2026 Super Bowl IN-GAME

KJ said:
Yeah this is the perfect sitch for guys who get drafted high and fail initially

I damn near want to be Sam's agent and start an online class on how to get knocked down but still succeed

#Chumbawumba
Click to expand...

It’s pretty simple. Sit in a room with Kyle Shanahan for a year.
 
KJ said:
Yeah this is the perfect sitch for guys who get drafted high and fail initially

I damn near want to be Sam's agent and start an online class on how to get knocked down but still succeed

#Chumbawumba
Click to expand...
Crazy to say but a guy like Zach Wilson could still be good in the right system and a good team. He'll never lift a bad team though.
 
Inspekdah said:
Eh you might not see the ball again.

And I have a hard time thinking the game comes down to a Rams having FG attempt for a win vs needing a touchdown
Click to expand...

But the entire logic of going for it on 4th is trust in your defense to get you the ball back. With that being a given, kicking the FG there was the only move. You’re now down 1 and only need a FG to win.

You’ve already implied you’re trusting your defense, so what’s the difference between trusting them down 1 or down 4? The fact that you can win with a FG and don’t need a TD. EITHER way you need a stop from your defense, and in one of the scenarios you only need a FG. It was an all time horrible decision, regardless of the outcome. It just defies logic to not kick a FG in that spot.

Not to mention, it was 4th and 4, so running it was maybe out of the question…and they still ran a play to the EZ as opposed to trying to the the first down. If you’re not trying to get the first down, and only going TD there, all the more reason you’re an idiot and should be kicking the FG.

Also, side note…the 3rd and 8 “catch” is tough to understand how it’s a catch when he didn’t survive the ground and clearly didn’t have 2 steps and a football move so he needed to maintain possession through the ground contact. How that wasn’t even discussed on the broadcast is wild, especially given the BUF/DEN play with the INT by DEN.
 
FSU24 said:
But the entire logic of going for it on 4th is trust in your defense to get you the ball back. With that being a given, kicking the FG there was the only move. You’re now down 1 and only need a FG to win.

You’ve already implied you’re trusting your defense, so what’s the difference between trusting them down 1 or down 4? The fact that you can win with a FG and don’t need a TD. EITHER way you need a stop from your defense, and in one of the scenarios you only need a FG. It was an all time horrible decision, regardless of the outcome. It just defies logic to not kick a FG in that spot.

Not to mention, it was 4th and 4, so running it was maybe out of the question…and they still ran a play to the EZ as opposed to trying to the the first down. If you’re not trying to get the first down, and only going TD there, all the more reason you’re an idiot and should be kicking the FG.

Also, side note…the 3rd and 8 “catch” is tough to understand how it’s a catch when he didn’t survive the ground and clearly didn’t have 2 steps and a football move so he needed to maintain possession through the ground contact. How that wasn’t even discussed on the broadcast is wild, especially given the BUF/DEN play with the INT by DEN.
Click to expand...

They never got the ball back, well really. The argument is they didn’t go for 2 basically at the very end of the third. Going down 1 with a crappy defense and 4 minutes isn’t the same as being up 3.
 
FSU24 said:
But the entire logic of going for it on 4th is trust in your defense to get you the ball back. With that being a given, kicking the FG there was the only move. You’re now down 1 and only need a FG to win.

You’ve already implied you’re trusting your defense, so what’s the difference between trusting them down 1 or down 4? The fact that you can win with a FG and don’t need a TD. EITHER way you need a stop from your defense, and in one of the scenarios you only need a FG. It was an all time horrible decision, regardless of the outcome. It just defies logic to not kick a FG in that spot.

Not to mention, it was 4th and 4, so running it was maybe out of the question…and they still ran a play to the EZ as opposed to trying to the the first down. If you’re not trying to get the first down, and only going TD there, all the more reason you’re an idiot and should be kicking the FG.

Also, side note…the 3rd and 8 “catch” is tough to understand how it’s a catch when he didn’t survive the ground and clearly didn’t have 2 steps and a football move so he needed to maintain possession through the ground contact. How that wasn’t even discussed on the broadcast is wild, especially given the BUF/DEN play with the INT by DEN.
Click to expand...

I’m surprised they didn’t talk about that catch or possibly lack of a catch more. If McVay challenges and loses does he still stop the clock?
 
Inspekdah said:
They never got the ball back, well really. The argument is they didn’t go for 2 basically at the very end of the third. Going down 1 with a crappy defense and 4 minutes isn’t the same as being up 3.
Click to expand...

That’s another reason you kick the FG there…you chose not to go for 2 twice when able to cut the lead to 3. Why do that if the reason wasn’t to possibly kick 2 FGs to win the game?

Cut it to 3 at either spot and you’ve tied either tied the game on that 4th and 4 with a FG, or you’re still in the spot where kicking a FG cuts the lead to 2 (as you’re down 5 missing the 2 pt conversion), and it’s the right decision to kick the FG on the 4th and 4.

Just seemed the way they played it the entire game that it made no sense to not only not kick a FG in that spot, but to throw into the EZ as opposed to underneath to pick up the first down. Was an all time bad decision.
 
Inspekdah said:
I’m surprised they didn’t talk about that catch or possibly lack of a catch more. If McVay challenges and loses does he still stop the clock?
Click to expand...

Just seemed super odd given the Bills/Broncos play and a couple of others last weekend (Adams vs Bears for one), that it wasn’t even mentioned at all. I don’t think it was a catch to be honest, he did not survive the ground, end of story.
 
FSU24 said:
That’s another reason you kick the FG there…you chose not to go for 2 twice when able to cut the lead to 3. Why do that if the reason wasn’t to possibly kick 2 FGs to win the game?

Cut it to 3 at either spot and you’ve tied either tied the game on that 4th and 4 with a FG, or you’re still in the spot where kicking a FG cuts the lead to 2 (as you’re down 5 missing the 2 pt conversion), and it’s the right decision to kick the FG on the 4th and 4.

Just seemed the way they played it the entire game that it made no sense to not only not kick a FG in that spot, but to throw into the EZ as opposed to underneath to pick up the first down. Was an all time bad decision.
Click to expand...

I don’t really 100% disagree. But I think if you’re playing that game and you want to extend the game then you should have had urgency with momentum to work quickly. You need to play for the ball back even if you score 3 or even 7. Assuming Seattle could score again. They kick 3, get 7, or turn it over on downs with 6:30 left and it’s a different game. With 5 minutes you give them a chance to end the game with 2 conversions which is what happened. Rams came up about a minute short.
 
FSU24 said:
Just seemed super odd given the Bills/Broncos play and a couple of others last weekend (Adams vs Bears for one), that it wasn’t even mentioned at all. I don’t think it was a catch to be honest, he did not survive the ground, end of story.
Click to expand...

Cowboys fans agree with you. Dez Bryant had that ball for far longer.
 
So i‘m not trying to criticize the refs, i‘m genuinely asking here: what’s the difference between Stidham fumble and tuck rule?
 
VirginiaCavs said:
So i‘m not trying to criticize the refs, i‘m genuinely asking here: what’s the difference between Stidham fumble and tuck rule?
Click to expand...
First, the Tuck Rule was eliminated in 2013. In Stidham's case he tucked it but then made an attempt at a two-hand chest pass, negating the tuck. I thought it was deflected backwards by the lineman but on the replay it became clear that the lineman never touched the ball, he influenced Stidham's hand direction. Since Stidham was in control of the ball when it was released it was an attempted pass, not fumble. But since his hands pushed the ball backwards it was a backwards pass and therefore a live ball.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015543364133806280
 
I'm not sure if you're American if you aren't watching a Japanese player lose the Phoenix Open at the moment
 
Overweight American drains putt to defeat the Japan guy in OVERTIME

I want some sushi tonight before breaking this down
 
Giannis invested in Kalshi

They took $23million in wagers on who he'd be traded to (alleged market wagering) before the trade deadline

No trade/Bucks was a winner

Not sure how they handle this but it seems like a situation
 
Next up....

Biggest mismatch is SB recency by my very suspicious numbers

But SEA defense v NE offense is a lot of fun on paper
 
Is anyone in here even on Seattle?

Shitty ingame if everyone is on one side and it the team that likely loses by 20 plus
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top