Jump to content

Bengals 27 Jets 12


Recommended Posts

Bad game plan by the Jets helped to start the game, played 1 high and line gave some good protection, after the first 2 drives Jets went mostly 2 high and the line went back to stinking!!  (They almost ended his season again by getting run over)

Was it just me or did Perine look a lot better than Mixon picking holes and hitting them??!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Bad game plan by the Jets helped to start the game, played 1 high and line gave some good protection, after the first 2 drives Jets went mostly 2 high and the line went back to stinking!!  (They almost ended his season again by getting run over)

Was it just me or did Perine look a lot better than Mixon picking holes and hitting them??!!

Wasn’t just you, Perrine definitely did a better job today. Mixon seems to be dancing a little bit to much this year, while Perrine just found a hole and put his foot in the ground and went. Perine doing that may help Mixon, because he had to see how what Perine was doing was working. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From CincyJungle.com on the Tee Higgins catch/no catch:

However, Higgins was ruled out of bounds after securing the ball in the end zone. His toes were in, but since it wasn’t a toe-dragging catch, he needed his heels in as well.

Mike Garafolo called it one of the “weirder rules” in the NFL. Considering he was in bounds with his toes and those did touch first, it does sound strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, theguru said:

From CincyJungle.com on the Tee Higgins catch/no catch:

However, Higgins was ruled out of bounds after securing the ball in the end zone. His toes were in, but since it wasn’t a toe-dragging catch, he needed his heels in as well.

Mike Garafolo called it one of the “weirder rules” in the NFL. Considering he was in bounds with his toes and those did touch first, it does sound strange.

It certainly is a weird rule.  Especially considering that a player has to complete the catch to the ground, often landing out of bounds, in order for the catch to be legal.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, REALSPORT said:

It certainly is a weird rule.  Especially considering that a player has to complete the catch to the ground, often landing out of bounds, in order for the catch to be legal.   

I feel like it boils down to you can't toe drag in reverse.

Definitely something that needs to be changed but fortunately it didn't matter in this game. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theguru said:

I feel like it boils down to you can't toe drag in reverse.

Definitely something that needs to be changed but fortunately it didn't matter in this game. 

Correct.  I was also disappointed that the hit on Higgins was not reviewed for targeting.  It looked like a textbook case of a player launching himself headfirst into the head and neck area of a defenseless receiver.  

There were several questionable calls and no calls yesterday.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, REALSPORT said:

Correct.  I was also disappointed that the hit on Higgins was not reviewed for targeting.  It looked like a textbook case of a player launching himself headfirst into the head and neck area of a defenseless receiver.  

There were several questionable calls and no calls yesterday.

Agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.