Another dumb challenge

[BigOrangeJetFan]

Another dumb challenge by Rex in the first half. Doesn't someone upstairs tell him not to throw the challenge flag??

[flgreen]

Disagree

 

it was a 46 yard gain.  The Falcons were running a no huddle O.  Didn't give the Jets time to review it on the big screen.  it was worth a time out to get a look at the play to see if maybe it could be reversed.

 

Good call

[bitonti]

it seemed like they were gonna take a timeout anyway the defense was confused. might as well challenge it too... 

[sourceworx]

It wasn't likely to go their way, but considering Atlanta got such a huge gain on the play, it was worth challenging.

[cr726]

I thought it was a good challenge as well., not a thread worthy topic.

[The Crusher]

On my TV the receiver took two very clear clean steps before losing the ball. 

[kay_gee]

On my TV the receiver took two very clear clean steps before losing the ball.

he practically went out to lunch. it was a dumb challenge. if you need to slow the game down, calling timeout is just as effective.

[The Crusher]

he practically went out to lunch. it was a dumb challenge. if you need to slow the game down, calling timeout is just as effective.

 

 

You must eat quick.  LOL

[joewilly12]

I just submitted my resume to the Jets hopefully I can replace whoever it is they have in the box.

[kay_gee]

You must eat quick. LOL

we don't all get a 2-4 hour lunch break!!!

[The Crusher]

we don't all get a 2-4 hour lunch break!!!

 

 

Lunch break? I have fatdapted to eating while working, sleeping, driving, talking, pooping, peeing, crying, yawning, walking (waddling), and even while making nice nice with teh misses. 

[Sperm Edwards]

I wrote this in the game thread

 

I have an opinion on the - let's call it excessive - use of the challenge flag.   I think this is showing the downside with the HC calling the plays on defense.  While he's wondering whether or not to throw a flag, he's not calling a play in to the defense.  So now there's no time to think of (or send in) a play and the only thing left to do is throw the challenge flag.  Just an opinion.

[JustInFudge]

I wrote this in the game thread

 

I have an opinion on the - let's call it excessive - use of the challenge flag.   I think this is showing the downside with the HC calling the plays on defense.  While he's wondering whether or not to throw a flag, he's not calling a play in to the defense.  So now there's no time to think of (or send in) a play and the only thing left to do is throw the challenge flag.  Just an opinion.

 

Which could be valid.  I also think thats a "what do you have to lose" type of challenge.  It either negates a huge fluky play or lose 1 of your 2 challenges.  Didnt really see the downside on that one.  We've seen some similar plays get reversed this season...the Edelman one comes to mind.

[Bleedin Green]

Disagree

 

it was a 46 yard gain.  The Falcons were running a no huddle O.  Didn't give the Jets time to review it on the big screen.  it was worth a time out to get a look at the play to see if maybe it could be reversed.

 

Good call

 

it seemed like they were gonna take a timeout anyway the defense was confused. might as well challenge it too... 

 

This.  Not to mention, with the changes to the rules regarding reviews, it's a whole different ballgame this year.  They aren't the ridiculously precious commodity they once were now that every single TD, turnover and play within the 2 minute warning is automatically reviewed.  It gives teams the opportunity to go ahead and use it on plays exactly like that one.  It was a hell of a lot smarter to just take the challenge rather than do something like Coughlin did and burn a timeout than use a challenge after that.  The old rules for challenges no longer apply and while some of the spot of the ball challenges from past weeks might have been stupid, I think this is the exact kind of play you use it on with the new rules.

[JustInFudge]

This.  Not to mention, with the changes to the rules regarding reviews, it's a whole different ballgame this year.  They aren't the ridiculously precious commodity they once were now that every single TD, turnover and play within the 2 minute warning is automatically reviewed.  It gives teams the opportunity to go ahead and use it on plays exactly like that one.  It was a hell of a lot smarter to just take the challenge rather than do something like Coughlin did and burn a timeout than use a challenge after that.  The old rules for challenges no longer apply and while some of the spot of the ball challenges from past weeks might have been stupid, I think this is the exact kind of play you use it on with the new rules.

 

Which is why I was fine with his spot challenges too.  Granted, it turns out later we could have used one but still...you dont know how the game is going to go.  If your gut is telling you that could be a turning point play, then challenge that sh*t.  They're not nearly as valuable as they once were.

[Sperm Edwards]

This.  Not to mention, with the changes to the rules regarding reviews, it's a whole different ballgame this year.  They aren't the ridiculously precious commodity they once were now that every single TD, turnover and play within the 2 minute warning is automatically reviewed.  It gives teams the opportunity to go ahead and use it on plays exactly like that one.  It was a hell of a lot smarter to just take the challenge rather than do something like Coughlin did and burn a timeout than use a challenge after that.  The old rules for challenges no longer apply and while some of the spot of the ball challenges from past weeks might have been stupid, I think this is the exact kind of play you use it on with the new rules.

 

This is totally true.  But it's still aggravating to watch.  Plus it did almost cause a loss against Buffalo because he couldn't challenge one that actually should have been challenged and overturned.

[Bleedin Green]

he practically went out to lunch. it was a dumb challenge. if you need to slow the game down, calling timeout is just as effective.

 

Considering that calling a TO costs the same thing (potentially more if the call was overturned) but without getting the review, that would have been even dumber.  It was less of a catch than the one the refs handed back to the Pats.

[Stonehands]

Have someone fall down and fake a stroke to slow the offense down and save the challenge.

[CobraVerde]

it was a good challenge. 

[kay_gee]

Considering that calling a TO costs the same thing (potentially more if the call was overturned) but without getting the review, that would have been even dumber. It was less of a catch than the one the refs handed back to the Pats.

you didn't think that was a catch? take off the green glasses, dude.

[kay_gee]

Lunch break? I have fatdapted to eating while working, sleeping, driving, talking, pooping, peeing, crying, yawning, walking (waddling), and even while making nice nice with teh misses.

I'm sorry I underestimated you.

[Bleedin Green]

you didn't think that was a catch? take off the green glasses, dude.

 

Huh?  Perhaps you need to put on some glasses, those of the reading variety, because that's not what I said at all.

 

To make my points clear here; first, calling a TO when you are considering challenging anyway is absolute idiocy.  Even if you're unsure about it at the time, you're better off going for it then burning a TO, which is the penalty for a failed challenge anyway, and then realizing later that you want to challenge it.  Just ask Tom Coughlin how completely stupid that is.  And while upon review it was clearly a catch, my only other point was that with the volume of idiotic calls the referees make in the NFL, you also never know how things will go.  Just look at Edelman's catch in week 2; he had possession of it longer than White did, yet it was still overturned and called an incompletion.

[kay_gee]

Huh? Perhaps you need to put on some glasses, those of the reading variety, because that's not what I said at all.

To make my points clear here; first, calling a TO when you are considering challenging anyway is absolute idiocy. Even if you're unsure about it at the time, you're better off going for it then burning a TO, which is the penalty for a failed challenge anyway, and then realizing later that you want to challenge it. Just ask Tom Coughlin how completely stupid that is. And while upon review it was clearly a catch, my only other point was that with the volume of idiotic calls the referees make in the NFL, you also never know how things will go. Just look at Edelman's catch in week 2; he had possession of it longer than White did, yet it was still overturned and called an incompletion.

oh I see what you're saying now. but what I'm saying is that I didn't want to challenge it at all. it was clear the guy took 3 steps and it was a road game (like in NE, where NE got a BS help call). it burned the TO anyway AND it ate a challenge we may have needed later.

[Scott Dierking]

I wrote this in the game thread

 

I have an opinion on the - let's call it excessive - use of the challenge flag.   I think this is showing the downside with the HC calling the plays on defense.  While he's wondering whether or not to throw a flag, he's not calling a play in to the defense.  So now there's no time to think of (or send in) a play and the only thing left to do is throw the challenge flag.  Just an opinion.

If you throw the challenge flag in lieu of a timeout, you are burning the ability to call for another challenge, later in the game, if you are incorrect.

 

It is not a smart move to call a challenge, because you may also be taking a TO.

[Larz]

it seemed like they were gonna take a timeout anyway the defense was confused. might as well challenge it too... 

 

this is what rex said in his presser

[Scott Dierking]

this is what rex said in his presser

Just take the time out then-don't waste a challenge You don't know when you may actually need it to challenge something worth challenging.

[Bleedin Green]

oh I see what you're saying now. but what I'm saying is that I didn't want to challenge it at all. it was clear the guy took 3 steps and it was a road game (like in NE, where NE got a BS help call). it burned the TO anyway AND it ate a challenge we may have needed later.

 

I gotcha, but I just don't see challenges being the big deal they used to be.  Every single turnover, TD and play inside the 2 minute warning is up for automatic review now.  The former 2 categories is what teams always saved their challenges for, but now there's no need to do so.  I think it's fair to say Rex didn't see all of the replays we saw, many of them during/after the challenge, so he wasn't entirely convinced.  At that point, if he's going to burn the timeout anyway, I think you just toss the challenge flag.  If there's a chance he might challenge, it'd be far worse to be like Coughlin's stupid ass and do both (sure, he ultimately would have likely not challenged had he called a TO, but he obviously didn't know that at the time).

 

Don't get me wrong, ask me that before the rule change and I would have said differently, but I think these days, those are the exact types of plays you use the challenges on: the non-turnover, non-TD big plays.

[Sperm Edwards]

If you throw the challenge flag in lieu of a timeout, you are burning the ability to call for another challenge, later in the game, if you are incorrect.

 

It is not a smart move to call a challenge, because you may also be taking a TO.

 

I agree.  If he wants to call the plays on defense, that's fine.  But he should have nothing to do with throwing the flag while we're on defense.  Someone else is in charge of that while Rex is dialing up and calling in the next play, acting as though we're not throwing the flag every time.  If it needs to be thrown, then tug on Rex's sweater vest & tell him to throw the flag out there.

[CTM]

Which could be valid.  I also think thats a "what do you have to lose" type of challenge.  It either negates a huge fluky play or lose 1 of your 2 challenges.  Didnt really see the downside on that one.  We've seen some similar plays get reversed this season...the Edelman one comes to mind.

 

 

Don't see what you have to lose? A challenge and a timeout? Didn't we get burned a few weeks back with not having timeouts?

[BP]

Don't see what you have to lose? A challenge and a timeout? Didn't we get burned a few weeks back with not having timeouts?

He's blinded by Rex Love. he wants to put his mouth in the crease of our head coach's ass cheeks. when there's that much man love involved, blindness occurs and stupidity is rampant.

[Jettington]

I thought it was worth a challenge we've seen two similar plays this year that were called incomplete passes, Santonio against Buffalo, and Edelman against us, both were very similar and were called incomplete. The league's rules on this sort of thing seem like such a gray area, so I think it was challenge worthy.

[LionelRichie]

Which could be valid.  I also think thats a "what do you have to lose" type of challenge.  It either negates a huge fluky play or lose 1 of your 2 challenges.  Didnt really see the downside on that one.  We've seen some similar plays get reversed this season...the Edelman one comes to mind.

 

no, no, no.    

 

A challenge and a timeout are not the same thing.    If you want to take a timeout then you take a timeout,    By wasting a challenge Rex can only challenge 1 more play the rest of the game.    If he keeps his challenge he can challenge 2 or 3 more plays the rest of the game.  

 

While turnovers and TDs are automatically reviewed, non-calls are not.   I believe this happened in the Buf game, Rex wasted consecutive challenges and then couldn't challenge a missed fumble call.  

 

I think Sperm nailed it with the Rex calling the defensive plays.   I also think Rex treats the challenge flag like it's a do-over flag and he just wants the play back.  

[JustInFudge]

Don't see what you have to lose? A challenge and a timeout? Didn't we get burned a few weeks back with not having timeouts?

 

 

 

no, no, no.    

 

A challenge and a timeout are not the same thing.    If you want to take a timeout then you take a timeout,    By wasting a challenge Rex can only challenge 1 more play the rest of the game.    If he keeps his challenge he can challenge 2 or 3 more plays the rest of the game.  

 

While turnovers and TDs are automatically reviewed, non-calls are not.   I believe this happened in the Buf game, Rex wasted consecutive challenges and then couldn't challenge a missed fumble call.  

 

I think Sperm nailed it with the Rex calling the defensive plays.   I also think Rex treats the challenge flag like it's a do-over flag and he just wants the play back.  

 

I understand how challenges work.  My point is, while that was pretty obvious, you never know.  I've seen numerous, what I thought were obvious reviews, go the other way.  He's still got another and whats 1 timeout in the first half?  Turnovers and scoring plays are reviewed...you might not even use them all game...Atlanta didnt. 

[T0mShane]

I understand how challenges work. My point is, while that was pretty obvious, you never know. I've seen numerous, what I thought were obvious reviews, go the other way. He's still got another and whats 1 timeout in the first half? Turnovers and scoring plays are reviewed...you might not even use them all game...Atlanta didnt.

You never know, bro. You never know.

[T0mShane]

I understand how magnets work.