Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
GFNER

Packers-Cowboys

Recommended Posts

Yeah that's a messed up rule for sure. So a receiver can have control of the ball two feet down and go to the ground where it can cause an incompletion. To me it looked like he was stretching for the goal line vs going to the ground. In that event it should have been a catch. But the ruled he didn't complete the action after the catch. Lame but oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B.S. rule/call. He clearly caught the ball took 3 steps and was reaching for the goal line when the ball hit the ground.

The way I see it reaching for the goal line should be considered a football move, and that should have been a catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schmitty that's how I saw it too. The refs claimed he wasn't reaching for the goal line rather going to the ground hence the decision. I find it hard to believe it was overturned though. Most times those things "stand as called" since they don't want to stick their neck out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, he didnt take 3 steps!! He was off balance from the moment the ball touched his had, turned but never really made a "football" move he dove/fell to the ground, he didnt maintain control after hitting the ground, no catch, period. Right call.

I hate the packers, but the call was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who say he wasn't going for the goal, explain why his hand/arm were stretched out. If that play was near the 50 yard line and nothing on the line, he brings in in and holds it near his chest and "maintains" control through the entire hitting of the ground with the ball. He was aware that the goal line was there and he was trying to cross it. The mere act of stretching it out toward the goal is a football move, AFTER the two+ steps with control. That's a catch.

Even if it's "borderline" between catch and no-catch (which it must be, or there would be no debate on the topic) -- the undisputed fact is that it was INITIALLY CALLED A CATCH. There's not enough evidence that he didn't make a football move after having possession, IMHO, to OVERTURN the call on the field. If it had been called a non-catch, I'd have said the same thing. It was close enough of a play with not enough evidence on the replay -- in that case, you have to maintain the call on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gutsy play on 4th down,

It was, but worth the risk when you're trying to advance in the playoffs? It was 4th and 2, not 4th and 10+ and I have to question lobbing it up 30yds when the season is on the line. Dallas will be Dallas, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would bet my life that if they were playing against the Vikings that would have been ruled a catch.

Possession in the air, 3 steps, and a dive with arm extended should be considered a football move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possession in the air, 3 steps, and a dive with arm extended should be considered a football move.

Thats what I thought as well. He took three steps and looked to deliberately dive toward the goal line. Not sure how that's not a "football" move but I guess there is a lot of room for interpretation in what actual constitutes a football move.

Either way I don't see the Packers or Cowboys going into Seattle and winning, at least not with Rodgers as limited as he appeared. He looked like he could barely move and that was after 2 weeks of rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like this?

MegaMoron pretty much let go of the ball on his own at the same time it hit the ground on that play.

If he wasn't in the endzone did all that then dove and extended his arm trying to cross the goaline then the ground caused the ball to pop out it should be a complete pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who say he wasn't going for the goal, explain why his hand/arm were stretched out. If that play was near the 50 yard line and nothing on the line, he brings in in and holds it near his chest and "maintains" control through the entire hitting of the ground with the ball. He was aware that the goal line was there and he was trying to cross it. The mere act of stretching it out toward the goal is a football move, AFTER the two+ steps with control. That's a catch.

Even if it's "borderline" between catch and no-catch (which it must be, or there would be no debate on the topic) -- the undisputed fact is that it was INITIALLY CALLED A CATCH. There's not enough evidence that he didn't make a football move after having possession, IMHO, to OVERTURN the call on the field. If it had been called a non-catch, I'd have said the same thing. It was close enough of a play with not enough evidence on the replay -- in that case, you have to maintain the call on the field.

Agree all the way on this. I saw it as a football move. I didn't see enough evidence to overturn it. Should have stood. Refs should not win or loose games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree all the way on this. I saw it as a football move. I didn't see enough evidence to overturn it. Should have stood. Refs should not win or loose games.

And I disagree all the way on this. (So what???) As far as refs winning or losing games, with 4 minutes left to play, I think Rogers's ability to move the ball against Dallas (80 yd. & 90yd. drives) would have been enough to get them in field goal position. In the hypothetical world, GB would have won by 1 instead of by 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no dog in the fight but after the call he was on the field with helmet off just like last week. I'd hate to try to coach someone who doesn't learn and can't control himself for the betterment of the team. He's a bad egg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no dog in the fight but after the call he was on the field with helmet off just like last week. I'd hate to try to coach someone who doesn't learn and can't control himself for the betterment of the team. He's a bad egg.

I was disgusted to see that, too. I prefer seeing rules consistently enforced rather than selectively enforced. To me, the ruling on Bryant's catch was consistent with the calls throughout the season. Bryant seems to get a pass on the helmet rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not nearly as bad as the call in the Det vs Dallas game...

the main difference between the call last week and Cowboys call this week is that the NFL won't be apologizing today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand the rule as applied, you can clearly see he has possession with 2+ feet down and separates the ball to 1 hand to reach for the goal line and tries to spike in across... so if he catches a pass and runs 40 yds and dives for the goal line and losses the ball is that also a incomplete pass? at what point is there control is it 2 steps or 3 or 10? and don't give me this steps don't matter dump... he is making a play to do more that just catch the ball, he is making a play to score... I am so conflicted because the 3 teams I hate the most (Det- Dal and GB) are all in these controversies with phantom rules/calls/non calls and while I love it because of my hate... I hate that football, which I love, is becoming so stupid and lacking common sense.

Now that would not mean Dal would have won but lets be honest the game was over with that overturn by INDISPUTABLE VIDEO EVIDENCE????? Seems like I could dispute that he was making a "Football Move" as he had enough control to put the ball into 1 hand to reach out, just saying. This is a overturn, I could make the same argument if it had been called a incomplete pass by the official, we are swapping 1 officials opinion for another and that should not be an overturn IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



  • Posts

    • That's because this is the cooking thread and not Silly Town. Plenty of whining be-oches to argue with over there all day!
    • You guys must have a nicer wife than I've got. By the end of the day I'm worn out from arguing with her and come here for a break. Seems like the opposite on here sometimes. 
    • Yes, we buy the spray cans of olive oil,canola or whatever. I personally haven't tried fish but with breaded chicken I'm not a big fan. It works great when I make wings and non battered chicken. Just my personal experience.
    • That is a thing of beauty. I am speechless and if you know me........
    • Those are cool but I enjoy the amount of water that mixes with my whiskey when I put 2 or 3 cubes of ice in it.
    • That's why my wife is getting one for Winter Solstice too!
    • Milton’s put 1/8 on your house? Was that the new owner? Mines Miltona, 4 years old and came with either 1/4 or 5/16, not 100% sure but it wasn’t 1/8. 
    • I get what Del is saying to a certain extent. I would never buy a bottle of Pappy for $2000. There's no way that any whiskey can taste 40-50 times better than a $30-$50 bottle. I actually rarely buy anything over $35/bottle but that's just me being cheap. I do like to try the $50 stuff but have rarely found anything that I like better than Eagle Rare, Buffalo Trace or Maker's Mark. Actually one of my favorite Bourbon's is Jim Beam Black for only about $25 a bottle. That being said I couldn't care less what other people drink or what they pay for their whiskey, beer, wine or whatever. If you have a job and make your own money, buy and drink what you want. I don't know if that's true or not but I sometimes wonder the same thing about all the people who claim to like really hoppy beers.
    • Between the frig and stove its only about 2 steps    My kinda program !!!
    • like any addiction..........there are the 12 steps!!!!!!!!!!
  • Our Sponsors