NFL 2007 Season Week 6 Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2019 Season Week 7 Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Dolphins 31 @ Browns 41
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
0 Picks - 0% 15 Picks - 100%
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Vikings 34 @ Bears 31
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
4 Picks - 27% 11 Picks - 73%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Bears
Bears
Redskins 14 @ Packers 17
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
6 Picks - 40% 9 Picks - 60%
Redskins
Redskins
Redskins
Redskins
Redskins
Redskins
Packers
Packers
Eagles 16 @ Jets 9
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
11 Picks - 73% 4 Picks - 27%
Eagles
Eagles
Jets
Jets
Eagles
Eagles
Eagles
Eagles
Rams 3 @ Ravens 22
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
3 Picks - 20% 12 Picks - 80%
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Titans 10 @ Buccaneers 13
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
8 Picks - 53% 7 Picks - 47%
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Titans
Titans
Texans 17 @ Jaguars 37
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
4 Picks - 27% 11 Picks - 73%
Jaguars
Jaguars
Texans
Texans
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Bengals 20 @ Chiefs 27
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 12:00pm
13 Picks - 87% 2 Picks - 13%
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Panthers 25 @ Cardinals 10
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 3:05pm
2 Picks - 13% 13 Picks - 87%
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Raiders 14 @ Chargers 28
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 3:15pm
1 Pick - 7% 14 Picks - 93%
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Patriots 48 @ Cowboys 27
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 3:15pm
13 Picks - 87% 2 Picks - 13%
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Saints 28 @ Seahawks 17
Final
Sun, 10/14/07 7:15pm
5 Picks - 33% 10 Picks - 67%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Seahawks
Seahawks
Giants 31 @ Falcons 10
Final
Mon, 10/15/07 7:30pm
15 Picks - 100% 0 Picks - 0%
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Week Record8 - 5
0.615
7 - 6
0.538
10 - 3
0.769
First Place
8 - 5
0.615
Season Record52 - 37
0.584
52 - 37
0.584
54 - 35
0.607
57 - 32
0.640
Scotttime Record217 - 139
0.610
204 - 152
0.573
204 - 152
0.573
209 - 147
0.587
No-Pack-Vike Record2567 - 1507
0.630
2496 - 1578
0.613
2580 - 1494
0.633
2544 - 1530
0.624
Lifetime Record894 - 529
0.628
815 - 608
0.573
874 - 549
0.614
868 - 555
0.610
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Browns
Bears
Packers
Jets
Ravens
Buccaneers
Jaguars
Bengals
Panthers
Chargers
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:9 - 4
0.692
Season:52 - 37
0.584
Lifetime:221 - 135
0.621
newalex.jpg
Browns
Bears
Packers
Eagles
Ravens
Titans
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:8 - 5
0.615
Season:59 - 30
0.663
Lifetime:209 - 146
0.589
goodlooking.jpg
Browns
Bears
Packers
Jets
Ravens
Buccaneers
Jaguars
Chiefs
Panthers
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks
Giants

Week:9 - 4
0.692
Season:53 - 36
0.596
Lifetime:210 - 143
0.595
image.jpeg
Browns
Bears
Redskins
Eagles
Ravens
Titans
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:7 - 6
0.538
Season:20 - 23
0.465
Lifetime:84 - 67
0.556
face.bmp
Browns
Bears
Packers
Eagles
Ravens
Buccaneers
Texans
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:8 - 5
0.615
Season:55 - 34
0.618
Lifetime:55 - 34
0.618
flower .jpg
Browns
Bears
Packers
Eagles
Rams
Titans
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Saints
Giants

Week:8 - 5
0.615
Season:54 - 35
0.607
Lifetime:54 - 35
0.607
question_mark.gif
Browns
Bears
Packers
Eagles
Ravens
Buccaneers
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Raiders
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:8 - 5
0.615
Season:48 - 28
0.632
Lifetime:48 - 28
0.632
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpg
Browns
Bears
Redskins
Eagles
Rams
Titans
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Seahawks
Giants

Week:6 - 7
0.462
Season:17 - 10
0.630
Lifetime:17 - 10
0.630
100_0732.JPG
Browns
Bears
Redskins
Eagles
Ravens
Buccaneers
Texans
Chiefs
Cardinals
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks
Giants

Week:7 - 6
0.538
Season:19 - 8
0.704
Lifetime:19 - 8
0.704
question_mark.gif
Browns
Bears
Packers
Eagles
Ravens
Titans
Jaguars
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Saints
Giants

Week:9 - 4
0.692
Season:9 - 4
0.692
Lifetime:9 - 4
0.692
question_mark.gif
Browns
Vikings
Packers
Jets
Rams
Buccaneers
Texans
Bengals
Cardinals
Chargers
Patriots
Saints
Giants

Week:8 - 5
0.615
Season:8 - 5
0.615
Lifetime:8 - 5
0.615
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Vikings 34 @ Bears 31

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Look out Bears, the Vikings have had a full two weeks to make zero adjustments to the game plan in preparation for this one. Look for Adrian Peterson's slow faze out to continue. I predict a stat line of 3 rushes for 45 yards early in the first quarter and a benching to follow.
matt.jpg
Matt
Chester Taylor for MVP!!!!
sarah.jpg
Sarah
I don't care for either of these teams. I'd rather have the Vikings win if it came down to it.
jon.jpg
Jon
Green Bay seemed to be able to run against Chicago easily at times. Of course, they also had to respect the passing game, but still I think Adrian Peterson can have some fun.

Redskins 14 @ Packers 17

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
The Redskins looked pretty good against the Lions last week. Look for the Pack to drop two in a row at home.
matt.jpg
Matt
I miss the Steve Spurrier Era.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
I watched part of the Redskins game last week. They didn't look that impressive, but they got it done. I hope the Packers can rebound after the dreadful performance from last week. What lack of a rushing game was everyone worried about?
jon.jpg
Jon
Smothering defense.

Saints 28 @ Seahawks 17

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Looking to try and recapture the magic of last season the Saints have announced they will be playing the rest of the season in 2006 throwback uniforms.
matt.jpg
Matt
I think this is the Saints' week, but I could be wrong.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Sux to the sux
jon.jpg
Jon
I just don't think New Orleans will go 0-5.

Giants 31 @ Falcons 10

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
How badly to you think the NFL wants to swap this game out for the Pats @ Cowboys game?
matt.jpg
Matt
I thought that I should point out that both of these teams have beaten the Vikings in NFC Championship games.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Vick sure is in a lot of trouble. How come the Cowboys vs Patriots game isn't the national one this week? I mean do we really need another Giants national game? Not that we need another Cowboys/Patriots national game, but still. I'd like to see the Patriots get their asses kicked. And I hate the Cowboys.
jon.jpg
Jon
I wouldn't be surprised if the Falcons won, but why would I pick them? I'm just glad I can see the Giants on tv again.
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpgRUFiO1984 - I put my socks on the wrong feet.
10/09/2007 @ 10:21:37 PM
 Quote this comment
upset pick of my week 6 rams over ravens!!!!




Rest up Detroit, you need it :( !
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpgRUFiO1984 - I put my socks on the wrong feet.
10/09/2007 @ 10:23:28 PM
 Quote this comment
even better upset cowboys over pats!!! but not going to happen :)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - How do you use these things?
10/10/2007 @ 06:16:40 PM
 Quote this comment
Happy Birthday Brett!emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
question_mark.giftbrown81 - 1 Posts
10/10/2007 @ 08:47:48 PM
 Quote this comment
Raiders will upset the chargers!!!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - As Seen On The Internet
10/12/2007 @ 11:26:28 AM
 Quote this comment
Would that really be that big of an upset at this point?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 12:52:17 AM
 Quote this comment
Is Micah not picking anymore?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - But let history remember, that as free men, we chose to make it so!
10/14/2007 @ 02:11:12 PM
 Quote this comment
The last 2 weeks holding has been called on like ever other offensive play for the Packers.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
10/14/2007 @ 02:43:15 PM
 Quote this comment
On the veterans no less
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - 4131 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 02:43:35 PM
 Quote this comment
Portis just fumbled 1st and goal for the pack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - So's your face
10/14/2007 @ 02:45:17 PM
 Quote this comment
WTF?????????? THat was a push out!!!!!!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - 4131 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 02:49:15 PM
 Quote this comment
unbelievable
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 03:43:34 PM
 Quote this comment
You can't drop back to pass 60 times a game and not expect holding penalties.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
10/14/2007 @ 04:14:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Flawless logic. I'll expect holding calls when I see holding calls. When there is no holding (as was the case on that bogus call that took away touchdown), I expect there to be no holding call. The Packers won, so I 'm not that upset (although the refs cost me 12+ fantasy points for taking 2 touchdowns away from the packers).

Anyway, the "smothering defense" by the Redskins should have given up close to 31 points. I'm feeling pretty good about how this season is going. Especially because the Packers won a game where there played kinda crappy against a pretty good team.

Crazy finish to the Vikings-Bears game. Devin Hester should be considered for MVP, because he definitely changes the way teams approach the kicking game.

Edit: (I was quoting Jon's "smothering defense" comment, and to be fair, he never specified which team he was talking about.)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Scott edited this at 10/14/2007 4:15:47 pm
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 04:16:45 PM
 Quote this comment
Fair enough, but they called at least 1 real iffy one today. As much as holding supposedly occurs (whether it's called or not) I think it should only be a 5 yard penalty.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 04:25:11 PM
 Quote this comment
That holding call that took away the 30 yard touchdown qualifies as a joke of a call, just for the record.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Scott screwed with this at 10/14/2007 4:25:41 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 04:31:55 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - 10/14/2007 @ 04:14:42 PM
Flawless logic. I'll expect holding calls when I see holding calls. When there is no holding (as was the case on that bogus call that took away touchdown), I expect there to be no holding call. The Packers won, so I 'm not that upset (although the refs cost me 12+ fantasy points for taking 2 touchdowns away from the packers).

Anyway, the "smothering defense" by the Redskins should have given up close to 31 points. I'm feeling pretty good about how this season is going. Especially because the Packers won a game where there played kinda crappy against a pretty good team.

Crazy finish to the Vikings-Bears game. Devin Hester should be considered for MVP, because he definitely changes the way teams approach the kicking game.

Edit: (I was quoting Jon's "smothering defense" comment, and to be fair, he never specified which team he was talking about.)


There's holding on virtually every play, so yes expect them to come when you throw enough times. The Packers passed 50 times on the Vikings with 0 holding calls, so I'm not sure what you're all complaining about with the last few games. The holding penalties will come. 50+ passes a game + Favre getting sacked so few times == a pretty good chance there's holding once in a while.

Also, keep in mind that sometimes the ref calls a number, they show that player doing nothing wrong in the replay, and all it was was that the ref said the wrong number. They say the wrong number like 10% of the time.

They also called back a few huge plays by the Redskins. One for sure I saw was on a play where the wideout was being mugged and held, the Redskin receiver simply used his arms to get a holding/already-falling Packer off of him, and caught a pass for a decent amount of yards. They called penalties on them both and the offsetting penalties was essentially a 20 yard penalty on the Redskins.

You guys won a game you had absolutely no business winning. They were kicking your asses all day and if it wasn't for a couple instances of "opportunity meeting preparation" down the stretch you would have lost. Quit your bitching and enjoy the win.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 4 times.
Jeremy perfected this 2 times, last at 10/14/2007 4:39:07 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 08:25:26 PM
 Quote this comment
I had a really good rebuke to that comment, but my browser crashed and I lost everything. Basically it boiled down to the mem wanting to point out that the Packers get their fair share of bogus or lame calls despite some people (who may or may not be members of this site) thinking that the Packers are always the beneficiary of some NFL consipiracy. And I really could care less because the Packers did win and are running away with the NFC North.

edit: And I saw the same pass interference call that Jeremy described and it wasn't the onesided call has he described it. When a wide receiver fights off a db and the db ends up on the ground, my gut feeling is that maybe that WR did something merriting a flag. But for the Packers it's a gift call.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this 2 times, last at 10/18/2007 8:39:50 am
scott.jpgScott - Resident Tech Support
10/14/2007 @ 08:28:00 PM
 Quote this comment
Also, is someone going through and giving the 0 nut to every comment? The last 10 comments all were recently given the 0 nut rating.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
10/14/2007 @ 08:43:47 PM
 Quote this comment
I thought of something else about my rant about the officials. This is why it is rediculous to say things like "well, my team is really 2 plays away from being 5-0 instead of 3-2". Case in point, I argue that the Packers were 2 calls away from todays game being a Packers victory 31-14 rather than 17-14, and a Redskins fan (or Vikings fan I guess) finds one play that went against them and argues the same thing in their favor. No one play ever determines the outcome of a game, so the idea that one lucky bounce is the difference between winning and losing is rediculous, because the other team could say the same thing about a completely different play (or set of plays).
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpgRUFiO1984 - Go Lions!!!
10/15/2007 @ 01:22:00 PM
 Quote this comment
good point :)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/15/2007 @ 02:22:50 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - 10/14/2007 @ 08:43:47 PM
I thought of something else about my rant about the officials. This is why it is rediculous to say things like "well, my team is really 2 plays away from being 5-0 instead of 3-2". Case in point, I argue that the Packers were 2 calls away from todays game being a Packers victory 31-14 rather than 17-14, and a Redskins fan (or Vikings fan I guess) finds one play that went against them and argues the same thing in their favor. No one play ever determines the outcome of a game, so the idea that one lucky bounce is the difference between winning and losing is rediculous, because the other team could say the same thing about a completely different play (or set of plays).


Well, it's safe to say no football game has been the opening kickoff and no other plays were run. You could argue that everything in the world is the cumulative cause and effect of everything that put you into that moment. I do however think it's a gross over complication in the sports world, because the sports world has some finite borders. Obviously there were many many things that come down to a team setting up a field goal attempt down 2 with 1 second left. It would still be fair if someone discussed the outcome of that field goal as winning or losing them the game. If you would have made that field goal you would have won, so not making it lost.

Also to argue this point you would have to argue, to a degree, that every play is of equal weight. The 67 yard touchdown run is equal to the 2 yard loss that put the team in that exact spot the play before. You could argue that the 67 yard run may never have happened had they not been in that exact spot and circumstances thanks to the -2 yard run and every single play before it, but I think that's a pretty gross over complication. Especially when you factor in that many scoring plays are only stopped by the endzone and are in a way, if you insist on waxing philosophical, infinite. Charles Woodson would have taken that fumble in yesterday if the goal line was 5, 10, 50, 100, or 400 yards away. To argue that that play wasn't the turning point in that game, and was rather just one of 100 plays that day, all of equal value, the sum total of which totaled up to 17-14 Packers, to me is just silly.

If you don't want to bust chops for the sake of it everyone generally knows what someone means when they say "that holding penalty cost us the game." They don't mean they ran one play all day, it went for a touchdown, the refs called it back, ceremoniously awarded the other team a point for their effort, and the game ended then and there 1-0.

Also I think you have to put a cap on the number of things you can do that with. If you do indeed have to point to a set of plays then odds are you're just reaching.

edit: Also, I dont mean to sound like I'm piling on and dismissing this completely. Your point that in a lot of cases someone for team a saying "That penalty cost us a touchdown" could be met with a fan of team b saying "well the refs cost us 4 points on such and such when we had to settle for a field goal. I still think it's a little over-thinking to say "no one play ever determines the game."

Plus not all "yeah-buts" are equal. The refs taking a touchdown off the board on a fishy holding call and someone countering with "well if receiver x could have held onto that TD it wouldn't have been an issue" is not equal because Team 1 did their part and got it taken away, Team 2 just has a list of "could haves."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 3 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 10/15/2007 2:44:51 pm
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - You analyze me. Tend to despise me. You laugh when I stumble and fall.
10/15/2007 @ 09:00:35 PM
 Quote this comment
Thats what you call a 67 candy corn post.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
10/15/2007 @ 10:49:24 PM
 Quote this comment
67 Candy corns, but not enough to actually get a rating of any sort?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpgRUFiO1984 - Two raw eggs in the morning
10/16/2007 @ 07:00:06 AM
 Quote this comment
yes but thats a lot of candy corn!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
10/16/2007 @ 07:23:39 AM
 Quote this comment
PackOne Wrote - 10/15/2007 @ 09:00:35 PM
Thats what you call a 67 candy corn post.


I think that was actually the play the Packers ran when Favre threw his record breaking touchdown.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 4131 Posts
10/16/2007 @ 07:38:18 AM
 Quote this comment
http://www.nfl.com/probowl Vote Favre into the Pro Bowl!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
10/16/2007 @ 08:32:09 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - 10/16/2007 @ 07:23:39 AM
PackOne Wrote - 10/15/2007 @ 09:00:35 PM
Thats what you call a 67 candy corn post.


I think that was actually the play the Packers ran when Favre threw his record breaking touchdown.


It was going to be, but then he checked to the 88 pancake slant.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 10/16/2007 12:34:55 pm
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - 1528 Posts
10/17/2007 @ 06:00:48 PM
 Quote this comment
Week 7 anyone ? Bueller?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
10/18/2007 @ 07:35:06 AM
 Quote this comment
Vindicated!!! My rant was legit!!! The Packers officially got screwed, league officials report. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - How do you use these things?
10/18/2007 @ 07:44:39 AM
 Quote this comment
I called it as it was happening! (as i was talking to myself on this blog) They're lucky we won...emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - "Always remember that you are unique. Just like everybody else."
10/18/2007 @ 07:46:58 AM
 Quote this comment
GJ Scott, you win!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/18/2007 @ 08:06:38 AM
 Quote this comment
Actually, I don't remember Scott making any comment on the Bubba Franks push out.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
10/18/2007 @ 08:24:09 AM
 Quote this comment
it was one of the 2 touchdowns I said were called back.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
10/18/2007 @ 08:24:50 AM
 Quote this comment
do I still get the points in fantasy football? Favre's 6 points for the td pass and then the yards for the pass.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
10/18/2007 @ 08:41:45 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - 10/14/2007 @ 08:25:26 PM
I had a really good rebuke to that comment, but my browser crashed and I lost everything. Basically it boiled down to the mem wanting to point out that the Packers get their fair share of bogus or lame calls despite some people (who may or may not be members of this site) thinking that the Packers are always the beneficiary of some NFL consipiracy. And I really could care less because the Packers did win and are running away with the NFC North. edit: And I saw the same pass interference call that Jeremy described and it wasn't the onesided call has he described it. When a wide receiver fights off a db and the db ends up on the ground, my gut feeling is that maybe that WR did something merriting a flag. But for the Packers it's a gift call.


In this comment, my rebuke taht I lost because of computer problems contained my complaint about the Franks catch. Either way, I still was more upset about the penalty than I was about the Franks catch, cuz I could see the Franks catch being called either way. Pushout calls are always questionable, no matter which way they call it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i
10/18/2007 @ 08:59:50 AM
 Quote this comment
I think the fairest way to do the pushouts is just get rid of them altogether. Getting pushed out before you get your feet down should just be a risk of throwing near the sidelines. I feel as if the rule was originally implemented to cover "What happens if a linebacker catches a receiver 5 yards from the sideline and runs him out of bounds....we should make a rule that if they obviously would have come down it counts as a catch." Then since then we've gotten closer and closer to the sideline and more nitpicky. If a receiver gets one foot down and his other foot is millimeters off the ground when he's pushed out then fine. I don't think it was without question that Franks would have been in bounds and I certainly don't think it's without question that the player (Greg Olson?) would have come down in bounds the week before in the Packers/Bears game. The pushout rule being what is is they both should have been called, I just don't like the rule.

There's a reason we marvel at the Marvin Harrisons, Randy Mosses, Cris Carters or the world. The "falling out of bounds, or sprinting out of the back of the endzone, yet managing to sneak your feet inbounds catch" is hard to master. Yet somehow if there's a defender in the area making contact we assume any and every receiver was just milliseconds away from making a catch that would land them on "Top Ten" countdowns across the land.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
10/18/2007 @ 12:26:49 PM
 Quote this comment
Well it would help if the rule was changed to only need one foot in bounds, which it should be.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8989 Posts
10/18/2007 @ 12:49:51 PM
 Quote this comment
I don't think it should and I don't see how that would solve this problem.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
10/18/2007 @ 01:41:20 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - 10/18/2007 @ 08:59:50 AM
There's a reason we marvel at the Marvin Harrisons, Randy Mosses, Cris Carters or the world. The "falling out of bounds, or sprinting out of the back of the endzone, yet managing to sneak your feet inbounds catch" is hard to master. Yet somehow if there's a defender in the area making contact we assume any and every receiver was just milliseconds away from making a catch that would land them on "Top Ten" countdowns across the land.


But, lots of these sideline catches are just kind of routine catches near the sidelines where the receiver would have come down inbounds without an extradorinary effort. In Bubba's case, he was coming straight down, not barreling towards the sidelines. I see what you mean, but in a case where a player isn't making a spectacular catch at the sidelines but a routine catch near the sidelines, I don't mind this rule.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
10/18/2007 @ 01:55:58 PM
 Quote this comment
Maybe pushouts in the endzone could be first and goal at the one. It seems to me it operates under the same "this would have been a catch had the defender not interceded" logic as pass interference, why is it treated differently?

I can't remember the exact position/posture/trajectory of Bubba's body, but the play resulted in a simultaneous "No. No. Out of bounds." from Matt, Jon, and I as we anticipated the result of BFR Section 2 Subsection 4 "In the even there is no specific rule in the BFR handbook for a given play, and the result could go either way without defying all other explanation, err on the side of Favre." So take that for what it's worth. Obviously we had our purple glasses on, but you had your green glases on too.

(Also for the record the BFR Handbook Section 2 Subsection 5 states "In regards to rule 2.4, it's ok if it defies all other explanation once in a while too.")
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 4 times, last at 10/18/2007 1:58:19 pm
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
10/18/2007 @ 02:05:27 PM
 Quote this comment
I may have had my green glasses on at the time, but the official ruling states that my glasses were in fact crystal clear.

Also, for the record, I don't think Favre has been giving a roughing the passer all year, and there is no doubt he is getting knocked down a lot more this year than in the past several years.

Also also, you weren't watching the Vikings game?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
10/18/2007 @ 02:29:38 PM
 Quote this comment
Well I was referring to the fact that you saw "routine catch" and "coming straight down" were we saw "out of bounds."

The games were on side by side and since NFL games spend 95% of their air time on commercial we got to see a lot of the Packer game.

The 'official ruling' is irrelevant in a discussion about how the rule is stupid.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel
10/18/2007 @ 07:08:17 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - 10/18/2007 @ 01:55:58 PM
So take that for what it's worth.


Nothing?

If the receiver only needs one foot in bounds doesn't it seem like it would easier to make a judgment call, since probably half of the time on pushouts the receiver does have one foot in?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.