Sammys Boombox

I hate talking about the Cubs with real people. Guy stopped me in a gas station because I'm wearing a Cubs hat. Wants to tell me that he doesn't think the Cubs will be good until 2017. So, naturally, they should trade Castro for Brandon Phillips straight up and wait for Baez to be good. Somehow he knows Baez is going to struggle the next two years, but is then going to be the best SS in the game in 2017.

After watching Aoki for a year in KC I do not want any part of that guy. He is horrendous in the OF.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/01/upon_further_review_alcom_read.html I don't think its possible to watch this video and say you don't see the ball hitting the ground.

A football move does matter - Dean Blandino said it himself last night. Dez just didn't show a football move - he simply went with his momentum and lost the ball when he hit the ground. Yeah, but a football move can only be made if you are not going to the ground during the catch. They are actions that cannot be done at the same time. If you are making a football move you are no longer considered going to the ground to complete a catch.

made contact, thigh on the ground, no actual visual proof of the ball touching even a BLADE of grass (that I've seen yet) Dallas got hosed. This is delusional, or you are not trying hard enough to find video of the play.

Everybody pay close attention: He's going to the ground throughout the act of the catch. Steps, getting hit, making a football move. None of it matters. It's not that hard.

Well, if the catch yesterday happened as Bryant was heading out of bounds, he wouldn't have reached the ball forward for the end zone. My scenario could be in the middle of the field. So, if the player gets greedy with his ball control it's catch? I'm confused what your point is. Just looking for clarification. I think his point is that the only reason the ball came loose is because Dez, having already caught the ball, was stretching for the end zone. If he'd been at the 15-yard line instead of the 5, he just falls on his butt and this is never an issue. The bottom line is the rule needs to be adjusted somehow. Any set of rules that results in Josh Cribbs being ruled to have possession on that punt and Dez Bryant not being ruled to have possession on that catch needs to be examined. So, should fumbles that occur near the goal line not be fumbles because the guy was only stretching because the end zone was so close? I get he's talking about a football move (WHICH DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE GOING TO THE GROUND FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME), but the player tried to do something that he could not physically do (possess the ball and cross the goal line) and failed. Isn't that what sports are all about?

Well, if the catch yesterday happened as Bryant was heading out of bounds, he wouldn't have reached the ball forward for the end zone. My scenario could be in the middle of the field. So, if the player gets greedy with his ball control it's catch? I'm confused what your point is. Just looking for clarification. the point is you can tap two tows on the sideline fall out of bounds and have the ball hit the ground as you go down and its a catch. But if you do it in the middle of the field its not. That seems contradictory Not true. You have to possess all the way to the ground while going out of bounds too.

Well, if the catch yesterday happened as Bryant was heading out of bounds, he wouldn't have reached the ball forward for the end zone. My scenario could be in the middle of the field. So, if the player gets greedy with his ball control it's catch? I'm confused what your point is. Just looking for clarification.

Let me ask this, if somebody goes up for a ball, grabs it, taps down two feet and one foot bounces twice and then on his way down the ball hits the ground and pops out should that be a completion? I say no. So how do you write the rule that differentiates what Dez did and this scenario?

Technically he could take 15 (or more) steps with the ball secured, and try to juke a defender. If the judgement of the official says he was going to the ground the whole time it's incomplete. Obviously that would be poor judgement, but it would be in the context of the rules. Steps don't matter at all. Football move doesn't matter. Going to the ground in the act of a catch trumps all.

Basically, you have to maintain possession through any of these three to be a catch: 1. A football move 2. Going to the ground 3. Both feet in bounds However, if you are going to the ground in the act of the catch just #3 is not good enough, you must also have #2. It's the same with #1. If you are going to the ground in the act of the catch you must also meet the requirements for #2. I understand that Bryant got three feet down, but he was still in the act of the catch the entire time. EVERY rules expert has agreed on this and I immediately got texts from knowledgable fans of the Bears and Rams telling me they thought it was incomplete. People who watch a lot of the NFL were not surprised the call was overturned. You can still hate the rule. I hate the rule even more that says if they had ruled it a catch and then a fumble and it went out the end zone that the Packers would have gotten it at the 20, but I would challenge you to write a rule defining a catch because it's a lot harder than you'd think.

You still have to maintain possession all the way to the ground in that instance too.

It was dislodged by the ground. How can you tell? I never saw on a replay the ball actually touch the ground How are people making this claim? It was obviously shown during the broadcast.

It's just another glimpse of how out there the rules have become. PI can't be reliably called. Holding is a crapshoot. Completed catches could go either way depending on a number of things. Heck, many times the play clock is at zero and no flag. Guys are lined up in the neutral zone, no call. It's terrible all around This. I'm obviously glad it was called incomplete, but there was holding all around both sides all game and nothing was called and then they call a hold on a Packers return where there was clearly no holding (unless they got the player's number wrong). PI calls are a game changer and there is no consistency. Also, the blow to the head of the QB rule during a sack is not consistent. Rodgers got hit hard on the helmet today during a sack, no penalty. That's a 25-yard swing. The PI that setup the Cowboys first TD was not a catchable ball, but that didn't matter. Matthews was clearly held on the third down play right before the Bryant catch/no catch that would have made it 3rd and really long instead of 4th and 2. On Murray's long run that setup Dallas last TD there was an obvious hold at the line that sprung the play. As a fan of the Packers these stick out to me, but I'm sure Cowboys fans have a list in their minds too. I really think the "All-Star" crews is a bad way to go for the playoffs. Not that the regular season is much better. Really sucks because almost every close game you lose you can look to multiple bad calls and say, "If only that was called correctly." It can make football infuriating.

I understand the people that don't like the rule, but the ones that claim the ball never touched the ground, are you watching on black and white SD TV?

Fair enough. In my opinion the Lions are still a much better opponent than the Panthers even if the Panthers match up well with Seattle. But it's just an opinion.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/05/nfl-addresses-kroenke-announcement/ I love your avatar.

I mean, that's pretty much a done deal, right? Rams are gone? http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nfl/story/_/id/12122091/st-louis-rams-owner-planning-stadium-site-los-angeles

I'll be rooting for either DAL or DET to be humiliated in shame. Don't care who. I just want the Packers to get the Panthers and the Seahawks to have to play a decent team (Detroit). Carolina's won 5 in a row, not really fair to imply they aren't decent. They're every bit as likely to win in Seattle as Detroit is, IMO. I don't think it's splitting hairs to think the Packers conference title odds playing CAR then winner of DET/SEA >> playing DAL then winner of CAR/SEA.

I haven't heard anyone mention it, but Bryant actually did this in the first half of the game as well. I'm pretty sure it was right after the running into the punter that extended the 99-yard TD drive.

As a newcomer to the SEC fans of other schools in this conference cannot comprehend that right now the SEC is not head and shoulders above every other conference. A friend of a friend who is an Alabama fan just claimed that Missouri won the SEC East the last two years only because moving to the SEC made them a much better team. I would have said it had more to do with everybody else in the division having down years at the same time and things (including the schedule) falling right for Missouri, but I guess SEC Missouri is like Big XII Missouri + some magical SEC power up.

I'll be rooting for either DAL or DET to be humiliated in shame. Don't care who. I just want the Packers to get the Panthers and the Seahawks to have to play a decent team (Detroit).

As much as I hate Detroit I am the biggest Lions fan this weekend.