end zone and breaks the plane, even if the ball is knocked out when he hits the ground it is a TD, in this case is doesnt matter where the ball was caught as long as outside the end zone, when it crosses the plane it is a TD! Now, if he had caught the ball inside of the end zone and didnt maintain possession and complete a football move(which is the dumbest thing ever written) than YES it would not be considered a TD, Steelers were screwed plain and simple as usual when it is to help the Patriots!

And Mike P the Great almighty Ref is an idiot, this isnt anything like Dez catch years ago was, also to him about the rule that the ground cannot cause a fumble, Also his knee was down when the ball hit the ground and caused the fumble. Again the NFL and their rules suck, especially since no one knows how to enforce them. Mike P saving face for the czar in NY that made the decision, but anyone else thats been around, played or anything else knows that was a catch!
 
Last edited:
#92
#92
Bigorangefaninga said:
You would be wrong and if not the rule is wrote wrong. If that ball was caught on the 10 and the receiver jumps into the end zone and breaks the plane, even if the ball is knocked out when he hits the ground it is a TD, in this case is doesnt matter where the ball was caught as long as outside the end zone, when it crosses the plane it is a TD! Now, if he had caught the ball inside of the end zone and didnt maintain possession and complete a football move(which is the dumbest thing ever written) than YES it would not be considered a TD, Steelers were screwed plain and simple as usual when it is to help the Patriots!
Click to expand...

catching at the ten, the receiver then becomes a runner. He hadn't completed the catch yet as he crossed the goal line, thus referencing the second part of your statement. The ball rotated as he landed, he never had complete possession per the rules.

And the dumbest thing ever written (in sports at least) is the fumble out of the end zone is a touch back rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#93
#93
He was outside the end zone and extending to the goal line, at that point he is a runner! It is stupid to make a differentation between a RB and WR at that point, How many times have we seen a RB jump over the line and stretch the ball just enough to get it over the line before it gets knocked out by a LB? I have seen it hundreds of times, so Mike P. states in his address back on it was the right call because he took the risk of EXTENDING the ball over the goal line, never once does he state that James lost possession or didnt even have possession with it, but that he wasnt considered dead crossing the end zone because he extended the ball himself over the goal line and lost the ball. Heck, now its even hard to find a replay of the play, ESPN shows as no longer able to play media, hmmm wonder if thats to do with the fact they were wrong and they dont want people disecting it more than they are already! NFL is a joke!
 
#94
#94
As soon as you catch the ball and make a football move you are now a runner. In the case of this call he never became a runner and there is a valid question as to if he ever had control of the ball.

In the case of this play he never became a runner. The first thing that hit the ground was his knee and he never showed control of the ball. This play is a pure judgement call and depending on which side of the argument you are on a lose/lose for the ref. I can see the call going either way tbh and anyone arguing it was clear cut either way is the crazy one.
 
#95
#95
Bigorangefaninga said:
He was outside the end zone and extending to the goal line, at that point he is a runner! It is stupid to make a differentation between a RB and WR at that point, How many times have we seen a RB jump over the line and stretch the ball just enough to get it over the line before it gets knocked out by a LB? I have seen it hundreds of times, so Mike P. states in his address back on it was the right call because he took the risk of EXTENDING the ball over the goal line, never once does he state that James lost possession or didnt even have possession with it, but that he wasnt considered dead crossing the end zone because he extended the ball himself over the goal line and lost the ball. Heck, now its even hard to find a replay of the play, ESPN shows as no longer able to play media, hmmm wonder if thats to do with the fact they were wrong and they dont want people disecting it more than they are already! NFL is a joke!
Click to expand...
to become a runner you have to show control and make a football move. every single part of the guy hit the ground before his feet..He was running on his knees? If I am the ref I would have called it a TD initially but on replay u can see it is questionable if he had control because the ball is still moving before it crossed the plane. They are saying they don't believe he ever had control of the ball so he never made the transition from receiver to runner. The ground can cause an incompletion it cannot cause a fumble. Had his feet hit the ground before his knee this call goes the other way likely. I can argue either way if he had control and be valid both ways.. there is no argument that he was ever a runner because he didn't ever make that transition.


Twitter
 
#96
#96
pimo1 said:
to become a runner you have to show control and make a football move. every single part of the guy hit the ground before his feet..He was running on his knees? If I am the ref I would have called it a TD initially but on replay u can see it is questionable if he had control because the ball is still moving before it crossed the plane. They are saying they don't believe he ever had control of the ball so he never made the transition from receiver to runner. The ground can cause an incompletion it cannot cause a fumble. Had his feet hit the ground before his knee this call goes the other way likely. I can argue either way if he had control and be valid both ways.. there is no argument that he was ever a runner because he didn't ever make that transition.


Twitter
Click to expand...

If he's falling to the ground while catching the ball, I think it should be "does he have control of the ball when he would otherwise be considered 'down' (regardless of down-by-contact)?" In this case, his knee hit first, and at that point, he has control of the ball. In my opinion, at that moment he should have made that transition from receiver to runner, and then the question is, "did he break the plane with the ball prior to losing control?" to establish fumble/TD verification.

I realize that the existing "let's not use common sense here" rule that they did in fact call it correctly yesterday after the review.

Not a Steelers or Patriots fan, so I don't really have a dog in that fight. But something needs to be done with the rule here.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top