DCOrange

Correct, reportedly something he's considering (and some sources have heard he for sure is doing).

That would be fine with me. I'm just so over taking 5 minute breaks to still get calls wrong half the time. Or taking 5 minute breaks to get this call right but there's a million other plays you either don't or can't review so it's not like you're really doing it to make sure the "right" team wins. All these replay reviews do IMO is waste our time.

There was never really a time where you weren't required to get two feet in though and that's really the issue at play. Does he get two feet in after securing the ball? Because of the way he moved the ball, the NFL's answer would be that he failed to get two feet in. I agree with the idea of getting rid of replay reviews though; more trouble than its worth IMO.

Wasn't sure if we start a new Syracuse thread or just update the title of this one each year, but I'm hearing some good things about our recruiting efforts. Everyone knows Kiyan Anthony is almost certainly coming to Syracuse but there's a lot of buzz that we will also be getting Alex Costanza, currently a top 10-20 recruit depending on the rankings you look at. If we do ultimately get Kiyan and Costanza and keep Sadiq White in the fold, I think we're talking about roughly a top 5-10 class in the country.

From this point of view, it's interesting to compare this play and the Kincaid one a week ago. IMO Kincaid never really had control of the ball, but it didn't move all that much; you could just tell looking at it that it wasn't secure. Here, Coleman had the ball securely pinned to his body, not moving at all, and then solidified possession with the left hand later. I think if we're ignoring the actual rules, Coleman did have pretty secure control of the ball through all of that. But based on the way the NFL applies the rules, that brief moment where he goes from having it pinned to his body to then shifting it to his hand constitutes a loss of possession so it restarts the two-feet aspect.

Yeah, I'm honestly not sure how I think the penalty should actually be applied because if you try to really apply the rule the way it sounds (penalizing throws that are intentionally inaccurate) it adds a pretty severe amount of subjectivity to it. It just feels silly to name the penalty intentional grounding when the league lets QBs spike those screen passes intentionally all the time.

Intentional grounding drives me crazy too. The actual plays that are penalized are often not actually intentional (ex: QB throws a ball expecting a vertical route but the WR breaks it off just as he's throwing so it looks like there's no intended target). Meanwhile purposefully spiking the ball at the RB's feet on a screen pass is not "intentional".

I don't really understand why it took so long to begin with. I think one viewing of the first angle should have been enough to overturn it. Personally I just hate replay reviews in almost all sports. With the exception of sports like tennis and cricket, there's a decent chance the refs still get the call wrong and all we've accomplished is wasting more time. Games are long enough as is; much better as a viewer if they just make a call and move on IMO. For example, some professional soccer tournaments use VAR and some do not. The ones that do not use VAR are way more watchable to me.

It doesn't really matter once he switched hands the way he did. That act where the ball moved and he switched from having it pinned to his stomach to holding it in his hand essentially resets the process of establishing possession. And once that happens, it was very clear that he did not get two feet in. If he had kept the ball pinned to his stomach the whole way through, it would have been a catch.

The simple way to think of it is that he originally has the ball sort of pinned to his stomach with his right wrist and then solidifies control with his left hand. By rule, the NFL would say he didn't have possession of the ball until he began holding it with his left hand. After that point, he got 1 or 0 feet in bounds. Therefore, not a catch.

I still wonder what exactly caused him to slide as much in the draft as he did. I understand not everyone was 1st round pick high on his film, but 4th round was pretty crazy IMO if you're going purely off the film. I know his combine was uneven to be kind but still.

There were definitely two dropped on what eventually turned into a TD drive. The other Davis one ultimately ended in a field goal I believe. Not sure if he had others in this game. It's just insane though; even after overhauling the WR room, they still have the same issue of these hugely impactful drops. Lawrence is playing a lot worse this season than he did in the previous two years though so that's only exacerbated the issue.

I am definitely worried about Lawrence at this point, but it's also just astounding the number of touchdowns his receivers drop. He finished the year with 21 TDs last season and it's not even an exaggeration to say he could have had 40 if his receivers could catch the ball. And then he had at least 3 dropped TDs today alone. Lawrence is undoubtedly overpaid for what he is (and has seemingly declined this season which is obviously not what you want) but his receivers have been so much worse than you'd expect. On paper, Thomas, Kirk, and Gabe is probably just a below average or maybe average trio of WRs, but in actuality, their receiver room seems about as dire as ours (but Thomas looks very exciting so far).

The pellets in that screenshot are from the defender, not Cook. His elbow was pretty clearly out of bounds IMO and the foot was close but I think it initially landed in and then slid out of bounds before lifting off the ground. McDermott did not take a timeout after the Kincaid pass. He took a timeout after the Cook one.

Looks to me like his toe hit out of bounds before this screen shot and his elbow isn't touching the ground in this screenshot. When his elbow hits the ground, it appears to be out of bounds. I don't think he got any body part in.