The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Enough... time to move this back to smack. We've been off topic long enough.

The TC App wrote:What is Down by Contact?

Any ball carrier who is either tackled to the ground by the opposing team, or who falls to the turf on his own and is touched by the opposing team. Certain body parts such as the knee, elbow, hip, and head are considered down by contact. Basically any body part other than hands, fingers, and feet constitue a ball carrier to be declared down.

The ball is dead the instant the runner touches the ground.

He was never a "ball carrier." He was never a "runner."

The pass is incomplete, as the receiver went to the ground in the process of making the catch and did not maintain possession of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

More denial of the essence of the rule being ignored, insults, etc. to come.

DarthMonk wrote:He was never a "ball carrier." He was never a "runner."

Lmao he really doesn't watch football (this is clear)

ball·car·ri·er a player in possession of the ball and attempting to advance it.

according to Monk, Receivers just simply catch the ball but don't advance it...once again ignoring that, receivers like tight ends and even RB's
must first start the play in motion aka running thus making them runners...then receivers (catching) and then back to runners (advancing the ball)
The rule of down by contact applies to these sorts of players, not just running backs, but wide receivers and tight ends...when a player either is
entangled with another player (defender) or has fallen to the ground on his own, Or when either his knee or elbow strikes the turf making it a
dead ball at the point of where he's marked as down

all these ignored, which includes the obscure view from the pilon and his arm that fails to prove the ball
actually touched the ground as he and his NFL brainwashing counterparts will have you believe...I could
go on but I've embarrassed him enough time to put this to bed

Say goodnight Gracie

The TC App wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:He was never a "ball carrier." He was never a "runner."

Lmao he really doesn't watch football (this is clear)

We both watch but your post displays a lack of understanding. Here's why:

The TC App wrote:ball·car·ri·er a player in possession of the ball and attempting to advance it.

Dez never established possessiion since he failed to complete the catch as prescribed by the oft quoted (and ignored by your posts) rule.

The TC App wrote:according to Monk, Receivers just simply catch the ball but don't advance it...once again ignoring that, receivers like tight ends and even RB's must first start the play in motion aka running thus making them runners...then receivers (catching) and then back to runners (advancing the ball)

By this definition the left guard is a runner.

The TC App wrote:The rule of down by contact applies to these sorts of players, not just running backs, but wide receivers and tight ends...when a player either is entangled with another player (defender) or has fallen to the ground on his own, Or when either his knee or elbow strikes the turf making it a dead ball at the point of where he's marked as down

The rule of down by contact applies to ball carriers and to be one, one must establish possession. Again, Dez never established possessiion since he failed to complete the catch as prescribed by the oft quoted (and ignored by you) rule.

The TC App wrote: ... never actually touched the ground as he and his NFL brainwashing counterparts will have you believe...

OMG.

It doesn't not get any clearer than this:

Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the ball until after his contact with the ground

I saw the rule properly applied to RGIII denying him of a TD so my hate or lack thereof for the Cowgirls is irrelevant.

Back on topic.

Dallas has maybe a 5% chance of going all the way. The Ravens maybe 3%. Tne Jags maybe 1%.

Locking the thread might be wise.

^^^^^^

^^^ TC APP showing its glaring limits.

Back on topic.

Dallas has maybe a 5% chance of going all the way. The Ravens maybe 3%. The Jags maybe 1%.

Locking the thread might be wise.

^^^ says I'm an app but he's the one spewing the programmed responses

The TC App wrote:^^^ says I'm an app but he's the one spewing the programmed responses

^^^ Ironic and as predicted.

Your posts have no logical response for this ...

Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the ball until after his contact with the ground

which completely negates the down by contact "arguments" of your posts.

Back on topic.

Dallas has maybe a 5% chance of going all the way. The Ravens maybe 3%. Tne Jags maybe 1%.

Locking the thread might be wise.

DarthMonk wrote:
Back on topic.

Dallas has maybe a 5% chance of going all the way.

No defense, same offensive line as last year, 1 good receiver,
1 good tight end, 2 veteran runners, 1 rookie runner, 3 players
on suspension 2 for a month 1 for 10 games, NO special teams
gunner/returner no back up's and an injury prone Romo

5% is way to generious

TexasCowboy wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:
Back on topic.

Dallas has maybe a 5% chance of going all the way.

No defense, same offensive line as last year, 1 good receiver,
1 good tight end, 2 veteran runners, 1 rookie runner, 3 players
on suspension 2 for a month 1 for 10 games, NO special teams
gunner/returner no back up's and an injury prone Romo

5% is way to generious

Perhaps. Vegas says 16 to 1. That's around 6%. Vegas probably thinks the chances are a little lower but they like to make money. They've probably factored in things like chances of Romo, Dez, and the line staying healthy coupled with injuries to people like Newton, AR, and Wilson.

DarthMonk wrote:Perhaps. Vegas says 16 to 1. That's around 6%. Vegas probably thinks the chances are a little lower but they like to make money. They've probably factored in things like chances of Romo, Dez, and the line staying healthy coupled with injuries to people like Newton, AR, and Wilson.

I find this to be foolish gambling Romo even if healthy could start the season 0-4 given their
opponents are? NY, Washington, Chicago and San Francisco and it only gets worse from there
when they have to take on GB, Pittsburgh and Baltimore maybe just maybe they beat Cincy
and Cleveland anything else beyond that? I can't see happening unless I'm wrong and they
manage to sneak one out ( can't see it happening) so to give them any odds doesn't seem
right to me