Red Mosquito

Electromatic wrote:Jarvis Jones "poor" 40 time is not worrysome for teams that play 3-4. What it means is what we already knew, Jarvis Jones is a pass rush specialist. He's not going to cover TE's all the way down field. He can do it for short periods of time, but he's paid to be a disruptive game changing ball player and that's what he will be, What yesterday means is that a 4-3 defense absolutely has crossed out Jarvis Jones as a canidate. He's not playing in a 4-3.

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

Green Habit wrote:I guess I'm not the average fan, but I see the potential for more confusion. Where is the magic moment when the ball has moved in far enough to declare it a pump fake? Different camera angles could tell different stories depending on the level of view. I just have a feeling that there will be some playoff game that's disputed the same as the tuck rule game thanks to this.

I do agree with you on approving the RB helmet rule, though. All the RBs complaining about this should just use a stiff arm instead. It'll look more badass anyway, since you'll be striking your Heisman pose.

What do you mean by stiff-arming? You stiff arm people coming from the side, not straight at you. That is when you lower down and hit them...

Peeps wrote:i never understood why a running back was allowed to grab your facemask but the defender is penalized if he grabs the running backs

Self wrote:Dumervil to Baltimore, huh? Another reason to have the opener in Denver, I suppose.

Peeps wrote:i never understood why a running back was allowed to grab your facemask but the defender is penalized if he grabs the running backs

Green Habit wrote:

Peeps wrote:i never understood why a running back was allowed to grab your facemask but the defender is penalized if he grabs the running backs

He would be if he actually grabbed it, but 99% of the time, he pushes it. That is legal, and defenders could also push facemasks if they wanted to.

elliseamos wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

Peeps wrote:i never understood why a running back was allowed to grab your facemask but the defender is penalized if he grabs the running backs

He would be if he actually grabbed it, but 99% of the time, he pushes it. That is legal, and defenders could also push facemasks if they wanted to.

not "in the trenches."

Green Habit wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

Peeps wrote:i never understood why a running back was allowed to grab your facemask but the defender is penalized if he grabs the running backs

He would be if he actually grabbed it, but 99% of the time, he pushes it. That is legal, and defenders could also push facemasks if they wanted to.

not "in the trenches."

I'm guessing that it is legal in the trenches, but the calls you're thinking of is when the hands slide under the facemask and hit the actual face--which, of course, is illegal. I could be wrong, of course.

elliseamos wrote:i'm thinking of when a DL or OL pushes the fackmask up. also, when a DL happens to hit a QB in the head while trying to swap a pass.

Green Habit wrote:On a different note, I think Foxworth is right on the money when he says that multiple gay players could come out at once:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -come-out/

Since the selection of NFL players is pretty consistent by a factor not related to sexuality, the sheer math suggests that it's likely that 2-4% of the league's players may be gay.

Electromatic wrote:

Green Habit wrote:On a different note, I think Foxworth is right on the money when he says that multiple gay players could come out at once:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -come-out/

Since the selection of NFL players is pretty consistent by a factor not related to sexuality, the sheer math suggests that it's likely that 2-4% of the league's players may be gay.

and Just like the general public, I think a lot of NFL players wouldn't be bothered at all, and a lot of guys would freak the hell out about it and start quoting scripture, which shouldn't be that hard when it's written on the inside of thier biceps.