Was Colin Cowherd Correct?

[HardRightEdge]

More importantly, under the rules when the game was played, it was not a catch.

True, sort of. At the time I argued that catch conformed with officiating practice, but perhaps not the rules. Whether the creteria at that time was "football move" or "act common to the game" (I can't recall which) after 2 feet down, diving should have qualfied. But again, the practice was consistent in calling these kinds of catches "no catches" even if that did not reflect the actual rule. I also argued at the time that the controversial calls of this type did not respect the athleticism of the players. It's good they came around to my way of thinking even if it did take years and the general outrage over that Jesse James call to finally get it fixed (we think).

Speaking of rules, this new rule regarding helmet contact will be a mess if they enforce it at or around the line of scrimage on run plays. The rule makes no exceptions. This rule does not exempt offensive players, either. So, we're to expect RBs are going to run high through the hole and D-Linemen will be standing up at the snap to wrap up, and LBs coming up to fill the hole will stay high to wrap up? I don't think so. The way the run game has been played and defended forever, helmets are bound to initiate contact. Runners get low, defenders get low, and in the scrum at the line of scrimage helmets frequently and unintentionally initiate contact whether by the defender or the runner.

If this rule is enforced the way it's written, it would be the most significant rule change since O-Linemen were allowed to use their hands. It would transform the run game. The 3 point stance becomes problematic.

Despite all of the resources that go into fashioning rules, the NFL seems to not think things through. Lets hope they do not adhere to the letter of the law at the line of scrimage because flags will be flying on ordinary run plays with players and fans alike going "what the f***?".

 

[rmontro]

In my opinion it was especially interesting hear him talk about the franchise tag as the Packers could use it on him down the road. A soft cap like in the NBA would be a terrible idea.

Seems like allowing for greater player mobility in the NFL would be disastrous for places like Green Bay. Reggie White did decide to come here, but that took an act of God.

It's good they came around to my way of thinking

I may be the only person who was fine with the rule the way it was, having to survive the ground and all that. The offense gets plenty of advantages as it is.

This is what was being discussed on Cowherd today: Martellus Bennett was quoted as saying Rodgers has the better arm, but Tom Brady is the better quarterback because of his leadership, because he is precise, and is easy to play for.

“He makes the game easy, what he expects, where he wants you to be, where he’s putting the ball, he does so many repetitions with you, mental reps, physical reps, walk-through, he’s always letting you know,” Bennett said of Brady. “He communicates the best of what he expects. The communication between him and the receiver is on the highest level: What you like to do, what he likes to throw, if you ask him to do something he’ll try it.”

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...est-arm-but-tom-brady-is-easier-to-play-with/

Cowherd also drew a connection between Rodgers squabbling with his family and squabbling with his receivers.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Seems like allowing for greater player mobility in the NFL would be disastrous for places like Green Bay. Reggie White did decide to come here, but that took an act of God.


I may be the only person who was fine with the rule the way it was, having to survive the ground and all that. The offense gets plenty of advantages as it is.

This is what was being discussed on Cowherd today: Martellus Bennett was quoted as saying Rodgers has the better arm, but Tom Brady is the better quarterback because of his leadership, because he is precise, and is easy to play for.

“He makes the game easy, what he expects, where he wants you to be, where he’s putting the ball, he does so many repetitions with you, mental reps, physical reps, walk-through, he’s always letting you know,” Bennett said of Brady. “He communicates the best of what he expects. The communication between him and the receiver is on the highest level: What you like to do, what he likes to throw, if you ask him to do something he’ll try it.”

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...est-arm-but-tom-brady-is-easier-to-play-with/

Cowherd also drew a connection between Rodgers squabbling with his family and squabbling with his receivers.

Bennett and Cowherd...now there's two guys with a lot of credibility.

 

[rmontro]

Bennett and Cowherd...now there's two guys with a lot of credibility.

Being a Packer fan, I have no use for Bennett, obviously. As for Cowherd, a lot of the national sports media commentators seem to get on people's nerves. Right now I can't stand watching Max Kellerman, although I think Stephen A. Smith usually has a sensible approach. But I don't think you can completely dismiss what Cowherd said. There have been some ex-teammates of Rodgers that have thrown a little shade his way. Rodgers may have the most talent, but you can certainly make the argument that Brady has been the more successful quarterback, and leadership is part of that.

 

[sschind]

Being a Packer fan, I have no use for Bennett, obviously. As for Cowherd, a lot of the national sports media commentators seem to get on people's nerves. Right now I can't stand watching Max Kellerman, although I think Stephen A. Smith usually has a sensible approach. But I don't think you can completely dismiss what Cowherd said. There have been some ex-teammates of Rodgers that have thrown a little shade his way. Rodgers may have the most talent, but you can certainly make the argument that Brady has been the more successful quarterback, and leadership is part of that.

I would have absolutely no problem with any player who played with both QBs claiming Brady is a better leader than Rodgers. Just as one example some fans take Rodgers recent comments about the rookie WRs as evidence of leadership but I don't necessarily see it that way. Rodgers is very competitive and gives his all at all times and he expects the same from all those around him. That is a positive quality but its not exactly leadership.

 

[PackerDNA]

Honestly guys, I get more knowledgable and intelligent football discussion on this forum or at my favorite bar than I could ever get at ESPN and the likes of.

 

[Poppa San]

I get more knowledgable and intelligent football discussion on this forum

You're welcome.

 

[OldSchool101]

GB has not been “Elite” by pure #’s of recent Superbowls, but the Packers have had their share of success during the last several decades. also.
I mean damn! we lost an NFC Championship OT game by a FG to the Giants, who by the way crushed undefeated Patriots seasons 2 weeks later. That’s just one example of how close we’ve been to the top.
We as a fan base of anyone should know how difficult it is to get to, and stay at, the top. We may not be the Patriots as of late. But show me one other team out of the 30 remaining that has been the model of consistency in the last 20 years.??
Denver??? I honestly had to look them up! They’ve won 1 SB since the 1990’s!!
I was using AOL “you got mail” and preparing for the upcoming Y2K party at my House just to connect their 3 SB wins in as many decades!
In 2018, I would much rather put my money on GB than any other team aside from the Pats. They are still the team to beat. They are the only true team to beat.
There is no trophy for winning consistency in this sport, but if there were GB would be In the first row of nominees at thar award ceremony. We wouldn’t want to trip getting up the the stage for our acceptance speech.
We can’t change the mistakes we’ve made, but we can as fans support our team during those tough times. If all we do is support our family in the good times.. that doesn’t make us any different than the Chicago Bears fans.
Coward can go kick rocks

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Rodgers may have the most talent, but you can certainly make the argument that Brady has been the more successful quarterback, and leadership is part of that.

Brady has been more successful because the Patriots were able to put more talent around him. Having Belichick as the team's head coach certainly helped as well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But show me one other team out of the 30 remaining that has been the model of consistency in the last 20 years.??

The Steelers have been pretty good over the past 20 years as well.

 

[rmontro]

Brady has been more successful because the Patriots were able to put more talent around him. Having Belichick as the team's head coach certainly helped as well.

It's like the perfect storm. Dude has five rings, that's crazy.
But if the Pats have had more talent, Belichick gets credit for that also.