CTM Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 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. It was an obvious catch on the first replay view. He had plenty of time to review. It was a bad challenge, you can still offer you anus to him.. don't worry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 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. I think it's more than "could be" valid. While he's talking to his (blind) guy in the booth, he's not looking at the new down/distance/field position. Meanwhile, Atlanta (or NE, Buffalo, etc.) is sprinting to the line to get a play off. The only thing in the world Rex is NOT thinking of is what to do next on defense: who to sub in/out (if there's even time for that), and what formation or blitz or whatever he wants to dial up. So with the other team in super-hurry-up, and the normal play clock effectively cut in half, he's talking to someone about whether or not to challenge. With Ryan 1-2 seconds away from snapping the ball, there's only time to do one thing: challenge or burn a time out. Rex doesn't think he's burning a challenge. He thinks he's saving a time out (because if, during the TO, it's determined that the play is challenge-worthy but not a 100% sure thing, he'd risk burning a 2nd time out. He really views it as a freebie challenge. Except here's the problem with this "freebie challenge" point of view: There had only been 4 games this year prior to throwing this stupid challenge. In 1 of those 4 games, we let Buffalo back into a game they'd clearly lost purely because of a bad ref call that we no longer could challenge. Not 2 games later he does the same thing and risks the same thing happening again. I get what you're saying about challenges not being as valuable as before, since the league already reviews so many plays by rule, and that is absolutely valid. But the fact remains that you can't guess when you're going to need 3 in a game and when you're going to need zero. That's why the league decided to give coaches 2 challenges and not 1. Refs can make 2 bad (reviewable) calls, but it is possible that only 1 has the indisputable evidence required to overturn. Rex is only giving the team 1 challenge by burning 1 on a play that won't be overturned. If he does it twice, like he did in Buffalo, he's giving the team zero challenges. Turns out 5 minutes later they badly needed one. If you want to call time out, then call time out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 It was an obvious catch on the first replay view. He had plenty of time to review. It was a bad challenge, you can still offer you anus to him.. don't worry Exactly. If you want a timeout, call a timeout. You don't challenge it because the refs allowed Bill Belichick to get away with getting Edelman's fumble ruled an incomplete pass. He gets those calls; Rex doesn't. It shouldn't be, but it is. Know who you are and who you are not (particularly, know who the refs think you are and who the refs know you're not). Call too many challenges on plays that should not be overturned, and it's human nature for refs to not like it. And I do think that gets around among the different ref crews that Rex throws crazy challenges instead of timeouts because he views them as freebies. Even though refs' emotions have no place in a game governed purely by rules, they are also human. No one likes being told they f*cked up their job when they didn't, and that's what an unworthy challenge is effectively saying. That's what is being said, to the very guys who can - and often do - decide the fate of the game. And on Monday night games, it's calling them f*ckups on national TV. Look at the terrible defensive penalties they were calling on the Jets (and non-holding penalties on the Falcons' offense) after another stupid challenge flag. Maybe they would have made the same calls anyway, but we all know that ticky-tack flags can be thrown on almost every play. Something makes the refs call it sometimes but not other times. Whether Rex's bad challenge flag earlier was a factor or not, it's bad business to give any ref (or ref crew) reason to be annoyed, or even pissed off, at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 It was an obvious catch on the first replay view. He had plenty of time to review. It was a bad challenge, you can still offer you anus to him.. don't worry You never know. And I will. I think it's more than "could be" valid. While he's talking to his (blind) guy in the booth, he's not looking at the new down/distance/field position. Meanwhile, Atlanta (or NE, Buffalo, etc.) is sprinting to the line to get a play off. The only thing in the world Rex is NOT thinking of is what to do next on defense: who to sub in/out (if there's even time for that), and what formation or blitz or whatever he wants to dial up. So with the other team in super-hurry-up, and the normal play clock effectively cut in half, he's talking to someone about whether or not to challenge. With Ryan 1-2 seconds away from snapping the ball, there's only time to do one thing: challenge or burn a time out. Rex doesn't think he's burning a challenge. He thinks he's saving a time out (because if, during the TO, it's determined that the play is challenge-worthy but not a 100% sure thing, he'd risk burning a 2nd time out. He really views it as a freebie challenge. Except here's the problem with this "freebie challenge" point of view: There had only been 4 games this year prior to throwing this stupid challenge. In 1 of those 4 games, we let Buffalo back into a game they'd clearly lost purely because of a bad ref call that we no longer could challenge. Not 2 games later he does the same thing and risks the same thing happening again. I get what you're saying about challenges not being as valuable as before, since the league already reviews so many plays by rule, and that is absolutely valid. But the fact remains that you can't guess when you're going to need 3 in a game and when you're going to need zero. That's why the league decided to give coaches 2 challenges and not 1. Refs can make 2 bad (reviewable) calls, but it is possible that only 1 has the indisputable evidence required to overturn. Rex is only giving the team 1 challenge by burning 1 on a play that won't be overturned. If he does it twice, like he did in Buffalo, he's giving the team zero challenges. Turns out 5 minutes later they badly needed one. If you want to call time out, then call time out. Meh, it cost them nothing, it meant nothing...bitching to bitch. Even in the Buffalo game where it would have really be useful, it didnt matter. If it comes back to bite them in the ass, then I'll complain. He had another, so he took at chance, it meant nothing. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Meh, it cost them nothing, it meant nothing...bitching to bitch. You could say the same thing about someone playing russian roulette and not catching a slug in the head. Might have cost them nothing this time, but not a smart habit and certainly something that will cost them eventually.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 You could say the same thing about someone playing russian roulette and not catching a slug in the head. Might have cost them nothing this time, but not a smart habit and certainly something that will cost them eventually.. Robert DeNiro and Christopher Walken were fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 You never know. And I will. Meh, it cost them nothing, it meant nothing...bitching to bitch. Even in the Buffalo game where it would have really be useful, it didnt matter. If it comes back to bite them in the ass, then I'll complain. He had another, so he took at chance, it meant nothing. Oh well. It didn't matter IN THE END. It definitely mattered at the time. I'm not even one of the guys calling for Rex's head, but you must recognize that it is stupid and can lead to turning a win into a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 It didn't matter IN THE END. It definitely mattered at the time. I'm not even one of the guys calling for Rex's head, but you must recognize that it is stupid and can lead to turning a win into a loss. Meh, like I said, you never know. The Buffalo game, I thought the first spot of the ball challenge was stupid. The Stevie Johnson catch, I didnt. Kerley got one over turned in the same game and it looked like more of a catch than Johnson's. If you think that play is turning point, you dont hold the flag because of what might happen later in the game. Clearly in Atlanta, he thought it was a turning point play, he still had another challenge and who gives a **** about 1 timeout in the first half? How many games in the history of the NFL have you seen decided by poor use of the challenge flag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexiRoll6 Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 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 Disagree. Rex does not know the challenge system. When a call is made it takes a lot to reverse it. Rex has done a lot of good things this season but his challenges are awful and someone should take the flag away from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blocker Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I certainly felt it was a bad challenge, and i still do. The receiver ran for at least three steps. And as others have noted you do not only lose the time out but only get one more challenge in the game. Use of the challenge is especially risky in the first half. As noted it did not cost the Jets in this game, but it is not a good practice to use the challenge as it was used in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.