Blame ej all you want

[DesertFox24]

You can blame ej all you want but the defense, ol, and running game are not doig their part.

Those coupled with the indisciplined play and stupid penalties is playing a larger part in our record than ej.

Ej needs to do better but he is a rookie and most level headed fans did not expect great play this year.

[justasportsfan]

The guy can't read and react accordingly. He's indecisive . Thad would've done 10x better

[SpikedLemonade]

7 sacks and 4 INTs sure don't look good on him.

The OL was crap today as well.

[WagonCircler]

He's Trent Jr.

[ParanoidAndroid]

He shows flashes. He just isn't able to be consistent. Today, the O-line couldn't get it done.

[DesertFox24]

Two of those picks are not on him the Stevie tip and woody play. The foster one was not a pick but was a terrible throw so I count it.

The ok did terrible and we have no running game terrible for rookie qb.

[TacklingDummy]

I blame the Refs.

[coastal]

Draft another one.

[X-Era]

I'm not blaming him for doing anything other than playing like a rookie. Bad game. They have them. He's the starter until we draft a better prospect. Right now there is no Luck in this draft. There's lots of prospects like last years draft though.

[colin]

Although they gave up 2 or 3 terrible plays, the d was actually really solid today. Ej is the problem, he's JP losman bad and he needs to go.

[Raptor]

Ah yes the "it's everyone else's fault but EJ's" defense has begun

as it did with JP
As it did with Trent
as it did with Bledsoe

its a QB league except in Buffalo where it's everyone's else's fault but the horrible QB

[WagonCircler]

Ah yes the "it's everyone else's fault but EJ's" defense has begun

as it did with JP
As it did with Trent
as it did with Bledsoe

its a QB league except in Buffalo where it's everyone's else's fault but the horrible QB

You left out Holcomb.

[BertSquirtgum]

You can blame ej all you want but the defense, ol, and running game are not doig their part.

Those coupled with the indisciplined play and stupid penalties is playing a larger part in our record than ej.

Ej needs to do better but he is a rookie and most level headed fans did not expect great play this year.

Face the reality. EJ is garbage and will not be any better than a back up in this league. The Bills fail again at the draft. **** this team.

[X-Era]

All EJ's fault. All the losses. All the fumbles. All the terrible defensive plays. All the terrible OL play. All EJ's fault.

Global warming, starvation, HIV, and Obamacare are also EJs fault.

Please.

[BertSquirtgum]

All EJ's fault. All the losses. All the fumbles. All the terrible defensive plays. All the terrible OL play. All EJ's fault.

Global warming, starvation, HIV, and Obamacare are also EJs fault.

Please.

Nobody has said that but EJ is very bad and not helping the team at all. In fact, he adds to the suck.

[X-Era]

Nobody has said that but EJ is very bad and not helping the team at all. In fact, he adds to the suck.
Today he did. I agree. But usually I don't feel he does. I think we have bigger problems.

[EDS]

You can blame ej all you want but the defense, ol, and running game are not doig their part.



Is that statement supposed to make me feel better about this franchise? Great, so our rookie QB is not the problem. But oh, it turns out, the veteran RBs, DL, etc. are to blame? Paints a wonderful picture.

[justasportsfan]

Today he did. I agree. But usually I don't feel he does. I think we have bigger problems.

EJ is the biggest problem. The guy only plays decently at home.

[gr8slayer]

No, it's Dallas too, it's never Romo's fault around here.
Ah yes the "it's everyone else's fault but EJ's" defense has begun

as it did with JP
As it did with Trent
as it did with Bledsoe

its a QB league except in Buffalo where it's everyone's else's fault but the horrible QB

[DesertFox24]

All EJ's fault. All the losses. All the fumbles. All the terrible defensive plays. All the terrible OL play. All EJ's fault.

Global warming, starvation, HIV, and Obamacare are also EJs fault.

Please.

I agree ej has definitely not set the world on fire but a lot of hall of game qbs looked terrible their rookie and sometimes second year.

[Famous Amos]

can we blame EJ along with the offensive line, along with the running game, along with the lousy W routes, along with the defense? Why does it have to be the QB alone is blamed or ever other facet except the QB? It was a **** game by the entire team from what I saw. Coaches on down.

off topic, but did anyone watch the Philly/ Detroit game? It's much more entertaining watching a talented team play. I love the Bills but sometimes it feels like a prison sentence to watch them.
Any ways, the Philthy game. What a wild game in the snow! in fact, it seemed every east coast game had snow other than the TB/Buffalo game. Didn't snow in WNY either. I miss snow games in Buffalo.Maybe it'll snow for the Fish game.

[X-Era]

EJ is the biggest problem. The guy only plays decently at home.
3 games? Really? We're going to make this claim with 3 games as data?

Come on guys. As frustrating as it is he's a damn rookie with very little starts under his belt. We don't have enough data to draw really any conclusions.

[BertSquirtgum]

Today he did. I agree. But usually I don't feel he does. I think we have bigger problems.

Yeah. The offensive line. Bills needs go as follows.... a true #1 WR in the first. LG in the second. and a RT in the third. Then, BPA. but my god, EJ's bad games has me wanting JP Losman or Trent Edwards back. That in itself, is a statement of how bad EJ is when he's bad. When he's good, he is as good as Aaron Rodgers is on his worst day. It will never be good enough.

[paladin warrior]

:baghead:OL and OT.OG are stinky with our QB 7 sacks times. WTF

[X-Era]

Yeah. The offensive line. Bills needs go as follows.... a true #1 WR in the first. LG in the second. and a RT in the third. Then, BPA. but my god, EJ's bad games has me wanting JP Losman or Trent Edwards back. That in itself, is a statement of how bad EJ is when he's bad. When he's good, he is as good as Aaron Rodgers is on his worst day. It will never be good enough.
Don't disagree with the needs. I'd just like to give Hairston a chance at RT.

[SquishDaFish]

Hes a rookie so he gets a pass from me for the year. But that was the most pathetic excuse for a running game I ever seen! And those god damn penalties need to stop!!

[colin]

Our BC blows so far, but maybe he doesn't need to go. Our oc is garbage and needs to walk. Ej is a bad football player. He took a super talented FSU team and made them worse (just look at them now). He isn't an NFL qb. I'll take manzel, but I'm no expert.

[Mr. Pink]

There is NO running game when your QB cannot throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield.

Why wouldn't any team not put 8 in the box all game long against this team?

[ublinkwescore]

Trade Stevie, get best wr on the board in round 1. get some nasty olinemen in front of EJ problems solved.

[BillsFever21]

Just last year tons of people around here were saying how we had one of the best OL's in the NFL. Maybe that was because of nothing but quick passes?

Going into and during this year many around here said we had one of the best WR units in the league.

Now all of that stuff is the reason why we're losing along with the running game, etc. How some can even call this defense good is beyond me. They make some plays but who doesn't? They are inconsistent during the game and give up a ton of points.

[DesertFox24]

Funny people in Green Bay were clamoring for Aaron Rogers to be sent packing after his first year starting. If you remember they drafted Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn the draft after his first year as starter.

His second year as starter, well we all know the how that turned out.

Aaron also had the benefit of sitting behind Brett Favre for three years something EJ does not have the benefit of.

It is really bad that this league has come to the point where a rookie QB has one year to show he is franchise or not, all because a few guys did really well on teams that were stacked.

Cincy has a great D
Seahawks might be best def in league and great running game
49ers great def and running game
Colts - well luck is the only true franchise guy to come out in years
Skins - RG3 had a great rookie year and they snuck into playoffs because NFC east was and is terrible
Ravens Flacco had a great running game and def to relay on his first couple of years, and correct me if wrong no one thought he was elite until last year

It is just ridiculous how fans are now a days and want the instant fix and if a player does not preform at HOF status his first year he is a bust of a pick.

[GingerP]

Funny people in Green Bay were clamoring for Aaron Rogers to be sent packing after his first year starting. If you remember they drafted Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn the draft after his first year as starter.

That is just not true. They drafted Brohm because he was a highly rated after his junior year but was off as a senior, and they felt he was a value in the 3rd. Flynn was a 7th round flyer based on his leadership and intangibles. The Packers have a history of drafting QB's and developing them for trade bait.

In Rodgers first year starting he was 341-for-536 (63.6%), 4,038 Yds (7.5 YPA), 28 TD, 13 Int, 93.8 QB Rating.

[colin]

the point made above about the pack drafting qb's even with rogers tells me we ABSOLUTELY have to draft a qb, perhaps not in the first, but we need qbs. now i'm not sure who the best guy is and all that, but i think a first round qb, if we can get the best guy in the draft this year, makes a ton of sense. ej isn't a good qb.

[trapezeus]

i think you draft another qb that pushes manuel. This constant "we've picked a guy and don't want any frustration from getting pushed" is nonsense. you can do that once you have a stud. but untill then, keep taking qb's.

and that does not mean take manziel. he'll be hurt, talking smack and out of football with the same tenacity as tebow.

[OLDSRIP]

He's Trent Jr.

I don't know. But to me Trent didn't seem like the kind of guy to sleep with a black women.

[justasportsfan]

There is NO running game when your QB cannot throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield.

Why wouldn't any team not put 8 in the box all game long against this team?

Almost seems like he's pretending to go through his reads even though he knows he's dinking the ball before any playcall is called in anyways.

[Mr. Pink]

Almost seems like he's pretending to go through his reads even though he knows he's dinking the ball before any playcall is called in anyways.

That Jet game was an obvious outlier. The guy is simply afraid to throw the ball downfield for whatever reason.

Since this season is a total waste at this point, Hackett should call a game plan that simply forces Manuel to throw the ball downfield. Don't hover receivers or running backs near the LOS. Put everyone into patterns 10+ yards downfield every passing down.

Maybe you'll ingrain some confidence in Manuel that he doesn't need to throw 3 yard passes into the flat constantly.

[justasportsfan]

That Jet game was an obvious outlier. The guy is simply afraid to throw the ball downfield for whatever reason.



SJ and Woods are his comfort level. When they were both out for the jets game, he found TJ and Goodwin.

Ej plays scared unless we're playing at home.



Since this season is a total waste at this point, Hackett should call a game plan that simply forces Manuel to throw the ball downfield. Don't hover receivers or running backs near the LOS. Put everyone into patterns 10+ yards downfield every passing down.

Maybe you'll ingrain some confidence in Manuel that he doesn't need to throw 3 yard passes into the flat constantly.It's been stated by HAckett and Marrone that deep throws were called before and Ej dinks it.

[Historian]

I honestly thought this would be like Joe Ferguson's rookie year, 1973:

Hand off to the Juice (or in modern parlance, CJ Spiller) all season, while you learn the passing game.

Spiller has been hurt, and has looked like Booker Moore behind this line.

So much for the rookie QB getting brought along slowly.

[EDS]

Funny people in Green Bay were clamoring for Aaron Rogers to be sent packing after his first year starting. If you remember they drafted Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn the draft after his first year as starter.

His second year as starter, well we all know the how that turned out.

Aaron also had the benefit of sitting behind Brett Favre for three years something EJ does not have the benefit of.

It is really bad that this league has come to the point where a rookie QB has one year to show he is franchise or not, all because a few guys did really well on teams that were stacked.

Cincy has a great D
Seahawks might be best def in league and great running game
49ers great def and running game
Colts - well luck is the only true franchise guy to come out in years
Skins - RG3 had a great rookie year and they snuck into playoffs because NFC east was and is terrible
Ravens Flacco had a great running game and def to relay on his first couple of years, and correct me if wrong no one thought he was elite until last year

It is just ridiculous how fans are now a days and want the instant fix and if a player does not preform at HOF status his first year he is a bust of a pick.

I challenge you to find one person who was clamoring for Rogers to go after his first season starting.

[kishoph]

There is NO running game when your QB cannot throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield.

Why wouldn't any team not put 8 in the box all game long against this team?

It is so easy to just say things, even though there is no truth to them, Tampa barely ever if not never put 8 guys in the box against the Bills yesterday, or saying that Manuel lead Woods right into being hit, again no, look at it, he hits woods in the back shoulder as Steve Beurelein insisted he should of done but didn't. Or Manuel only looked at Graham on the 2nd int, no he looked left thru most of the route then came back to the right were Graham was coming from. I don't understand why people watch the game and either just make **** up, or listen to what some color commentator says and act like because he said it it must be fact.
Manuel did not have a good game yesterday, but it might have help if he wasn't under pressure most of the game, 7 sacks and 13 hits is ridiculous, if you put that much pressure on any QB he's gonna have a ****ty day. But he threw 4 picks, sure two off the hands of receivers and one that should of been over ruled. Plus were was the flag for hitting a defenseless receiver on the Woods play ?

Inconclusive ? (below)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v153/kishoph/Image1sss.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/kishoph/media/Image1sss.jpg.html)

You argued and argued about the pic below being a TD, in what league, the lingerie league ?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v153/kishoph/Image4-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/kishoph/media/Image4-1.jpg.html)

I could go on showing still pics, but it would be much easier if people just watched the games.

[WagonCircler]

I don't know. But to me Trent didn't seem like the kind of guy to sleep with a black women.


***crickets***

(followed by uncomfortable silence)

[Mr. Pink]

It is so easy to just say things, even though there is no truth to them, Tampa barely ever if not never put 8 guys in the box against the Bills yesterday, or saying that Manuel lead Woods right into being hit, again no, look at it, he hits woods in the back shoulder as Steve Beurelein insisted he should of done but didn't. Or Manuel only looked at Graham on the 2nd int, no he looked left thru most of the route then came back to the right were Graham was coming from. I don't understand why people watch the game and either just make **** up, or listen to what some color commentator says and act like because he said it it must be fact.
Manuel did not have a good game yesterday, but it might have help if he wasn't under pressure most of the game, 7 sacks and 13 hits is ridiculous, if you put that much pressure on any QB he's gonna have a ****ty day. But he threw 4 picks, sure two off the hands of receivers and one that should of been over ruled. Plus were was the flag for hitting a defenseless receiver on the Woods play ?

Inconclusive ? (below)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v153/kishoph/Image1sss.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/kishoph/media/Image1sss.jpg.html)

You argued and argued about the pic below being a TD, in what league, the lingerie league ?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v153/kishoph/Image4-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/kishoph/media/Image4-1.jpg.html)

I could go on showing still pics, but it would be much easier if people just watched the games.

Or you could get a still that showed both of Jackson's toes came down before his heel came down. But that would go against your argument now wouldn't it.

You may watch the games but you see what you want to see. There was a safety in the box the majority of the game and Tampas corners were in press coverage the majority of the game. They were daring the Bills to go over the top, EJ or Hackett or both were too scared to take even one shot.

EJ's wildly inconsistent and inaccurate passes get receivers hammered, even that INT off Johnson's fingertips would have gotten him labelled if he had jumped to catch the ball - which he would have needed to do if he was gonna catch it. EJ's done it all year to receivers, tight ends and running backs. Just because you want to say it doesn't exist doesn't make it so.

In fact you argued that getting only your tip toes in bounds doesn't equal a catch and you need your entire foot down. Santonio Holmes says you're wrong. Remember this? Guess what it was? http://articlefilter.com/holmes-tiptoe-td-catch.jpg

[kishoph]

Or you could get a still that showed both of Jackson's toes came down before his heel came down. But that would go against your argument now wouldn't it.
In fact you argued that getting only your tip toes in bounds doesn't equal a catch and you need your entire foot down. Santonio Holmes says you're wrong. Remember this? Guess what it was?

http://articlefilter.com/holmes-tiptoe-td-catch.jpg

Toes touching going forwards are completely different than toes (only) touching when you're coming down straight or falling backwards, if the heel hits in that case, it's out of bounds. Fact is, I said then, it is a completely different catch, you can not compare those two types of catches. I specified coming down with the heel out of bounds when coming down flatfooted, obviously I wasn't talking about your heel coming down out of bounds if your toes hit and you're falling forward, I don't think that can happen, unless you have your shoes on backwards.

[Mr. Pink]

Toes touching going forwards are completely different than toes (only) touching when you're coming down straight or falling backwards, if the heel hits in that case, it's out of bounds. Fact is, I said then, it is a completely different catch, you can not compare those two types of catches. I specified coming down with the heel out of bounds when coming down flatfooted, obviously I wasn't talking about your heel coming down out of bounds if your toes hit and you're falling forward, I don't think that can happen, unless you have your shoes on backwards.

So now you're saying if Jackson had his back to the play, caught the ball and the play went the same way it would have been a catch? Interesting. He didn't come down flat footed. His toes touched down first and then his heel followed.

[OLDSRIP]

***crickets***

(followed by uncomfortable silence)

Yes, I noticed.

No knock on Black women. I have know a few in my day.
I meant Trent is a very conservitave guy.

back to lousy Bills football.

[kishoph]

So now you're saying if Jackson had his back to the play, caught the ball and the play went the same way it would have been a catch? Interesting. He didn't come down flat footed. His toes touched down first and then his heel followed.

WTF are you talking about ?
Fine flatfooted, doing a pirouette whatever, it's not a TD. I know if a player taps his toes or drags his toes on the sideline or endzone it's a legal catch, but that is a totally different body position, facing out of bounds not in towards the field. I don't know any other way to explain it (it's not easy to), but I shouldn't have to, this is simple football 101. Someone please help me . :help!:

[BertSquirtgum]

WTF are you talking about ?
Fine flatfooted, doing a pirouette whatever, it's not a TD. I know if a player taps his toes or drags his toes on the sideline or endzone it's a legal catch, but that is a totally different body position, facing out of bounds not in towards the field. I don't know any other way to explain it (it's not easy to), but I shouldn't have to, this is simple football 101. Someone please help me . :help!:

You are right. The idiot cleveland fan is a dumb ass.

[feldspar]

You can blame ej all you want but the defense, ol, and running game are not doig their part.

Those coupled with the indisciplined play and stupid penalties is playing a larger part in our record than ej.

Ej needs to do better but he is a rookie and most level headed fans did not expect great play this year.

The defense gave up a couple of big plays, but they played very well apart from that. I think they gave up a total of 40 yards in 2 quarters. They gave up somewhere around 130 yards apart from those two plays. One of them, the long pass to Vincent Jackson, was rather fluky. It was a painfully brutal game to watch all the way around though. I don't think anybody is completely blaming Manuel.

But rationalizing and making excuses is why these rookies get free passes for years, and that also sets the team back years. I'm not slamming EJ, either. But all that talking him up like you are doing is just as bad as blindly "attacking" him or blaming him.

I just don't think that you hand the job to Manuel just because you drafted him high. If the Bills are in a position to upgrade the position in the draft (in their opinion), then they should do it. With the rookie wage scale, not as much is invested in a first-round QB as before.

I really don't have a very good feeling about EJ's chances of being a franchise QB. I think his ceiling is that of an average QB at most, and if that's true, then you have to rethink this thing in the offseason. They won't, but they should. And I'm not just talking about this game alone, either.

We shouldn't feel obligated to give EJ a certain amount of time to develop. I'm not sure he'll ever be particularly accurate with throwing the football, and I'm not sure he can go through his progressions. You need him to do those things. But yeah, he's a rookie and that translates into being an innocent child. Not really. He shouldn't be immune to being replaced as soon as next year. All I'm saying is that is an option too.

[Meathead]

heel touching the line is oob no matter what the toes do

[Mr. Pink]

heel touching the line is oob no matter what the toes do

Not when the toes come down first.

[Mr. Pink]

WTF are you talking about ?
Fine flatfooted, doing a pirouette whatever, it's not a TD. I know if a player taps his toes or drags his toes on the sideline or endzone it's a legal catch, but that is a totally different body position, facing out of bounds not in towards the field. I don't know any other way to explain it (it's not easy to), but I shouldn't have to, this is simple football 101. Someone please help me . :help!:

So Santonio's entire body hit out of bounds after his toes, so he must have been out right?

I mean after all toe tapping doesn't count right?

[BertSquirtgum]

Not when the toes come down first.


So Santonio's entire body hit out of bounds after his toes, so he must have been out right?

I mean after all toe tapping doesn't count right?

Two more idiot posts.

[feldspar]

Not when the toes come down first.

You don't understand the rules. You are just wrong, and therefore there is no argument.

Let me try to explain the difference. What happens when a player steps on the white line? He's out of bounds, right? Either a player is inbounds or out of bounds, right?

If you catch the ball on your toes, you are inbounds, sure. But how you land is considered part of the catch. That's why you can't catch a pass on your toes with your back to the sideline and have your heels immediately go out of bounds. That's part of the catch, or in this case, part of the non-catch. Why? Because the receiver will have landed out of bounds in that case, and that's the rules. It makes sense. If only your toes touch inbounds and your momentum takes you out of bounds, you've established possession inbounds that way, and it's a catch.

Nobody spends too much time on their toes. The bottom line is that you have to consider the entire foot...what happens with both entire feet during the whole process of the catch. No part of any foot can be out of bounds at any point during the catch when we are talking about establishing possession inbounds based on the feet.

kishoph is right, it's the simplest concept, but it's not so easy to explain. The first thing you should understand is that you are dead-wrong. This is not something that is disputable, Mr. Pink.

You ever seen Bobby Chandler play? I would assume not.

[BuffaloRedleg]

I just don't know why people feel like we are obligated to give him a fair shake. If we are in the position to draft a QB who is a more sure prospect, then why not take him? EJ absolutely is still a prospect for the QB job in Buffalo he has not earned anything. I will still support him and I love the guy, but life isn't fair.

We all knew he was going to take a few years to develop, but even then it was still a longshot. He just was never that great of a prospect to begin with, but we needed to draft a QB by any means necessary. The fact that we were put into that unfortunate situation, needing to draft a QB during an off year for QBs, should not keep us from taking a guy the next year. And let's face it, no EJ means we most likely don't get Alonso... so I'm not mad at how things turned out.

The bottom line is that EJ has not done much to give us a reason not to draft a QB next year. He has shown flashes and has had a typically uneven rookie season. That's normal. But the argument "of course he is going to struggle he is a rookie" is not the primary argument you want to be hearing when discussing the future of the most important position in all of sports. Most of the time I'm mentally making excuses for the things he does, not being amazed by the potential he shows. You'll notice most of our arguments are about tempering expectations not about the great things he's done. The arguments always end up with "well he has no supporting cast" or "did you see that drop come on" and although those are all very reasonable defenses for the overall results, it still is not the resounding thumbs up that you'd want to see at this point.

Sure he might turn out to be a good QB, but as of right now he hasn't done anything to prove it. Maybe those are unrealistic expectations, but for me I'm not hinging the future of this franchise on a developmental prospect we were forced into drafting early in an off year for QBs. We can argue all day in defense of why he hasn't proven to be our guy (no wrs etc), but if we are in a position to draft a more legit prospect then you have to show some balls and take it. Let them fight it out and see where the chips fall. Yes we will be sacrificing the ability to draft an elite WR but if we have a crack at a top 2 QB in a seemingly strong draft at QB then you take it.

[kishoph]

You don't understand the rules. You are just wrong, and therefore there is no argument.

Let me try to explain the difference. What happens when a player steps on the white line? He's out of bounds, right? Either a player is inbounds or out of bounds, right?

If you catch the ball on your toes, you are inbounds, sure. But how you land is considered part of the catch. That's why you can't catch a pass on your toes with your back to the sideline and have your heels immediately go out of bounds. That's part of the catch, or in this case, part of the non-catch. Why? Because the receiver will have landed out of bounds in that case, and that's the rules. It makes sense. If only your toes touch inbounds and your momentum takes you out of bounds, you've established possession inbounds that way, and it's a catch.

Nobody spends too much time on their toes. The bottom line is that you have to consider the entire foot...what happens with both entire feet during the whole process of the catch. No part of any foot can be out of bounds at any point during the catch when we are talking about establishing possession inbounds based on the feet.

kishoph is right, it's the simplest concept, but it's not so easy to explain. The first thing you should understand is that you are dead-wrong. This is not something that is disputable, Mr. Pink.

You ever seen Bobby Chandler play? I would assume not.

Thank you so much, and I don't wan't to argue with Mr. Pink and the reason wasn't to gloat or say I'm right your wrong, I was trying to explain the ruling, but it is hard and I was getting frustrated with myself also for not being able to define it better.

[Spiderweb]

Ah yes the "it's everyone else's fault but EJ's" defense has begun

as it did with JP
As it did with Trent
as it did with Bledsoe

its a QB league except in Buffalo where it's everyone's else's fault but the horrible QB

What the heck are you reading? There are many posters crucifying EJ, as there was against those you named above. For crying out loud, can no one have a different opinion? Heck I'm even in the Manuel's detractors camp............

[Mr. Pink]

You don't understand the rules. You are just wrong, and therefore there is no argument.

Let me try to explain the difference. What happens when a player steps on the white line? He's out of bounds, right? Either a player is inbounds or out of bounds, right?

If you catch the ball on your toes, you are inbounds, sure. But how you land is considered part of the catch. That's why you can't catch a pass on your toes with your back to the sideline and have your heels immediately go out of bounds. That's part of the catch, or in this case, part of the non-catch. Why? Because the receiver will have landed out of bounds in that case, and that's the rules. It makes sense. If only your toes touch inbounds and your momentum takes you out of bounds, you've established possession inbounds that way, and it's a catch.

Nobody spends too much time on their toes. The bottom line is that you have to consider the entire foot...what happens with both entire feet during the whole process of the catch. No part of any foot can be out of bounds at any point during the catch when we are talking about establishing possession inbounds based on the feet.

kishoph is right, it's the simplest concept, but it's not so easy to explain. The first thing you should understand is that you are dead-wrong. This is not something that is disputable, Mr. Pink.

You ever seen Bobby Chandler play? I would assume not.

He did land. He landed on his toes. In full possession of the ball. Therefore he is inbounds.

Like when a receiver lands on his knee and then his hip hits out of bounds, he is also inbounds.

Like Santonio Holmes landing on his toes and the rest of his body ends up out of bounds, he is inbounds.

People would be throwing a fit if that was Stevie Johnson catching the ball like that and it not being called a TD.

[feldspar]

He did land. He landed on his toes. In full possession of the ball. Therefore he is inbounds.

Like when a receiver lands on his knee and then his hip hits out of bounds, he is also inbounds.

Like Santonio Holmes landing on his toes and the rest of his body ends up out of bounds, he is inbounds.

People would be throwing a fit if that was Stevie Johnson catching the ball like that and it not being called a TD.

Those who understand the rules would not be throwing a fit at all, Mr. Pink.

I told you before, the entire foot matters when establishing possession of ball inbounds with your feet. You can't catch a ball on your toes and then have your heels go out of bounds right away. That's just the rules and has nothing to do with any other scenario you can dream up. Find fault with it all you want, but it's still true.

Look it up.

[Mr. Pink]

Those who understand the rules would not be throwing a fit at all, Mr. Pink.

I told you before, the entire foot matters when establishing possession of ball inbounds with your feet. You can't catch a ball on your toes and then have your heels go out of bounds right away. That's just the rules and has nothing to do with any other scenario you can dream up. Find fault with it all you want, but it's still true.

Look it up.

Quote the rule where it says that.

And apparently with what you're saying if Jackson would have hopped after landing with his toe down and not the heel, it wouldn't have mattered where he landed. As having only your toes in demonstrates two feet and possession - Santonio Holmes SB catch proves that.

[feldspar]

Quote the rule where it says that.

And apparently with what you're saying if Jackson would have hopped after landing with his toe down and not the heel, it wouldn't have mattered where he landed. As having only your toes in demonstrates two feet and possession - Santonio Holmes SB catch proves that.

No dude, you look it up. It's the rules...I don't don't what else to tell you. I'm not going to repeat myself, either. Believe whatever you want. I tried to help you, but you'd rather be obstinate about it.

[BertSquirtgum]

Quote the rule where it says that.

And apparently with what you're saying if Jackson would have hopped after landing with his toe down and not the heel, it wouldn't have mattered where he landed. As having only your toes in demonstrates two feet and possession - Santonio Holmes SB catch proves that.

You have numerous people telling you that you're wrong. Maybe, just maybe, you are wrong.

[GingerP]

The rule is clear, that was not a catch. A rule states that the player has to get 2 feet inbounds (or two points of contact such as a hand, hip, leg, etc. - but in this instance it was the feet),if any part of the foot land out of bounds, it is not a catch.

The only exception is when a toe is dragged on the way out of bounds, in that case, the toe is considered the whole foot by definition of the rule. If you don't drag the toe, and any part of the foot lands out-of-bounds, it is not a catch. That is why that play was ruled incomplete, correctly.