NFL 2025

[GSG]

I still can't figure out when it happened

 

[AZRaiderH8r]

Really sucks for Bo.

 

[Mavric]

I still can't figure out when it happened

Supposedly it was on the designed QB sweep (thrid-to-last play). He didn't appear to be limping after that play but he was kind of slow walking back to the huddle. Then he really got in on the kneel down/center the ball before the field goal. He did seem to go down awkwardly on that one.

 

[Mavric]

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Street Novelist]

Quiet night here in the Bay...very quiet

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Quiet night here in the Bay...very quiet

As my Niners buddy said, they were playing this post-season with house money, which got swept off the table last night.

 

[Archy1221]

Far from "phantom" PI calls.

I did think the INT was a pretty questionable call. For starters, as Steratore said on the broadcast, I don't think there was ever clear possession. But after watching it again, I wonder if "surviving the ground" comes in to play. If the Bronco rips it out and the ball falls to the turf, it's definitely incomplete because he didn't complete the catch. So, from that standpoint, it would still be a live ball that McMillan came up with.

Here is the problem though as the NFL had already established precedent for this type of play. And then went against it.

 

[Archy1221]

As my Niners buddy said, they were playing this post-season with house money, which got swept off the table last night.

This year was a heck of a coaching job by the Niners staff. The injuries they went through and to still get to this point was pretty awesome

 

[Mavric]

Here is the problem though as the NFL had already established precedent for this type of play. And then went against it.

Eh, those two plays are not similar enough to say you have to rule them the same. For starters, it was obvious that Rogers had possession with both feet on the ground. And I don't know that the "survive the ground" would apply in that situation. There was no clear look showing Cooks had clear possession. And, even if he did, he would have to "survive the ground." As I said earlier, if the ball had just been ripped out and fallen to the ground, it seems very likely that it would have been ruled incomplete (because he didn't "survive the ground"). But since it didn't touch the ground, it was a live ball that Denver came up with. Steratore agrees.

 

[Archy1221]

Eh, those two plays are not similar enough to say you have to rule them the same.

 

[Mavric]

Yep. Some random guy with an X account should definitely be given more weight than a long-time NFL referee and rules analyst.

Not to mention that he definitely did not satisfy part (c) of what he posted.

 

[Archy1221]

Yep. Some random guy with an X account should definitely be given more weight than a long-time NFL referee and rules analyst.

Not to mention that he definitely did not satisfy part (c) of what he posted.

That “some random guy with an X account” showed you a play quote similar to the play in question. So now that a similar play was found, thereby making your disagreement on the Roger’s play a moot point, you decide to diminish that play because some rando found it? OK.

 

[MLB 51]

Yep. Some random guy with an X account should definitely be given more weight than a long-time NFL referee and rules analyst.

Not to mention that he definitely did not satisfy part (c) of what he posted.

Steratore is a clown. He quit the ref job because he sucked at it. Network should be ashamed for hiring him as an analyst.
At worst, this should have been ruled a no catch.

 

[Mavric]

That “some random guy with an X account” showed you a play quote similar to the play in question. So now that a similar play was found, thereby making your disagreement on the Roger’s play a moot point, you decide to diminish that play because some rando found it? OK.

"Similar" is not "the same."