AFC Championship: Colts vs. Patriots - Sun Jan 21, 5:30 CST

[Chris]

Peyton says that Bruschi, Faulk and Brady all showed class after the game.

[Chris]

Colt defense has cut the rushing YPG by 100 yards in the postseason. ha ha

[Chris]

Tom Brady doesn't know about that pass interference call :wtg:

[NCCubFan]

BTW NCCF, love the sig

I had to bust OleMiss's chops a little after our exchange earlier in the week. :D

[Andy]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

I wasn't going to be the one to say it, but my thinking was that if some calls had been switched(namely your 1 and 2), the Pats would've won and many people would've cried foul about the Pats being gifted the AFC again.

[VanceJergins]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

I wasn't going to be the one to say it, but my thinking was that if some calls had been switched(namely your 1 and 2), the Pats would've won and many people would've cried foul about the Pats being gifted the AFC again.

 

1. That was face-guarding. You have to try and get to the ball, you can't just turn your back and try to block out the receiver. That was very good, obvious call.

 

2. Yeah, there should have been a call, but there are plenty of calls like that both ways every game. If I reviewed the tape I could find at least 10 each way.

 

3. Thems the rules. He hit the quarterback after the pass was cleared. I dont like weak calls like that, but those are the rules.

 

How about the double face-mask that was called only on the Colts, another very obvious face-mask on a kick-off, the receiver whose back foot was touching the back of the end-zone before he jumped up and made the catch, which he probably wouldn't have come down with both feet anyway?

 

The Colts clutched their way to a clutch victory behind the amazingly clutchy Peyton Manning with the Jackson cluthingly picking off Cpt. Clutch in the clutchiest part of the game and Bill Belichick clutched up a clutchstorm as he clutchtastically pouted in the post-game interview. The Colts won because they're better, not because of the calls.

 

GO COLTS!!!! (The Bears are my 2nd favorite so I wont cry too much if they win.)

[BigSlick]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

[VanceJergins]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

[BigSlick]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

 

Was not aware. Either way, its a dumb play by the DB, because even if he didn't touch the guy, he made no attempt to play the ball at all, and left himself exposed to the PI.

 

Why is this a rule anyway? If he doesn't touch the receiver, how is he interfering with his ability to get the ball?

[VanceJergins]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

 

Was not aware. Either way, its a dumb play by the DB, because even if he didn't touch the guy, he made no attempt to play the ball at all, and left himself exposed to the PI.

 

Why is this a rule anyway? If he doesn't touch the receiver, how is he interfering with his ability to get the ball?

 

First of all, I think I over-reacted a little bit, so sorry for that. I'm not sure why its a rule. I remember having it called against my high school team several years ago and being a little confused, but I've seen it called in the NFL a few times since then. I think its just so people arent just sticking their hands in the receiver's face to try and block their vision and stuff like that.

[BigSlick]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

 

Was not aware. Either way, its a dumb play by the DB, because even if he didn't touch the guy, he made no attempt to play the ball at all, and left himself exposed to the PI.

 

Why is this a rule anyway? If he doesn't touch the receiver, how is he interfering with his ability to get the ball?

 

First of all, I think I over-reacted a little bit, so sorry for that. I'm not sure why its a rule. I remember having it called against my high school team several years ago and being a little confused, but I've seen it called in the NFL a few times since then. I think its just so people arent just sticking their hands in the receiver's face to try and block their vision and stuff like that.

 

Gotcha. Either way, Hobbs knew he was going to get called for playing like that, that was flat out playing the receiver and not the ball.

 

Some of my hopes for the future of officiating:

 

NFL adopts NCAA rules for PI, that means: 15 yard penalty, not a spot foul. Giving the ball to the offense on the 1 yard is basically giving them a touchdown. And with how ticky-tack PI gets called nowadays, I don't think it should be penalized that hard. Or maybe it should. Either way, be more consistent with these calls.

 

Get rid of running into the kicker/punter. Forever. (I guess roughing should stay, but be real conservative calling it. And by conservative, I mean, only call it for picking up the punter and pile-driving him into the ground)

 

Get rid of roughing the passer. Stop it. I'd rather see quarterbacks hit IR week after week instead of seeing games hinge completely on one call like that. Or at least make it a stiuation where the 15 yards is tacked onto the play (as in, if its a 3rd and 10 at the 30 yard line, its now 3rd and 10 at the 45 yard line)

[NCCubFan]

GO COLTS!!!! (The Bears are my 2nd favorite so I wont cry too much if they win.)

You're just the opposite of me (the Bears are my favorite team and the Colts 2nd).

[Derwood]

I actually think college should adopt the spot foul for PI.

 

And you can't get rid of roughong the passer. Why would you give DE's and blitzing LB's incentive for blowing out a QB's knees every chance they get?

[CuseCubFan69]

I actually think college should adopt the spot foul for PI.

 

And you can't get rid of roughong the passer. Why would you give DE's and blitzing LB's incentive for blowing out a QB's knees every chance they get?

 

I agree. Just get refs that can do their job and that helps eliminate the problem.

[CuseCubFan69]

Are they bringing in PAC 10 refs to do the game? If the game is a blow out at least we can watch Larry, Curly and Moe do their thing.

[CuseCubFan69]

I can see why some experts say Brady needs more help offensively but didn't they score 34 points in that game and a bunch against SD? It seems to me the defense didn't do their jobs more than the Pat's offense.

[Soul]

I actually think college should adopt the spot foul for PI.

 

And you can't get rid of roughong the passer. Why would you give DE's and blitzing LB's incentive for blowing out a QB's knees every chance they get?

 

I agree. Just get refs that can do their job and that helps eliminate the problem.

 

Yeah, I don't like the 15-yard PI call. That idea didn't make it in the pros because it would lead to the "good" pass interference, sort of like a "good" foul in basketball. And the NFL doesn't want 13-6 games to be the rule. And as much as I love defense, I agree with them.

 

As far as roughing the passer, there's no way they are going to change those calls. I'd settle with just better officiating on the PI calls.

 

That horsecollar crap needs to go the way of the do-do bird though. And the "illegal contact" calls have gotten out of hand. You can't even so much as lay a pinky finger on the receiver after 5 yards or it's a penalty, but you can effectively trip him to the ground if you play it right and it will be called "incidental." Doesn't make any sense.

 

They need to start calling holding better too. They're letting OLines get away with blatant holding on nearly every pass play now.

[CuseCubFan69]

I actually think college should adopt the spot foul for PI.

 

And you can't get rid of roughong the passer. Why would you give DE's and blitzing LB's incentive for blowing out a QB's knees every chance they get?

 

I agree. Just get refs that can do their job and that helps eliminate the problem.

 

Yeah, I don't like the 15-yard PI call. That idea didn't make it in the pros because it would lead to the "good" pass interference, sort of like a "good" foul in basketball. And the NFL doesn't want 13-6 games to be the rule. And as much as I love defense, I agree with them.

 

As far as roughing the passer, there's no way they are going to change those calls. I'd settle with just better officiating on the PI calls.

 

That horsecollar crap needs to go the way of the do-do bird though. And the "illegal contact" calls have gotten out of hand. You can't even so much as lay a pinky finger on the receiver after 5 yards or it's a penalty, but you can effectively trip him to the ground if you play it right and it will be called "incidental." Doesn't make any sense.

 

They need to start calling holding better too. They're letting OLines get away with blatant holding on nearly every pass play now.

 

You could call holding on about every play in football and that's the funky thing about the game that bugs me...the times they call it and the times they don't. I know whatever happens happens and IMO football is a very subjective sport. Just look at the marks the refs give just to get an idea. Where they come up with some of those are simply beyond me.

[goonys evil twin]

You could call holding on about every play in football and that's the funky thing about the game that bugs me...the times they call it and the times they don't. I know whatever happens happens and IMO football is a very subjective sport. Just look at the marks the refs give just to get an idea. Where they come up with some of those are simply beyond me.

 

I think they do a pretty good job with holding. It's a tough one. But they basically let anything go until you are reaching for guys or literally wrapping your arms around them. If you're in close with hands in front, you can clutch, but you can't reach. I'm fine with that.

[CuseCubFan69]

You could call holding on about every play in football and that's the funky thing about the game that bugs me...the times they call it and the times they don't. I know whatever happens happens and IMO football is a very subjective sport. Just look at the marks the refs give just to get an idea. Where they come up with some of those are simply beyond me.

 

I think they do a pretty good job with holding. It's a tough one. But they basically let anything go until you are reaching for guys or literally wrapping your arms around them. If you're in close with hands in front, you can clutch, but you can't reach. I'm fine with that.

 

I like the if it doesn't effect the play don't call it kind of an idea. Granted, who's to really know sometimes but some of these stupid calls when they have absolutely no effect on what happened in the play drive me crazy.

[Andy]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

 

Was not aware. Either way, its a dumb play by the DB, because even if he didn't touch the guy, he made no attempt to play the ball at all, and left himself exposed to the PI.

 

Why is this a rule anyway? If he doesn't touch the receiver, how is he interfering with his ability to get the ball?

 

First of all, I think I over-reacted a little bit, so sorry for that. I'm not sure why its a rule. I remember having it called against my high school team several years ago and being a little confused, but I've seen it called in the NFL a few times since then. I think its just so people arent just sticking their hands in the receiver's face to try and block their vision and stuff like that.

Understood. I didn't mind the 2nd one so much either, if only because it enabled me to get off the quote of the night to one of my friends I was watching the game with: (This was after the two Caldwell drops)

 

"The only excuse they could have for not calling it is if they ruled it uncatchable because it was thrown to Reche Caldwell."

[VanceJergins]

So some terrible calls in this one helped make a 17-point difference in this game:

 

1. The absolutely inexcusable PI call on Hobbs in the endzone when he made absolutely no interference whatsoever.

 

2. The absolutely inexcusable PI noncall when Caldwell was tackled in the endzone. Pats kick a FG instead.

 

3. The absolutely inexcusable roughing the passer call, which was, considering the situation, probably the worst of all those pathetic excuses for penalties.

 

As you can tell, I don't like the Colts.

 

Hhah, fo-sho, bro. How can there be pass interference if the guy doesn't TOUCH the other player? I don't care if he dives in front of him and doesn't turn around....he didn't TOUCH THE GUY.

 

Either way. The calls didn't make the Patriots give up 32 points or whatever in the second half. Any defensive stand on any number of drives and they'd be in the Super Bowl.

 

That is a clearly defined rule. You cannot just turn your back and stick your hands up. Thats face-guarding and its against the rules. Its not even a controversial call.

 

Was not aware. Either way, its a dumb play by the DB, because even if he didn't touch the guy, he made no attempt to play the ball at all, and left himself exposed to the PI.

 

Why is this a rule anyway? If he doesn't touch the receiver, how is he interfering with his ability to get the ball?

 

First of all, I think I over-reacted a little bit, so sorry for that. I'm not sure why its a rule. I remember having it called against my high school team several years ago and being a little confused, but I've seen it called in the NFL a few times since then. I think its just so people arent just sticking their hands in the receiver's face to try and block their vision and stuff like that.

Understood. I didn't mind the 2nd one so much either, if only because it enabled me to get off the quote of the night to one of my friends I was watching the game with: (This was after the two Caldwell drops)

 

"The only excuse they could have for not calling it is if they ruled it uncatchable because it was thrown to Reche Caldwell."

 

Haha, he had some pretty ridiculous non-catches. Although the one where NOBODY was on him wouldnt have been a touchdown because Sanders had an angle on him....that was still hilariously awful.

[thedaymen]

"The only excuse they could have for not calling it is if they ruled it uncatchable because it was thrown to Reche Caldwell."

 

I used to make that joke about every pass thrown by Cade McNown.

[BigSlick]

Watching football is easier when you don't care about penalties as much. If you have a well-coached team, no bad penalty should cost your team the game. If you execute it shouldn't come down to a bad call anyway. (yes i Know there will always be close games, but still)

 

The most ridiculous thing I heard recently was that the officiating in the Bears game was poor because the Bears were only whistled for one penalty.

 

A-doy?

 

Whatever happened to a well disciplined team? Do they no longer exist? Clearly the Bears just didn't COMMIT penalties, not that the Reffs didn't CALL them.