Coach dez admits

[Greenstealth]

He didn't have control and now he wants the league to change the rules to benefit his sloppy play.

"as I went to the ground I rolled over and I tipped the ball to gain better control.. We lost and I accept it but please change that rule"

[art vandelay]

ha. if anything the league should go in the other direction. rule the ball dead as soon as it hits the ground. give the officials less to fuck up.

[CbEagle]

I had to argue with about a dozen eagle and a couple of cockroach fans that the ball hit the ground, and of courese timmay was one.

[IronEagle]

I had to argue with about a dozen eagle and a couple of cockroach fans that the ball hit the ground, and of courese timmay was one.

I originally thought that was a catch but the more I look at replays I can see why it was ruled otherwise.

Good call! F a Cowturd!

[Damned Thing]

So is he saying the ground didn't have anything to do with him losing control of the ball and he purposely did that? What a douche.

[Greenstealth]

I said it as soon as I saw him bobbling it at the end of the catch

I had to argue with about a dozen eagle and a couple of cockroach fans that the ball hit the ground, and of courese timmay was one.

I think coach dez knew it to be perfectly honest

[JuTMSY4]

everyone agrees

I originally thought that was a catch but the more I look at replays I can see why it was ruled otherwise.

Good call! F a Cowturd!

Good call, bad rule.

Then again, the Tuck Rule happened and Raiders fans are still hung up on it.

[TerpEagle]

Good call, bad rule.

Then again, the Tuck Rule happened and Raiders fans are still hung up on it.

That seems to be the opinion of a lot of people. Blandino was on NFL Network and said he understood why fans question the rule but if it's changed/modified it could open up the need for interpretation on other catches so just getting rid if it is a tricky proposition.

I'd bet that it's at least discussed if not voted on by the Competition Committee this year.

[art vandelay]

I don't understand how it's a bad rule. The ball hit the ground and Dez lost control. That's a cut and dry incompletion.

I don't think this was anything like Calvin Johnson's non-catch, where it looked like he had control over the ball with one hand before placing it on the ground. In that case I still agree with the ruling because it's impossible to really know if he had that ball.

But again, they should take the rule one step further and eliminate the subjective element. Avant was ruled to have control of a ball that he dragged against the ground against New Orleans a couple years ago Just make that an incompletion and take the officials out of it. The closest comparison is when they did away with the pushout rule.

[JuTMSY4]

I could stupidly explain it, but these guys do a better job:

http://deadspin.com/the-nfls-rules-are-dumb-1678940524

[TerpEagle]

I don't understand how it's a bad rule. The ball hit the ground and Dez lost control. That's a cut and dry incompletion.

I don't think this was anything like Calvin Johnson's non-catch, where it looked like he had control over the ball with one hand before placing it on the ground. In that case I still agree with the ruling because it's impossible to really know if he had that ball.

But again, they should take the rule one step further and eliminate the subjective element. Avant was ruled to have control of a ball that he dragged against the ground against New Orleans a couple years ago Just make that an incompletion and take the officials out of it. The closest comparison is when they did away with the pushout rule.

I haven't read the Deadspin article, but the argument I've heard is that he wasn't a receiver at that point, he was a runner. He had control and was making a football move (stretching to the goal line) so the ground caused the fumble after his elbow was down.

The explanation that Blandino gave (IRRC) was that he was still a receiver i.e. he was in the act of catching the ball so it's incomplete. Maybe I'm biased but I see it the way the NFL called it although I see merit in the other argument.