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

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Hernandez did the same thing to Barnes earlier in the game (except Barnes isn't an actor and didn't take a dive). Of course Hernadez dropped a perfect pass for a TD, but the flag still should have come out.

I have one question. Inside of 5 yards a DB can molest a WR as much as he wants as long as he doesn't hold him and the ball isn't in the air, and that is a legal play. Heck the DB can knock a guy to the ground and that is OK as long as it is in 5 yards.

So why can't a WR push a little too?

With all the rules that favor the offense this one is decidedly in favor of the defense.

The Skins played a great game, I enjoyed it thoroughly.

It was nice to see unexpected players step up. Granted, this was the worst team in the NFL defensively, but I will say this.

The Redskins did NOT play down to the defenses level of ineptitude. They took advantage of a weak squad and stayed with them. They executed and played with urgency. I appreciate that and cannot wait for the remaining games, FA, the draft and the return of injured players.

^^ that's what I'm talkin' about


we are not far off

hoefully these guys continue to bring in young players that can help and add depth

we have not had any semblance of either for a while

SkinsJock wrote:^^ that's what I'm talkin' about


we are not far off

hoefully these guys continue to bring in young players that can help and add depth

we have not had any semblance of either for a while

I agree. U can see signs of a better team in the future.

Well... for once, I cannot complain about Kyle's game management, at least. Frankly, the call on Moss was cheesy... the kind of call that the Pats get, but no one playing them does. There were multiple examples of Patriot receivers pushing off, that were not called.

The call against Fletcher was horrendous... pure League Brady-love. It went both ways... the "unecessary roughness" call against Wilfork was technically correct... but still a BS call against the big guy... I detest what the league is doing to destroy to spontaneous flow of the game. They are adding a level of "decision making" prior to any tackle. Defensive players must to a risk-benefit analysis prior to every hit. You could see that following the Fletcher penalty... hesitance in making contact with the NFL's golden boy.

Next? On field rule consultants, to provide player advice on the financial advisability/risk of making that hit. "Whoa, big guy... you can hit him... but there is a 53.7% chance that the zebra on the other side of the line, who will see nothing except Brady's head hitting the ground, is going to flag you for "roughing"... and you will get a call next Tuesday imposing a $50K fine... even though the call is wrong." Disgusting.

Countertrey wrote:Well... for once, I cannot complain about Kyle's game management, at least. Frankly, the call on Moss was cheesy... the kind of call that the Pats get, but no one playing them does. There were multiple examples of Patriot receivers pushing off, that were not called.

The call against Fletcher was horrendous... pure League Brady-love. It went both ways... the "unecessary roughness" call against Wilfork was technically correct... but still a BS call against the big guy... I detest what the league is doing to destroy to spontaneous flow of the game. They are adding a level of "decision making" prior to any tackle. Defensive players must to a risk-benefit analysis prior to every hit. You could see that following the Fletcher penalty... hesitance in making contact with the NFL's golden boy.

Next? On field rule consultants, to provide player advice on the financial advisability/risk of making that hit. "Whoa, big guy... you can hit him... but there is a 53.7% chance that the zebra on the other side of the line, who will see nothing except Brady's head hitting the ground, is going to flag you for "roughing"... and you will get a call next Tuesday imposing a $50K fine... even though the call is wrong." Disgusting.

+1

Countertrey wrote:the "unecessary roughness" call against Wilfork was technically correct... but still a BS call against the big guy... I detest what the league is doing to destroy to spontaneous flow of the game.

I can't agree with this. I have been watching football for the better part of 35 years and don't think it was ever acceptable for a player to go elbow first into a player that is on the ground already. It reminded me of WWE, when a wrestler goes to the top road and does the old "atomic elbow" on the guy on the mat. Except in WWE, the wrester isn't normally 400lbs and the elbow hit is actually fake.

There was also helmet to helmet. It wasn't much, but Skins' players have been flagged for less helmet to helmet contact.

What also gets me is all of the Pats fans I heard complaining about "roughing" call Carter drew for hitting Rex low. It is funny since that rule is often (incorrectly) called the "Brady rule". Players are no longer allowed to hit QBs at or below the knee. The competion commitee put that rule in place after one of the Steelers shreaded Carson Palmers knee during a playoff game in Jan 2006. Later, in 2009 when Brady had his knee gooned up by a player that was on the ground, but kept coming after Brady, the competion commitee made it clear that a player on the ground couldn't hit a QB low either.

He should at the very least be benched for a game to see if it has any effect on him. The guy has never been a consistent tackler, and that play on Gronkowski was simply inexcusable.

StorminMormon86 wrote:He should at the very least be benched for a game to see if it has any effect on him. The guy has never been a consistent tackler, and that play on Gronkowski was simply inexcusable.

1. Hall is an above average DB when it comes to willingness to tackle RB's.
2. If you want to bench people for being inconsistent tacklers, Reed Doughty would be the FIRST person to go.
3. If Hall deserves to be benched for anything, it's for his reckless attitude. Picking up that flag and throwing it was stupid.

StorminMormon86 wrote:He should at the very least be benched for a game to see if it has any effect on him. The guy has never been a consistent tackler, and that play on Gronkowski was simply inexcusable.

Did I miss something, isn't DHall the guy that made the tackle of Gronkowski?

Look the way the refs were throwing 15 yard flags Sunday, I can see Hall getting a yellow hankie if he had hit Gronk when he was "in the grasp". Hall thought just like I did that the HE TE had stepped out.

So play until the whistle blows, right? Just ask Kevin Barnes had that works out. He kept playing last week, made a clean hit on Sanchez, and still drew a roughing call. The Refs said the whistle had blown, even though no one heard it.

Am I making an excuse for Hall? Yes. Should he have went over and pushed Gronkowski out of bounds? Yes. Can I understand how he would be hesitant to hit a player after he thought the play was over, even though he didn't hear the whistle? Yes. Can I understand why Tanahan is mad with him? Yes.

I'm madder at Hall for the bone head flag toss! I'm madder at the Refs having a completely incompetent game! I'm madder at Elderman getting rewarded for bad acting!

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:^^ that's what I'm talkin' about


we are not far off

hoefully these guys continue to bring in young players that can help and add depth

we have not had any semblance of either for a while

I agree. U can see signs of a better team in the future.

I agree with both of you guys. There was a tough stretch there through the middle of the season, but after the last few games I can say I'm much more comfortable with the progress that we have seen from this team. We are seeing the beginnings of a quality system, with quality depth in place. We need more depth and most of all some high-level talent to make us competitive, but that is what next year's FA market and draft will do for us, if Shanahan can continue the trajectory he's put this team on.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:^^ that's what I'm talkin' about


we are not far off

hoefully these guys continue to bring in young players that can help and add depth

we have not had any semblance of either for a while

I agree. U can see signs of a better team in the future.

I agree with both of you guys. There was a tough stretch there through the middle of the season, but after the last few games I can say I'm much more comfortable with the progress that we have seen from this team. We are seeing the beginnings of a quality system, with quality depth in place. We need more depth and most of all some high-level talent to make us competitive, but that is what next year's FA market and draft will do for us, if Shanahan can continue the trajectory he's put this team on.

I've been saying this for some time but...last years and this years starters are really nothing more than depth. These guys are doing to be our depth. Especially after a offensive focused FA and draft. Last years starting offensive linemen, some started this season off on the bench. This years offensive linemen, some may start off next year on the bench as depth. Armstrong, depth. Gafney, depth. Both possibly replaced by Hankerson, Niles or a FA pickup, D. Bowe anyone? #shrug. I'm excited.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:1. Hall is an above average DB when it comes to willingness to tackle RB's.
2. If you want to bench people for being inconsistent tacklers, Reed Doughty would be the FIRST person to go.
3. If Hall deserves to be benched for anything, it's for his reckless attitude. Picking up that flag and throwing it was stupid.

I responded in the wrong thread, oops.

But calling Hall an above average DB is a bit of a stretch. Knowing what we know now, wouldn't you rather have kept Rogers and gotten rid of Hall? Who's having the better year? I don't want to bench him over his missed tackles, I think he should be benched over the fact that he stood there and watched Gronkowski struggle free from two of our players and simply watched him run down field. The flag throwing was icing on the cake.

I also would like to nominate the Wilson interception as my favorite play by our D this year so far.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:He should at the very least be benched for a game to see if it has any effect on him. The guy has never been a consistent tackler, and that play on Gronkowski was simply inexcusable.

1. Hall is an above average DB when it comes to willingness to tackle RB's.
2. If you want to bench people for being inconsistent tacklers, Reed Doughty would be the FIRST person to go.
3. If Hall deserves to be benched for anything, it's for his reckless attitude. Picking up that flag and throwing it was stupid.

+1

D Hall is the best corner we have. Period. He's a hothead. Take the good with the bad. End of the day, he wants to win and hates to lose. He just needs to harness that emotion and release it through his play and not by losing his temper.

StorminMormon86 wrote:But calling Hall an above average DB is a bit of a stretch.

Sir, I was speaking in reference to his willingness to make tackles when I called him above average. Now, in regards to his overall ability, he is above-average when he's his usual ball-hawking self. I wanted to keep Rogers (see my avi) but he refused to get his eyes checked while here, there's no guarantee he would have fixed them if he stayed, his performance in SF is moot, he didn't do that here.

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:1. Hall is an above average DB when it comes to willingness to tackle RB's.
2. If you want to bench people for being inconsistent tacklers, Reed Doughty would be the FIRST person to go.
3. If Hall deserves to be benched for anything, it's for his reckless attitude. Picking up that flag and throwing it was stupid.

I responded in the wrong thread, oops.

But calling Hall an above average DB is a bit of a stretch. Knowing what we know now, wouldn't you rather have kept Rogers and gotten rid of Hall? Who's having the better year? I don't want to bench him over his missed tackles, I think he should be benched over the fact that he stood there and watched Gronkowski struggle free from two of our players and simply watched him run down field. The flag throwing was icing on the cake.

I also would like to nominate the Wilson interception as my favorite play by our D this year so far.

Duly noted. My favorite would have to be Ryan Kerrigan's batted ball, interception, touchdown romp in Game 1 versus the Gnats.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Countertrey wrote:the "unecessary roughness" call against Wilfork was technically correct... but still a BS call against the big guy... I detest what the league is doing to destroy to spontaneous flow of the game.

I can't agree with this. I have been watching football for the better part of 35 years and don't think it was ever acceptable for a player to go elbow first into a player that is on the ground already. It reminded me of WWE, when a wrestler goes to the top road and does the old "atomic elbow" on the guy on the mat. Except in WWE, the wrester isn't normally 400lbs and the elbow hit is actually fake.

There was also helmet to helmet. It wasn't much, but Skins' players have been flagged for less helmet to helmet contact.

What also gets me is all of the Pats fans I heard complaining about "roughing" call Carter drew for hitting Rex low. It is funny since that rule is often (incorrectly) called the "Brady rule". Players are no longer allowed to hit QBs at or below the knee. The competion commitee put that rule in place after one of the Steelers shreaded Carson Palmers knee during a playoff game in Jan 2006. Later, in 2009 when Brady had his knee gooned up by a player that was on the ground, but kept coming after Brady, the competion commitee made it clear that a player on the ground couldn't hit a QB low either.

Guess we'll disagree, then. The NFL is killing the golden goose. The competition comittee would have been better served to require quarterbacks to wear protective knee braces (they do work) rather than destroying the flow of the game. Instead, they hamstring defensive players, and give the refs another excuse to influence the outcome of games.

Countertrey wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Countertrey wrote:the "unecessary roughness" call against Wilfork was technically correct... but still a BS call against the big guy... I detest what the league is doing to destroy to spontaneous flow of the game.

I can't agree with this. I have been watching football for the better part of 35 years and don't think it was ever acceptable for a player to go elbow first into a player that is on the ground already. It reminded me of WWE, when a wrestler goes to the top road and does the old "atomic elbow" on the guy on the mat. Except in WWE, the wrester isn't normally 400lbs and the elbow hit is actually fake.

There was also helmet to helmet. It wasn't much, but Skins' players have been flagged for less helmet to helmet contact.

What also gets me is all of the Pats fans I heard complaining about "roughing" call Carter drew for hitting Rex low. It is funny since that rule is often (incorrectly) called the "Brady rule". Players are no longer allowed to hit QBs at or below the knee. The competion commitee put that rule in place after one of the Steelers shreaded Carson Palmers knee during a playoff game in Jan 2006. Later, in 2009 when Brady had his knee gooned up by a player that was on the ground, but kept coming after Brady, the competion commitee made it clear that a player on the ground couldn't hit a QB low either.

Guess we'll disagree, then. The NFL is killing the golden goose. The competition comittee would have been better served to require quarterbacks to wear protective knee braces (they do work) rather than destroying the flow of the game. Instead, they hamstring defensive players, and give the refs another excuse to influence the outcome of games.

I agree. If I had my way hits like that the Carter hit on Rex shouldn't be a flag, but it was deffinately illegle with the current rules.

The Wlifork hit was a dirty cheap shot on a player that was on the ground (yes he could have gotten up). Wilfork was trying to hurt Royster and wasn't trying to keep him from getting up or "down him". A cheap shot that will be fined.

Of course the Jets fans felt that way about the Barnes hit on Sanchez last week. They though Barnes would get at a minimum a $25K fine. To this day I have not been able to find where Barnes was fined. It appears the NFL thought the hit was clean.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Hernandez did the same thing to Barnes earlier in the game (except Barnes isn't an actor and didn't take a dive). Of course Hernadez dropped a perfect pass for a TD, but the flag still should have come out.

I have one question. Inside of 5 yards a DB can molest a WR as much as he wants as long as he doesn't hold him and the ball isn't in the air, and that is a legal play. Heck the DB can knock a guy to the ground and that is OK as long as it is in 5 yards.

So why can't a WR push a little too?

With all the rules that favor the offense this one is decidedly in favor of the defense.

You are right about Hernandez shoving Barnes off of him. All the TE's do that to Barnes.

About the 5 yds - contact is legal both ways for the WR and the DB. I tried to see if Moss's contact was within 5 yards. It looks like the initial contact was but with the acting job by the DB, it looked like it went beyond the 5 yards. I think had the ref seen the initial contact, he doesn't make that call. The DB was also shoving Moss. Moss got the last shove and that is what they called and it was outside of the 5 yds at that point.

skinsfan#33 wrote:Am I making an excuse for Hall? Yes. Should he have went over and pushed Gronkowski out of bounds? Yes. Can I understand how he would be hesitant to hit a player after he thought the play was over, even though he didn't hear the whistle? Yes. Can I understand why Tanahan is mad with him? Yes.

When a player is wrapped up, Hall does not pile on or do late hits, he goes for the ball everytime. Folks are so quick to defend Hall on this play that they never give Hall that option which is the main option Hall takes when a player is wrapped up and Hall's preferred option when he is not wrapped up. Hall is a ball hawk, so he should have gone over and tried to strip the ball even as he saw him going out of bounds. Another option would have been to cover the play in case Gronk got free.

There is no excuse for that type of play (Quitting before the whistle was blown and knowing that it wasn't blown) from a team captain or any player and I am glad that we have a head coach who publicly addressed it and called it like it is instead of excusing it.

Red_One43 wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Hernandez did the same thing to Barnes earlier in the game (except Barnes isn't an actor and didn't take a dive). Of course Hernadez dropped a perfect pass for a TD, but the flag still should have come out.

I have one question. Inside of 5 yards a DB can molest a WR as much as he wants as long as he doesn't hold him and the ball isn't in the air, and that is a legal play. Heck the DB can knock a guy to the ground and that is OK as long as it is in 5 yards.

So why can't a WR push a little too?

With all the rules that favor the offense this one is decidedly in favor of the defense.

You are right about Hernandez shoving Barnes off of him. All the TE's do that to Barnes.

About the 5 yds - contact is legal both ways for the WR and the DB. I tried to see if Moss's contact was within 5 yards. It looks like the initial contact was but with the acting job by the DB, it looked like it went beyond the 5 yards. I think had the ref seen the initial contact, he doesn't make that call. The DB was also shoving Moss. Moss got the last shove and that is what they called and it was outside of the 5 yds at that point.

The initial contact was made at the 2 yard line and ended at the 1 yard line. The LoS was the 5yard line + about 6". So All of the contact was made with in 5 yds of the LoS.
I don't think offensive players can push off to gain separation even inside of 5 yds, but I could be wrong. If it matters MS said the call was the correct call even if it was a little on the picky side.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Hernandez did the same thing to Barnes earlier in the game (except Barnes isn't an actor and didn't take a dive). Of course Hernadez dropped a perfect pass for a TD, but the flag still should have come out.

I have one question. Inside of 5 yards a DB can molest a WR as much as he wants as long as he doesn't hold him and the ball isn't in the air, and that is a legal play. Heck the DB can knock a guy to the ground and that is OK as long as it is in 5 yards.

So why can't a WR push a little too?

With all the rules that favor the offense this one is decidedly in favor of the defense.

You are right about Hernandez shoving Barnes off of him. All the TE's do that to Barnes.

About the 5 yds - contact is legal both ways for the WR and the DB. I tried to see if Moss's contact was within 5 yards. It looks like the initial contact was but with the acting job by the DB, it looked like it went beyond the 5 yards. I think had the ref seen the initial contact, he doesn't make that call. The DB was also shoving Moss. Moss got the last shove and that is what they called and it was outside of the 5 yds at that point.

The initial contact was made at the 2 yard line and ended at three 1 yard line. The LoS was the 5yard line + about 6". So All of the contact was made within 5 yds of the LoS.

I don't think offensive players can push off to gain separation even inside of 5 yds, but I could be wrong. If it matters MS said the call was the correct call even if it was a little on the picky side.

I agree that the call was picky. I agree with your yard line synopsis, but I think what got the Ref's attention, was Edelman flopping backward in the endzone. The Ref clearly believed the acting job by Edelman or he was clearly biased or a both. I believe both but without the bias, the call is not made since was was so close to 5 yards. One thing we can agree on the refs were consistent in on the calls in that area. Did you see any O line holding calls on the Pats? We had one major one which I agree that it was holding, but I saw some major holds on the Pats, but not one called that I can remember.

Players are NOT called for holding all the damn time

this is nothing new - it's part of the game - EVERYONE knows this

why even bring it up

Red_One43 wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:Here is the replay http://www.twitvid.com/73GEZ

Thanks for passing that along. Yeah, that's pretty damning of Moss's move.

Hernandez did the same thing to Barnes earlier in the game (except Barnes isn't an actor and didn't take a dive). Of course Hernadez dropped a perfect pass for a TD, but the flag still should have come out.

I have one question. Inside of 5 yards a DB can molest a WR as much as he wants as long as he doesn't hold him and the ball isn't in the air, and that is a legal play. Heck the DB can knock a guy to the ground and that is OK as long as it is in 5 yards.

So why can't a WR push a little too?

With all the rules that favor the offense this one is decidedly in favor of the defense.

You are right about Hernandez shoving Barnes off of him. All the TE's do that to Barnes.

About the 5 yds - contact is legal both ways for the WR and the DB. I tried to see if Moss's contact was within 5 yards. It looks like the initial contact was but with the acting job by the DB, it looked like it went beyond the 5 yards. I think had the ref seen the initial contact, he doesn't make that call. The DB was also shoving Moss. Moss got the last shove and that is what they called and it was outside of the 5 yds at that point.

The initial contact was made at the 2 yard line and ended at three 1 yard line. The LoS was the 5yard line + about 6". So All of the contact was made within 5 yds of the LoS.

I don't think offensive players can push off to gain separation even inside of 5 yds, but I could be wrong. If it matters MS said the call was the correct call even if it was a little on the picky side.

I agree that the call was picky. I agree with your yard line synopsis, but I think what got the Ref's attention, was Edelman flopping backward in the endzone. The Ref clearly believed the acting job by Edelman or he was clearly biased or a both. I believe both but without the bias, the call is not made since was was so close to 5 yards. One thing we can agree on the refs were consistent in on the calls in that area. Did you see any O line holding calls on the Pats? We had one major one which I agree that it was holding, but I saw some major holds on the Pats, but not one called that I can remember.

I agree the flop probably drew the flag.

I didn't think Mo Hurt was holding. His hand was in the chest of the player and his shoulder was still ahead of the DL shoulder. If that is even technically holding, which I don't think it was, it was the type of holding that gets called one time out of 500.