|
|
|
|
#1
12-19-2005, 12:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Someone has to explain two things to me: (1) the failure to reverse the "interception" -- the receiver had possession and clearly was down ... and the TV crew does not know what they are taling about; and (2) the 4th down handoff to Duckett, after the same play lost 1 yard (oh and you have Vick back there who could run for it himself). [/ QUOTE ] This game is by far the low point in Jim Mora's coaching career (and I blame Mora not Knapp). They started with a conservative attitude and refused to allow their players to do what they do best. The decision to Duckett was just an illustration of how illprepared and intimidated the Falcons were coached tonight. The Jenkins call was atrocious and I have no explanation for it. They will not and do not deserve to go to the playoffs. 
|
|
#2
12-19-2005, 12:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Someone has to explain two things to me: (1) the failure to reverse the "interception" -- the receiver had possession and clearly was down ... and the TV crew does not know what they are taling about; and [/ QUOTE ] I assume they said no possession and since the ball never hit the ground it was a catch by the Bears' DB off of the WR's body. I couldn't really tell, though.
|
|
#3
12-19-2005, 12:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Someone has to explain two things to me: (1) the failure to reverse the "interception" -- the receiver had possession and clearly was down ... and the TV crew does not know what they are taling about. . . [/ QUOTE ] I posted this in another thread: [ QUOTE ] It was a good call on the INT. The receiver never established possession by getting a second foot down before getting knocked to the ground, in which case he must maintain possession when he hits the ground in order for it to be ruled a catch. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#4
12-19-2005, 12:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Someone has to explain two things to me: (1) the failure to reverse the "interception" -- the receiver had possession and clearly was down ... and the TV crew does not know what they are taling about; and (2) the 4th down handoff to Duckett, after the same play lost 1 yard (oh and you have Vick back there who could run for it himself). [/ QUOTE ] Neither play had that much of an impact on the game. The Bears just kicked their ass.
|
|
#5
12-15-2005, 10:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
Toast is the new CCx.
I'm just happy you aren't using "we" anymore in your analysis.
|
|
#7
12-16-2005, 08:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Toast is the new CCx. I'm just happy you aren't using "we" anymore in your analysis. [/ QUOTE ] Nah, there was always more venom in the CCx posts. If the Falcons lose this week there won't be another 20 posts ripping him.
|
|
#8
12-16-2005, 10:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
Toast is the new CCx. I'm just happy you aren't using "we" anymore in your analysis. [/ QUOTE ] I think my record making Falcons picks speaks for itself.
|
|
#9
12-16-2005, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Toast is the new CCx. I'm just happy you aren't using "we" anymore in your analysis. [/ QUOTE ] I think my record making Falcons picks speaks for itself. [/ QUOTE ] Very true.
|
|
#10
12-16-2005, 10:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falcons @ Bears: Opportunity Knocks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Toast is the new CCx. I'm just happy you aren't using "we" anymore in your analysis. [/ QUOTE ] I think my record making Falcons picks speaks for itself. [/ QUOTE ] What exactly is that record?
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
