Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Football Forum (NFL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (40941)	12/23/2017 8:41:45 PM
From: JimisJim	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45639

"Improve" is such a subjective thing... <ggg> ... however, I take your pt., and even suggest that the current rule is also subjective -- if it weren't that Steelers' play wouldn't still be under discussion by so many people, granted, many of those discussing it don't really understand the current rules, either, so who knows? I might actually agree that the rule that's been in place for 5 years should be untouched because it seems like too many NFL rules change every season (unlike the pace of change in MLB, for example -- they change rules, too, but not nearly as many or as often as the NFL) and at least the reception rule changes stopped 5 years ago, unlike say touchback rules, extra pt. rules, etc... but I keep bringing it up in this case only because I'm now a Steelers fan since the Chargers (in effect) left San Diego a few years ago and simply made the physical relocation only happened this season... <ggg> Oh, shoot, now I remember the Hochuli rule and how it was born in response to a call he made reversing a Chargers' fumble recovery, ruling it was a Denver incomplete pass, and afterward said he thought the rule should be changed because of how it affected the actual outcome of that game (I seem to remember it was vs. Denver, but maybe it was some other team): "On September 14, 2008, Hochuli officiated a game between the San Diego Chargers and the Denver Broncos.[33] He made an incorrect call with 1:17 left in the game, while Denver was in possession of the ball at the San Diego one-yard line and they were trailing the Chargers by seven points. On a second-down play, Denver quarterback Jay Cutler fumbled the ball, and it was recovered by San Diego linebacker Tim Dobbins. Ed Hochuli blew his whistle during the play, signaling that the play was dead and ruling an incomplete pass. "Hochuli later wrote, "Affecting the outcome of a game is a devastating feeling. Officials strive for perfection – I failed miserably."[34] The NFL passed a rule the following offseason allowing such plays to be reviewable under the instant replay rule for the 2009 NFL season.[35] Speaking to Referee in November 2009, Hochuli told the magazine, "It was really an easy play. I’ve thought many times why I did what I did. The best explanation is it was almost like dyslexia. I realized it was a fumble and did the wrong thing. I realized I was wrong but there was nothing I could do about it."[36]"

To: Bill who wrote (40941)	12/24/2017 8:50:45 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Recommended By Bill FJB Ms. Baby Boomer Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 45639

Sources: Teams complain that Packers violated IR rule, think Aaron Rodgers should be released 8:18 AM ET Adam SchefterESPN Senior Writer Facebook Twitter Facebook Messenger Pinterest Email print comment(I liked this comment, "as a result of this rule violation by the Packers, the New England Patriots will be docked 2 drafts picks in the upcoming draft.") Multiple teams complained to the NFL last week that the Packers violated the rules regarding players who are eligible to be placed on injured reserve -- and Green Bay should have to release quarterback Aaron Rodgers as a result, league sources told ESPN. NFL rules stipulate that a player needs to have suffered a new injury that would sideline him at least six weeks to be placed on injured reserve and, if that is not the case, the team is obligated to release the player once he is healthy. EDITOR'S PICKS Meaningless or not, Packers' shutout loss does little to save face in lost yearThe Packers had nothing riding on Saturday's loss to the Vikings, but that doesn't make the shutout loss to Minnesota any less disconcerting. Rodgers was activated off injured reserve and played last Sunday against Carolina but came out of the game because he was "sore," according to Packers coach Mike McCarthy. But Green Bay did not announce its decision to place Rodgers back on IR until Tuesday, after the Packers had been eliminated from a potential postseason spot. Had the Falcons lost to the Buccaneers on Monday night, keeping alive Green Bay's playoff chances, it's possible Rodgers could have played Saturday night against the Vikings. But the Packers opted to shut him down, which teams complained was a violation of NFL rules. It is not believed that Rodgers suffered any type of new injury last Sunday against Carolina. If Rodgers didn't suffer a new injury but was placed back on IR anyway, NFL rules stipulate that the Packers would have to release him -- which nobody expects will happen. It is why multiple teams raised the issue. Teams wanted to know why the Packers were being granted immunity. The NFL referred all inquiries about the situation to the Packers, who have declined comment. But one source said Rogers wasn't going to be medically cleared to play in Green Bay's next game, and the Packers knew he wasn't 100 percent. Still, not gaining medical clearance and being placed on injured reserve are two different things -- which is what drew the ire of multiple teams around the league. Rodgers was placed on IR and missed seven games after suffering a broken right clavicle in Green Bay's game against Minnesota on Oct. 15. In the Packers' loss to the Panthers, he threw three touchdowns and three interceptions -- the first time he has been picked off that many times in a game since 2009. ESPN's Rob Demovsky contributed to this report.