Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Thielen Catch


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

The ball moved in his hands when he hit the ground and he immediately went out of bounds - not a catch. Ball can't move at all even if it's still in the hands. Great effort though.

Also, like the Cotchery catch, it's a bit tough but if he gets it cleanly in the first place then anything else is (likely here, anyway) a moot point.

Edited by KSpan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KSpan said:

The ball moved in his hands when he hit the ground and he immediately went out of bounds - not a catch. Ball can't move at all even if it's still in the hands. Great effort though.

Also, like the Cotchery catch, it's a bit tough but if he gets it cleanly in the first place then anything else is (likely here, anyway) a moot point.

He has it secured the entire time. I don’t get why you would gaslight our own players for the sake of the refs ignorance and incompetence. The end result is we got cheated, purposeful or not.  You can’t coach, “hey catch this pass in a way that doesn’t get us cheated out of the game.”   
 

Refs need to be held accountable and overruled in real time. It’s too much of good ole boy system. That’s why they never fix anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, OneBadCat said:

He has it secured the entire time. I don’t get why you would gaslight our own players for the sake of the refs ignorance and incompetence. The end result is we got cheated, purposeful or not.  You can’t coach, “hey catch this pass in a way that doesn’t get us cheated out of the game.”   
 

Refs need to be held accountable and overruled in real time. It’s too much of good ole boy system. That’s why they never fix anything.

No he didn't. As I said, to my eyes the ball moved in his hands when he hit the ground and immediately went out of bounds before regaining full control. By rule that's not a catch.

I have to say also that I love that uniform combo. The blue jerseys are ugly IMO and the lighter blue is better but that darker color of pants with black jerseys is killer.

Edited by KSpan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, KSpan said:

No he didn't. As I said, to my eyes the ball moved in his hands when he hit the ground and immediately went out of bounds before regaining full control. By rule that's not a catch.

I have to say also that I love that uniform combo. The blue jerseys are ugly IMO and the lighter blue is better but that darker color of pants with black jerseys is killer.

No man. When the shoulder hits the ground he doesn’t lose possession. His hands move and adjust with the ball but it is secured and not bobbled. That’s a TD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, OneBadCat said:

No man. When the shoulder hits the ground he doesn’t lose possession. His hands move and adjust with the ball but it is secured and not bobbled. That’s a TD. 

In any scenario, if he catches it in the first place it's a TD. He didn't though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP
    • When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
×
×
  • Create New...