You are not logged in. Join Free! | Log In Thank you!    

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages<12
Share
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:48:12 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,513
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,105
Applause Received: 470

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
Let me guess, it was bullsh!t and we sh!t ourselves.


We shit ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline DoddPower  
#17 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:06:36 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,566
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 1,450
Applause Received: 337

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
or threw it to the RB in the flat there and let let him fight for the first down.

I rather the Packers attack first downs than getting greedy so much. But then I'm also one of the people who says stay on the gas and put the game away.

If the RB wasn't there, I'd be okay with this being Jones fault. Since there's someone wide open and could most likely get the first down if the WR on the edge blocks... I think this is on Rodgers decision making.


The RB just doesn't look that open to me. I see a LB within range that would very likely close and lay the wood right as the RB caught the ball, if he caught it at all. I wouldn't expect that option to get a first down. Sure, the defender could miss, but Jones could have also had better position and caught the ball, but that didn't happen either. Overall, just a bad offensive play/good defensive play.
Offline sschind  
#18 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:09:43 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 752
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 78
Applause Received: 307

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
We sh!t ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.


We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.
I fully respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Offline nerdmann  
#19 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:29:18 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,513
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,105
Applause Received: 470

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


Even Pereira mentioned it. Defenseless player.

Three shots to the head in a row, uncalled. Lacy, Starks and Finley. Finally they did one against JJ iirc and it got called.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline steveishere  
#20 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:49:57 PM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,237
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 27
Applause Received: 598

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/24/2013(UTC)
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#21 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52:43 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,644
Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 11
Applause Received: 345

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


I don't think it was an intentional hit, but it was illegal by rule.

Cannot hit the head or neck area of a defenseless player with helment, shoulder or forearm.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline dhazer  
#22 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:30:10 PM(UTC)
dhazer

Rank: Pro Bowl

Posts: 3,872
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 170

People seem to forget how good the Bengal defense is, they haven't given up 300 yards passing in 17 straight games
UserPostedImage

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be :)
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 9/25/2013(UTC)
Offline Dulak  
#23 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 12:21:54 AM(UTC)
Dulak

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,549
Joined: 1/19/2009(UTC)
Location: London, UK (from kenosha)

Applause Given: 122
Applause Received: 80

Originally Posted by: dhazer Go to Quoted Post
People seem to forget how good the Bengal defense is, they haven't given up 300 yards passing in 17 straight games


hey dhazer havnt seen you post in awhile ... welcome back (or maybe Ive missed em).

ya that was a wacky game ... 0-14 ..... 30-14 ..... ends with 30-34 .... I mean come on.

I dont think we should feel so bad - the niners touted as the second coming this season have the same record as us. I mean seriously we heard more about them then the ravens whom won the superbowl.
Offline sschind  
#24 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:50:05 AM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 752
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 78
Applause Received: 307

Originally Posted by: steveishere Go to Quoted Post
You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.


The ONLY other option would have been for him not to hit him at all them because they were going straight for each other. I can see the illegality in light of the defenseless receiver rule but I still don't think it was a bad hit. He didn't dive at him and he didn't lead with his helmet. He was leading with his shoulder (isn't that the way tackles are supposed to be made) and his shoulder hit Finley in the helmet. It was an illegal hit by definition of the rules but I don't think it was intentional and I don't think it was worthy of a fine. Yes it should have drawn a penalty because it was against the rules but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.

This is exactly the kind of play that so many Packers fans who are bitching about it now would be defending it as perfectly fine if the roles were reversed. Not saying anyone here in particular but a lot of them would be and you know it.
I fully respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Offline steveishere  
#25 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:00:00 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,237
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 27
Applause Received: 598

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
The ONLY other option would have been for him not to hit him at all them because they were going straight for each other. I can see the illegality in light of the defenseless receiver rule but I still don't think it was a bad hit. He didn't dive at him and he didn't lead with his helmet. He was leading with his shoulder (isn't that the way tackles are supposed to be made) and his shoulder hit Finley in the helmet. It was an illegal hit by definition of the rules but I don't think it was intentional and I don't think it was worthy of a fine. Yes it should have drawn a penalty because it was against the rules but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.

This is exactly the kind of play that so many Packers fans who are bitching about it now would be defending it as perfectly fine if the roles were reversed. Not saying anyone here in particular but a lot of them would be and you know it.


I don't know it was a weird looking hit. Like he was just running by and his shoulder happened to hit Finley in the helmet. I think he just took a bad angle or something and didn't make contact where he wanted to. If he took a better angle he could have smashed Finley legally and it would have been a great hit but it didn't work out that way. I think his fine was less than is usual for those hits so they took some of that into account. I don't think anyone has said it was an intentional hit though so I don't know where that is coming from.
Offline Zero2Cool  
#26 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:07:45 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

United States
Posts: 25,220
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,738
Applause Received: 1,784

There are millions of Packers fans, young, old, boy, girl, man, woman, hetero, homo, smart, stupid, etc ... there's always going to be a portion that fits any statement.


The hit was illegal and should have been flagged, per the rules according to former head of officiating, Mike Pereira.

Here's a break down of the play. I was surprised taunting wasn't called.
http://msn.foxsports.com...reira-week-3-live-092213

UserPostedImage
Click here and find the LATEST Packers News!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 2.1.0 | YAF © 2003-2014, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.432 seconds.