Posted on 01/19/2014 11:12:38 PM PST by This Just In
"Omaha" versus "You mad, bro?"
Super Bowl XLVIII between the Denver Broncos and the Seattle Seahawks is setting up to be a classic contest in which the surgical Peyton Manning will try to perhaps cap off his career and legacy against the brash--and best (ask Richard Sherman)--Seattle secondary that has smothered the league's best wide receivers all season long.
Simply put, the league's top offense (Denver) will face the league's top defense (Seattle). Something has to give.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The Broncos yesterday showed that a renewed Payton Manning can do wonders for a team. Watch out Seattle!
He is too smart for these knuckle draggers...
+++++
You’re exactly right, you’ll notice when he goes back to the bench after a series of play he doesn’t just sit there. He is going over the stills or on the phone. He’s totally involved in the game on field and off.
Unlike a quarterback like Brady after a bad series just sits there pouting like a spoiled child.
Now if only they would do something about those referees with their openly bad calls and late flags. I won’t go so far to say organized crime may be involved with certain players and refs but their fingers are in all sports.
I thought the Seahawks/49ers game was sloppy, both players and officials. Almost to the point of amateurish.
While in the end it was Kaep’s two interceptions that cost S.F. that game, that was the worst officiating I’ve ever seen in a playoff game ever. I thought it was supposed to be the “best of the best” handling these playoff games? We sure didn’t see that last night. Those zebras were a disgrace. And I didn’t realy care who won so I didnt’ have a dog in the fight - my vitriol is not a result of sour grapes.
Maybe this time the referees will give Seattle a chance, do some honest refereeing, and not throw the game like they did with the Steelers. Seattle won that game fair and square, but the NFL wasn’t going to be happy with the result.
Biggest laugh was the NEW penalty when the quarterback got a flag thrown when he tackled the guy who intercepted his pass. No such rule anywhere.
C’mon, NFL. Let the players play. Actually, I don’t see how Seattle has a chance with the Broncos.
Uhhhh Seattle had more penaties than any other team in the league this year. Bunch of loud mouth punks that are gonna get their asses handed to them by Denver.
Richard Sherman was in “Beast Mode” when he made his remark about Crabtree.
No. He was in “hey, look at me! mode.” A punk ass spoiled brat that wanted all the attention on him. Well, he got it. The Seahawks victory is already playing second fiddle to his self centered childishness.
Everyone’s commenting on Sherman’s post-game rant, while forgetting his behavior that drew an Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty. Running up to an opponent and making a ‘choke’ sign is hardly the behavior the NFL should want associated with their brand.
Before you kill the Redskins, try getting rid of the thugs.
I’d think the “gangsta” persona widespread in the NFL is a large part of its success.
NFL’s been a “success” before “gangsta” was considered hip.
One of the refs is from this area, it’s his fourth SB in eight years.
I think NFL has gotten better, the whole challenge flag thing seems to be working.
But at the same time, I HATE that late flag crap, where a coach can whine and bellow and throw a conniption, all the sudden a flag gets tossed. Alot of that stuff is some of the most subjective stuff in the game, there were a couple unsportsmanlike penalties yesterday that never should have been called.
I can’t agree that Seattle deserved to win. The fact that the clear roughing-the-kicker call was downgraded to a running=into-the-kicker call (meaning that Seattle was awarded the ball by the refs) late in the game was a big point in the game. The Bowman (sp?) clear fumble recovery that was called exactly backwards and was “unreviewable” was another turning point.
The refs seemed clearly one-sided in my mind, and I’m afraid that makes a positive close game outcome anything but deserved.
I am not a fan of either team headed to NY for the big game.
The 49ers recovered a Seahawk fumble the very next play. That effectively corrected that wrong.
And I do not agree with your assessment of roughing the kicker. I realize the benchmark is running into the planted leg, but on slow-motion it's not clear who ran into who, and it was a quite minor brush.
All that said, I think the 49ers are the better team, and would probably be a better match for the Broncos. The 12th man had a huge effect on the game, and unfortunately for Seattle, will not be in attendance at the Super Bowl.
Sorry - but the kicker has the affirmative right to the ground on which his plant foot lands, and the seahawk's shoulder turned the kicker's ankle. That's the whole purpose of the roughing rule - the kicker is essentially helpless to avoid injury when the plant leg is taken away. That "benchmark" is the rule, as I understand it.
With respect to the Bowman fumble - the fact that the seahawks couldn't convert is immaterial. The fact that ANOTHER bad call favored Seattle was my point.
I would like to see the officiating crew from Seattle barred from ever participating in post season games again - they were far from impartial, in my opinion.
I really only complain about bad calls as it impacts the Lions — as someone up in the thread somewhere said, it’s enough to make me suspect payola is involved. This is not to say that some Lions punish their own team with stupid penalties (I particularly love the ones which change a 3 and out by the opponent to a first down). :’) BTW, Caldwell’s the new Lions head coach, and it’s going to be a disaster.
A member of the receiving team may not run into or rough a kicker who kicks from behind his line unless contact is:
(a) Incidental to and after he had touched ball in flight.
(b) Caused by kicker’s own motions.
The defender was in mid-air before the kickers foot was planted. Both contributed to the contact which makes the 5 yard penalty completely appropriate.
You seem to misunderstand the intent of item b in the rule. When a punter kicks, he leaves the ground completely, with the “plant” foot coming down first, after the ball has been kicked. The punter’s motion in this instance was completely normal, which means he did nothing (beyond kicking the ball) to occupy the space you wish to claim for the Seattle player.
Part (b) was intended to prevent the kicker from altering his normal motion to cause the contact.
If the Seattle player had been caught under the plant foot, you might have a legitimate claim. As it is, the kicker’s ankle was turned by the seahawk’s shoulder pads at ground level. That means the kicker’s foot (which was also the result of a “launch”) was there first.
The announcers also stated that the interpretation was that hitting the kicking leg was running into, whereas the plant leg was roughing.
Sorry - but the refs screwed it up, and your novel interpretation of the rule is designed to break a punter’s leg. The Seattle player was supposed to launch himself in FRONT of where the punter kicks the ball to avoid contact and have a chance at the block. Where he ended up tells me it was roughing.
I will say this. If your interesting interpretation is correct, then I hope the Seattle punter becomes the epitome of its application.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.