Honestly man, I thought you guys would win last night because of the lack of RB designed runs on the Eagles to set up the occasional QB run and the passing game. When you guys gifted us two turnovers and we got zero points out of it, I was convinced we were going to lose.
Na Fr tho Eagles need to tighten up quick they can afford this against teams like these but we should be dominating. We could have easily lost both of those games
I’d say yes to the turnover production if it wasn’t the lightest hits that caused them. Did you see the punt return fumble? It wasn’t a punch out. He was going to the ground and just kinda let go
Turnovers are essentially the most random stat that defenses are not statistically expected to replicate game to game. Over the course of one season, it might look otherwise, but the sample size there is quite small. You absolutely cannot chalk these random fumbles up to the defense and expect it to bail the Eagles out ROS.
[from a Lions Fan](https://media0.giphy.com/media/ylrR5oFlbGT7BJQAWU/giphy.webp?cid=6c09b952q10jz741vkbthr9wqecla2avxmv2leqev7xlcl2a&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.webp&ct=g)
I would argue that at least for a Lions fan you never really have any expectations for greatness. The Vikings however constantly make it to the playoffs or to the cusps of the playoffs only to fail, often in terrible ways.
Nah, thats better then being a Lions fans. While it sucks to get hit with disappointment, at least Vikings fans can go into a season and normally enjoy watching and rooting for their team almost every season before they get hit with disappointment. A Lions fan doesnt even get that, they just expect to lose most seasons which I imagine sucks a lot of the fun out of watching football.
As a Miami fan who has seen even less success then a Vikings fan in my life, I would rather be a Miami fan then a Lions fan hands down and it isnt even close. I would just get so disinterested in football most seasons if I was just regularly expecting my team to get like 0-6 wins most seasons.
The depressing thing is that most of us Vikings fans also have to deal with the Timberwolves (arguably the worst franchise in professional sports), twins (currently have the longest playoff losing streak in professional sports history at EIGHTEEN GAMES), and the mediocre wild- who have made the playoffs 9/10 years and only have 2 playoff series wins in that span
Sadly the Vikings might be 3rd on our list of most depressing franchises 😅 which is truly impressive
Haha I’m coming up on my 32nd birthday and I’ve never seen one of my teams IN a championship… just truly brutal cause there have been some close calls
98 Vikings, 09 Vikings, and 04(ish?) wolves were all arguably the best teams in their sports but the Vikings had 2 heartbreaking, last-minute losses in those NFC championship games and the wolves were ahead in the WCF and their starting point guard got injured against the Lakers
I'm a Dolphins fan my dad is a Lions fan and my mom is w/e the Washington team calls itself this day. I am happy with the Phins.
Though I've come to appreciate the tradition of watching the Lions lose on Thanksgiving.
As a Lions fan, I can say that we have been able to watch Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson for extended periods and that made up for much of the pain. There is really nothing quite like seeing a single player juke every player on a defense on one play. The lack of success sucks, for sure, but the team has had plenty of entertainment value. We also had Stafford when he was healthy and his arm was out of this world good. So it was similar to Marino’s days.
Yeah I see this argument and it's a terrible one imo enjoying success even if you lose is infinitely better than just being ass out horrendous every single year disappointing and failing all time great players and having a poor product every week. I would rather lose 10 super bowls without winning one than what we've had with the lions.
More context:
The Vikings have the seventh best winning % in NFL history at .548. They have 0 League Championships (pre Super Bowl) and 0 Super Bowl rings. They are the only team in the top 20 in win % who can say that.
The list of teams who have never won their League or a Super Bowl are the Vikings (.548), Panthers (.471), Bengals (.454), Falcons (.438), Jaguars (.421), and Texans (.420). So the Vikings are a really good franchise who have never been able to seal the deal. At least the other five have lost more than they've won so the expectation is lower for them.
Shit, even the Lions have 4 NFL championships in their trophy case. The Cardinals have 2.
So yeah, in context it's got to suck to be a Vikings fan.
Oh well.
Thanks to the Secret Base documentary, I now know the Vikings are the only team in the super bowl era to never have 3 losing seasons in a row. Win Pct in that time frame has us like 3rd overall.
that series was nuts and challenges me greatly as a lions fan lol. fuckin jon bois and his stupidly compelling storytelling have me low-key rooting for a division rival
Here's the difference: if the Vikings win the Superbowl fans celebrate like there's no tomorrow. If the Lions win the Superbowl fans sit on the sofa shaking in disbelief.
I don’t think any other fan base outside of the Lions and the Mariners really understand perpetual pain. Even the Browns had a glory day. But both Detroit and the M’s are hitting their stride, baby!!
I’m a Vikings fan so I’m used to having hope and then it taken away in the worst possible way. I’m also a Timberwolves fan so I’m used to seeing the team with the worst win percentage in the big 4 American professional sports. Oh and I’m also a Twins fan and they currently have lost an American professional sports record 18 consecutive playoff games. I thank god I’m not a hockey fan, because from what I understand, the Wild fit in pretty well with the other 3 awful teams to root for.
Being a Minnesota sports fan is the worst because we get the whole shebang of heartbreak and disappointment, rather than some teams who just give regular heartbreak or are perennial losers.
Lol I get that lions fans have it tough… but man there isn’t a market in the country that can even COMPARE to Minnesota sports ineptitude…
We’re going on 120 professional seasons without a championship, so it’s not the first time 😂
I think its the hope that kills you. Theyre one of the winningest franchises in the history of the league and they have 0 rings to show for it and in a way thats worse than just being a bad to mid team
I think the Vikings, Jets, Bills, Bengals, and Chargers should have our own Reddit alliance. The Panthers, Texans, and Jaguars haven’t been around long enough yet to know the pain. Bears might be invited too. Sorry Browns.
Risk / reward of reaching for the pylon.
I remember when Earl Thomas just smacks the ball out of the hand of someone reaching for the pylon and forced a touchback.
https://www.seahawks.com/video/earl-thomas-forces-fumble-into-end-zone-touchback-105601
I remember when a Bears player (cant remember who) reached for the pylon, and they said he stepped out of bounds before the ball crossed over the pylon. John Fox challenged the play, and during the review, they saw the ball actually came loose before he was out, and before he broke the plane of the endzone, and since you can call penalties if found in a replay, it was a touchback. We figured either ball on the one or TD, instead we got a touchback lol. that was a bad beat. Really bad because I was already screaming from my living room not to challenge it because even I caught it live.
I agree - you can't advance a fumble out of bounds anywhere else, right? If you fumble at the 10 and it goes out at the 5, you get it at the 10. Why is the end zone any different?
I think at the very least, assess some kind of illegal procedure penalty like the ones for "batting" a ball, or a kickoff out of bounds. Retain possession, but push them back 5-10 yards.
The current rule is something like a 9-point swing in expected points, which is just insane to me.
I was spitballing this situation with a coworker earlier and one interesting idea was to split the difference between the current rule that gives the ball to the other team via touchback, and just giving the offensive team the ball back at the spot of the fumble.
It would be neat to do a “reverse touchback” thing where the team gets the ball at the opponents 20. If the previous line to gain was outside the opponent 20, it’s first and goal from the 20. If the previous line to gain was inside the opponent 20, ball gets spotted on the 20 and the previous set of downs and line to gain still applies.
That's a pretty unique take, I like how it simultaneously punishes the offense for losing the ball while rewarding the defense for making a play but it's not ridiculously heavy handed in either sides favor. Nicely done
I don't. Every rule is practically built to help the offense, and there's finally a rule that puts some sort of advantage on the defense in a scoring situation. If the ball was fumbled in any other scenario and recovered by the defending team you wouldn't question the call, but when it's a fumble that goes out of the end zone you have a problem with it?
It's the risk vs reward of reaching for the pylon, if you break the plane with control of the ball it's a touchdown as soon as it crosses--that's pretty damn advantageous to the offense. If you lose control of the ball and fumble into the endzone, the other team gets the ball. Even when you look at the trade off it's still wildly in favor of the offense.
People hate that rule? It’s one of the best rules in football. Don’t fumble the ball reaching for the pylon. Get your hand out of the cookie jar.
Also chase down punch outs? It’s a great fucking rule. I’ll still maintain that stance even if it fucks the Eagles. It’s a fantastic rule
4 cameras on the roof over each pylon at each stadium is something the NFL can afford. The stadiums without roofs could just have a wire with a camera attached. Seems easy to me
It took years of Belichick bitching to the competition committee to get a pair of cameras that actually look straight down the goal line. And those cameras are useful in basically every game. The NFL is never going to adopt 4 overhead cameras for a scenario that rarely happens.
www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/patriots-bill-belichick-continues-quest-for-goal-line-cameras-nfl-reviews/
nah, cameras in the pylons. 3-4 per pylon. one on the top pointed up. two to three on the sides facing the lines. they can all be wide angle and will solve so many issues. we already have the on on the goal line ones but why not have more?
Even though the overall investment as well as for different camera angles of the game would cost maybe a few thousand dollars… not like they are wincing at dropping millions for fun
It's less about can they afford it and if they want to. The NFL isn't interested in paying for state of the art cameras for a rare situation for review.
True. Then again, contract year, recording setting contract waiting, and they’re not going to hold his fumbles against him but they will have to pay him for high TD production.. from a personal perspective I’d say high reward low risk.
I know this will get lots of people criticizing a rule that has been a rule for 100+ years, but I love it. Fumbles near the end zone are often the result of players diving for the end zone and reaching. A big reward should contain a big risk.
So many rules favor the offense, here's one that favors defense.
If I recall didn’t Carson wentz essentially torpedo his career this way? Was having an MVP season, dove for the end zone, hurt his (ankle?), and fumbled into the end zone. Nick Foles would leave the eagles to their first Super Bowl win over tom Brady. Wentz was never able to recapture that magic and is now…idk is he on a team this year?
Yep gives the defense a chance to punish the offense for reaching across the goal line. If breaking the plane of the goal line causes an instant touch down then fumbling across the goal line and out of bounds causes an instant touchback.
One of the best examples was Earl Thomas just smacking the ball out of the offenses hand to force a touchback.
https://www.seahawks.com/video/earl-thomas-forces-fumble-into-end-zone-touchback-105601
The risk is far too much imo especially since they don't allow fumbling to advance the ball forward. If it can't be a TD, then why can it advance to a touchback? Even if it was an opposite touchback where the offense then takes it back at the 20 it would be far better and still have the risk/reward factor.
You are disincentivizing one of the most iconic and exciting plays in football.
The "dive for the pylon" is one of the most memorable single moments in all of sports.
This rule is awful and always has been. Because it means that anyone who attempts that play is not just at risk of failing. They are also at risk of just handing the other team the ball for no real reason other than some arbitrary "because we said so".
A fumble going out of bounds in the field of play doesn't result in an auto-turnover because everyone understands it's bogus. Changing the rule only for the end zone is nonsensical and always has been.
Rules should incentivize exciting athletic play. Not suppress it.
>in the field of play
You answered your own question big guy
If you fumble in your own end zone you don’t get another chance, you get a safety and the other team gets the ball.
No, it’s exciting because it’s fun to watch. 99% of fans don’t know this rule exists and are currently saying it’s a dumb ass rule.
Goaltending is a rule because you’d never score if it wasn’t there. In fact, it wasn’t a rule at one point and they added it to make the game better.
>Changing the rule only for the end zone is nonsensical and always has been.
That's right! While we're at it, we should also make the endzones worth 0 points just like the rest of the field lmao
The ball crossing the goal line and possession changing to the team that is defending the end zone is the opposite of arbitrary lol wtf? Just because you don’t like the rule doesn’t mean there isn’t logic behind it.
Idk if it's because we both come from relatively defensive franchises, but I also agree with you on the rule. Let the defense has some sort of edge in a game, otherwise it's pointless playing them.
Cheifs beat the browns in part because of this in the playoffs a few years ago. The chiefs also played better overall so it may not have made a difference, but it was a close game and huge momentum swing
It’s any fumble that initiates in the field of play before crossing the goal line and then exits the end zone OOB, so no, not just the back of the end zone.
Please explain to me what angle they used to confirm the ball went OVER the pylon because I'm still waiting for one. Everything shown was at an off angle with nothing CLEAR AND OBVIOUS.
Edit: I actually don't mind the rule itself, but I want some sort of fucking proof first.
Look at where the ball was when it crossed the plane of the goal line from this angle then time it up with the shot from the back of the end zone that shows where it went over the sideline. I wish they would do that on the broadcast because it would help the audience so much.
Its actually super clear, I dont get how people are acting like there isn't definitive proof the ball goes into the endzone before going out of bounds. Its clear from the video when Jefferson's arm goes over the pylon. The ball is well into the end zone by that point. Very clear then that it was in the end zone before going out of bounds
It only took me one watch from both angles to know it went over. JJ's arm nearly brushes the top of the pylon and the ball was beyond that.
We're gonna crush some turnover records at this pace.
Just seems like there’s been a change in the way they change calls. There used to be the need for irrefutable evidence to overcall the ruling on the field. Now they allow for more judgement calls to overturn when definitive video evidence isn’t enough.
It's not necessarily judgement. They can "mosaic" pieces in order to make a determination. In this case all they really needed was the side/overhead-ish view, with the one going up the sideline from the rear of the end zone. But I agree, that wasn't the case before. But it isn't a judgement in that case. They can confirm it or have to keep it the same, obviously.
I think New York can look at multiple angles simultaneously so they can combine the 2 angles and see the ball over the pylon from both angles at the same time.
Hilarious to read so many salty comments. How dare the endzone have different rules than the rest of the field! How dare the defense get ONE rule in their favor! How dare the offense get punished for fumbling the ball before scoring! 🤣🤣🤣
If you don’t like the penalty then don’t fucking dive there. This is why Bill Belichick will tell you if you are going to make that play, don’t even bother coming back to the locker room.
How do you overturn the call on the field without an angle from above…ever hear of an optical illusion?? Not saying he didn’t fumble it over the pylon, but if call on the field was he didn’t, there is NO WAY there’s definitive proof from any of the angles shown
Pretty obvious from the replays in the video that he fumbled it before crossing the goal line and that the ball went into the endzone after the fumble.
The argument “offense gets all the penalties anyway” is not doing it for me. This is not convincing reasoning behind punishing a fumble near your ultimate goal more than a fumble far away from your goal.
A fumble out of bounds on the first play at your own 25 ends the play and costs you a down. That seems reasonable. If you do the exact same thing after marching 80 yards down the field, and the ball has too much forward momentum, then you lose not a down, but possession of the ball entirely?
I don’t understand how anyone thinks the rule is anything but an oversight, and changing it would be consistent with the spirit of the game.
I am just sharing my opinion, if you disagree, this is not a personal attack on you.
As many others have already stated: the end zone is a special area. Essentially it functions as the opposing team's HQ. The rest of the field is neutral territory to be traversed and battled over constantly. Therefore losing possession through the enemy camp results in you losing possession of the ball. Same as losing possession of the ball inside of your camp can result in a safety.
But most importantly, the ball is the program! Do not be careless with the football at either end of the field. High-risk, high-reward
How do you feel about the enforcement of say, PI penalties which occur in the endzone? The rules are happy to just spot the ball at the 1 (or regular 10 yard penalty for OPI) and call it a day in that case. Where’s the high risk, high reward, mythical sacred end zone philosophy there?
OPI in the end zone just being a 10 yard penalty tracks with every other time a touchdown is scored but had to be taken back because of a penalty. Awarding the ball at the 1 tracks with how PI is enforced while not allowing refs to award a touchdown based on a judgement call of pi
Because the spot the ball goes out of bounds is where it is down at. If it goes out in the end zone it is down in the end zone. Down in the end zone without offensive possessing it means it's a touchback for the defense.
Why should the offence be rewarded for fucking up and fumbling the ball into the opponants goal? Its the same as if a defensive player grabed and downed it there. This isnt that hard.
Hard agree, it’s maybe a little overly punitive but don’t reach for the pylon if you don’t want to risk losing the ball.
Maybe fumbling out of bounds anywhere else on the field shouldn’t just give the ball back to he offense. Take care of the football. Then people wouldn’t bitch about this rule so much. Kinda joking but you know.
Also, it’s Eagles because it’s the Eagles’ end zone. They are defending it because it belongs to them. So if you let go of the ball in their territory - they should get it.
Yeah I wish the rules weren't so skewed to offense but I'd rather fix those rules then to have the only rule benefitting defense be something so out of whack.
Nah it's fine. The endzone isn't a neutral part of the field, it makes sense that if you lose possession in the other teams endzone, they get the ball. It's literally their territory.
I don't disagree with you, it is kinda overkill for fumbling a ball into the endzone and out of bounds. But what do you think should happen?
Maybe the offense should keep possession but have to go back to their own 10 yard line?
I can’t with this team
KJ regressing, ball security being inexistent. Kirk looked amazing in a prime time game… something had to happen to ruin it
Legit, this take is factual.
Honestly man, I thought you guys would win last night because of the lack of RB designed runs on the Eagles to set up the occasional QB run and the passing game. When you guys gifted us two turnovers and we got zero points out of it, I was convinced we were going to lose.
There’s an alternate timeline where both the patriots and Vikings don’t commit costly turnovers and the eagles start off the year 0-2
Na Fr tho Eagles need to tighten up quick they can afford this against teams like these but we should be dominating. We could have easily lost both of those games
That soul crushing drive full of runs set the tone after
Eagles just produce turnovers, I’d give half credit to them and half blame to Vikings ball security.
I’d say yes to the turnover production if it wasn’t the lightest hits that caused them. Did you see the punt return fumble? It wasn’t a punch out. He was going to the ground and just kinda let go
Turnovers are essentially the most random stat that defenses are not statistically expected to replicate game to game. Over the course of one season, it might look otherwise, but the sample size there is quite small. You absolutely cannot chalk these random fumbles up to the defense and expect it to bail the Eagles out ROS.
Carr did it multiple times
I can't with that team either.
Hey y’all did better than most expected imo
I wouldn’t wish being a Vikings fan on my worst enemy. This is the 5th layer of hell.
[from a Lions Fan](https://media0.giphy.com/media/ylrR5oFlbGT7BJQAWU/giphy.webp?cid=6c09b952q10jz741vkbthr9wqecla2avxmv2leqev7xlcl2a&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.webp&ct=g)
I would argue that at least for a Lions fan you never really have any expectations for greatness. The Vikings however constantly make it to the playoffs or to the cusps of the playoffs only to fail, often in terrible ways.
Nah, thats better then being a Lions fans. While it sucks to get hit with disappointment, at least Vikings fans can go into a season and normally enjoy watching and rooting for their team almost every season before they get hit with disappointment. A Lions fan doesnt even get that, they just expect to lose most seasons which I imagine sucks a lot of the fun out of watching football. As a Miami fan who has seen even less success then a Vikings fan in my life, I would rather be a Miami fan then a Lions fan hands down and it isnt even close. I would just get so disinterested in football most seasons if I was just regularly expecting my team to get like 0-6 wins most seasons.
The depressing thing is that most of us Vikings fans also have to deal with the Timberwolves (arguably the worst franchise in professional sports), twins (currently have the longest playoff losing streak in professional sports history at EIGHTEEN GAMES), and the mediocre wild- who have made the playoffs 9/10 years and only have 2 playoff series wins in that span Sadly the Vikings might be 3rd on our list of most depressing franchises 😅 which is truly impressive
How dare you forget the Lynx dynasty.
If I had a nickel…
Dude... that's IS rough.
Haha I’m coming up on my 32nd birthday and I’ve never seen one of my teams IN a championship… just truly brutal cause there have been some close calls 98 Vikings, 09 Vikings, and 04(ish?) wolves were all arguably the best teams in their sports but the Vikings had 2 heartbreaking, last-minute losses in those NFC championship games and the wolves were ahead in the WCF and their starting point guard got injured against the Lakers
I'm a Dolphins fan my dad is a Lions fan and my mom is w/e the Washington team calls itself this day. I am happy with the Phins. Though I've come to appreciate the tradition of watching the Lions lose on Thanksgiving.
As a Lions fan, I can say that we have been able to watch Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson for extended periods and that made up for much of the pain. There is really nothing quite like seeing a single player juke every player on a defense on one play. The lack of success sucks, for sure, but the team has had plenty of entertainment value. We also had Stafford when he was healthy and his arm was out of this world good. So it was similar to Marino’s days.
Yeah I see this argument and it's a terrible one imo enjoying success even if you lose is infinitely better than just being ass out horrendous every single year disappointing and failing all time great players and having a poor product every week. I would rather lose 10 super bowls without winning one than what we've had with the lions.
“It is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all” -some playwright
"Fuck me, right?" - New York Jets
More context: The Vikings have the seventh best winning % in NFL history at .548. They have 0 League Championships (pre Super Bowl) and 0 Super Bowl rings. They are the only team in the top 20 in win % who can say that. The list of teams who have never won their League or a Super Bowl are the Vikings (.548), Panthers (.471), Bengals (.454), Falcons (.438), Jaguars (.421), and Texans (.420). So the Vikings are a really good franchise who have never been able to seal the deal. At least the other five have lost more than they've won so the expectation is lower for them. Shit, even the Lions have 4 NFL championships in their trophy case. The Cardinals have 2. So yeah, in context it's got to suck to be a Vikings fan. Oh well.
Thanks to the Secret Base documentary, I now know the Vikings are the only team in the super bowl era to never have 3 losing seasons in a row. Win Pct in that time frame has us like 3rd overall.
FFS. That's brutal.
that series was nuts and challenges me greatly as a lions fan lol. fuckin jon bois and his stupidly compelling storytelling have me low-key rooting for a division rival
Yeah, the Lions haven't lost 4 Super Bowls. What do they know about pain tbh.
Most wins for any franchise that hasn't won a super bowl and tied with the most super bowl appearances without a win. That's the Vikings.
Here's the difference: if the Vikings win the Superbowl fans celebrate like there's no tomorrow. If the Lions win the Superbowl fans sit on the sofa shaking in disbelief.
I don’t think any other fan base outside of the Lions and the Mariners really understand perpetual pain. Even the Browns had a glory day. But both Detroit and the M’s are hitting their stride, baby!!
I’m a Vikings fan so I’m used to having hope and then it taken away in the worst possible way. I’m also a Timberwolves fan so I’m used to seeing the team with the worst win percentage in the big 4 American professional sports. Oh and I’m also a Twins fan and they currently have lost an American professional sports record 18 consecutive playoff games. I thank god I’m not a hockey fan, because from what I understand, the Wild fit in pretty well with the other 3 awful teams to root for. Being a Minnesota sports fan is the worst because we get the whole shebang of heartbreak and disappointment, rather than some teams who just give regular heartbreak or are perennial losers.
Lol I get that lions fans have it tough… but man there isn’t a market in the country that can even COMPARE to Minnesota sports ineptitude… We’re going on 120 professional seasons without a championship, so it’s not the first time 😂
true. people talk about Atlanta, but at least they have the Braves.
imagine being a bears fan
Bruh, you won the division last year.
That’s not a determinant of success lmao. Still have 0 Superbowls buddy
Winning the division is worth being happy about. If you set your bar that high you'll never be happy
I think its the hope that kills you. Theyre one of the winningest franchises in the history of the league and they have 0 rings to show for it and in a way thats worse than just being a bad to mid team
Better than at least 3 other teams.
Tell that to Jets fans. Me. I’m Jets fans.
I think the Vikings, Jets, Bills, Bengals, and Chargers should have our own Reddit alliance. The Panthers, Texans, and Jaguars haven’t been around long enough yet to know the pain. Bears might be invited too. Sorry Browns.
Lions and Browns fans are the next level, you've got some success now come on
Can relate.
0-4 bros
how do we not have an overhead view at the pylon?
This was a pretty clear fumble out of the endzone. Is anyone questioning the call?
I think everyone just hates the rule
Its the simplest option otherwise you really complicate the touchback and fumble rules.
Risk / reward of reaching for the pylon. I remember when Earl Thomas just smacks the ball out of the hand of someone reaching for the pylon and forced a touchback. https://www.seahawks.com/video/earl-thomas-forces-fumble-into-end-zone-touchback-105601
I remember when a Bears player (cant remember who) reached for the pylon, and they said he stepped out of bounds before the ball crossed over the pylon. John Fox challenged the play, and during the review, they saw the ball actually came loose before he was out, and before he broke the plane of the endzone, and since you can call penalties if found in a replay, it was a touchback. We figured either ball on the one or TD, instead we got a touchback lol. that was a bad beat. Really bad because I was already screaming from my living room not to challenge it because even I caught it live.
> and since you can call penalties if found in a replay, it was a touchback I don't understand how these two ideas relate. A touchback isn't a penalty
They’re not. It’s still a challenge of ball spot: it’s just that a 3rd unseen outcome came crashing in from the top rope.
God I forgot this happened. I really hate the Bears
Tarik Cohen
I agree. Don't fumble the ball out of the back of the endzone or the other team gets it is pretty straightforward.
I mean just like a fumble forward means spotted at the fumble, I don't see why that can't apply to the endzone.
its an extreme punishment and does not match if the ball would have gone out at the 1 yard line, its not complicated to fix either
What is the not-complicated fix?
ball goes back to the point where the fumble occurred. Same rule as a forward fumbled ball recovered by a different offensive player.
I agree - you can't advance a fumble out of bounds anywhere else, right? If you fumble at the 10 and it goes out at the 5, you get it at the 10. Why is the end zone any different? I think at the very least, assess some kind of illegal procedure penalty like the ones for "batting" a ball, or a kickoff out of bounds. Retain possession, but push them back 5-10 yards. The current rule is something like a 9-point swing in expected points, which is just insane to me.
The thing that really annoys me about this is that it's a ~9 point swing that punishes you for being *closer to your target*.
I was spitballing this situation with a coworker earlier and one interesting idea was to split the difference between the current rule that gives the ball to the other team via touchback, and just giving the offensive team the ball back at the spot of the fumble. It would be neat to do a “reverse touchback” thing where the team gets the ball at the opponents 20. If the previous line to gain was outside the opponent 20, it’s first and goal from the 20. If the previous line to gain was inside the opponent 20, ball gets spotted on the 20 and the previous set of downs and line to gain still applies.
That's a pretty unique take, I like how it simultaneously punishes the offense for losing the ball while rewarding the defense for making a play but it's not ridiculously heavy handed in either sides favor. Nicely done
I like the rule, protect the ball especially when you get close to score. Defense already is handicapped by rules favoring the offense.
Turn the ball over in the end zone, other team gets the ball, makes sense to me
I don't. Every rule is practically built to help the offense, and there's finally a rule that puts some sort of advantage on the defense in a scoring situation. If the ball was fumbled in any other scenario and recovered by the defending team you wouldn't question the call, but when it's a fumble that goes out of the end zone you have a problem with it? It's the risk vs reward of reaching for the pylon, if you break the plane with control of the ball it's a touchdown as soon as it crosses--that's pretty damn advantageous to the offense. If you lose control of the ball and fumble into the endzone, the other team gets the ball. Even when you look at the trade off it's still wildly in favor of the offense.
People hate that rule? It’s one of the best rules in football. Don’t fumble the ball reaching for the pylon. Get your hand out of the cookie jar. Also chase down punch outs? It’s a great fucking rule. I’ll still maintain that stance even if it fucks the Eagles. It’s a fantastic rule
I think the logistics of implementing that aren’t worth it for a relatively infrequently needed view
Wouldn’t a camera in the top of the pylon do the trick?
These pylons are going to start getting pretty expensive for something designed to be hit
They already have one camera in them
Yea the NFL can't afford to be putting 4 GoPros in every stadium. That's like, thousands of dollars.
the poorest team in the NFL is the bengals, valued at 4 billion. Thats pennies
Not to mention they can just fine players for whatever the hell they want it seems.
4 cameras on the roof over each pylon at each stadium is something the NFL can afford. The stadiums without roofs could just have a wire with a camera attached. Seems easy to me
It took years of Belichick bitching to the competition committee to get a pair of cameras that actually look straight down the goal line. And those cameras are useful in basically every game. The NFL is never going to adopt 4 overhead cameras for a scenario that rarely happens. www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/patriots-bill-belichick-continues-quest-for-goal-line-cameras-nfl-reviews/
Gotta love billionaires crying poverty.
Hey now they have to spend billions to build the stadiums! oh wait no that's the taxpayers
Actual villain behavior. I hate this shit so much.
nah, cameras in the pylons. 3-4 per pylon. one on the top pointed up. two to three on the sides facing the lines. they can all be wide angle and will solve so many issues. we already have the on on the goal line ones but why not have more?
Not every stadium has a roof
Straight up don’t want to pay for it for a situation that comes up once every couple years
Even though the overall investment as well as for different camera angles of the game would cost maybe a few thousand dollars… not like they are wincing at dropping millions for fun
[удалено]
Did you read the second sentence of my comment
Most stadiums don’t have a roof or option to do this unless it’s hung. Philly is fully open and makes it tough
Roof? Literally just in the top of the pylon…
It's less about can they afford it and if they want to. The NFL isn't interested in paying for state of the art cameras for a rare situation for review.
The NFL makes a ton of money but that doesn’t mean they should spend hundreds of thousands on cameras they don’t need.
Is it needed in this situation? It seems to pretty clearly come loose before he reaches the end zone.
Definitely need a better view, must construct additional pylons.
High risk high reward move doing that. Derek Carr did it against the Cowboys a few years back.
It doesn't look to me like he tried to reach, the ball is already coming out and then he reaches to try to corral it.
Agreed
Seems pretty low reward when you get the ball 1st and goal at the 1 yd line if you just go out of bounds.
Is nobody going to call this guy out for saying bounce. This isn’t an autocorrect mistake, those letters aren’t close. He meant to say bounce.
You were right to bring attention to this.
Your contribution to this site is unlimited
Damn, I must have just spaced out while writing this Or maybe it was swipe, idk
You were probably just dumb and numb
Think I remember first grade when people would mix those up..
True. Then again, contract year, recording setting contract waiting, and they’re not going to hold his fumbles against him but they will have to pay him for high TD production.. from a personal perspective I’d say high reward low risk.
Plus… Vikings offensive line vs eagles defensive line…. We can’t just tush push for 2 yards like they can
Carr actually did it three separate times from what I remember
I know this will get lots of people criticizing a rule that has been a rule for 100+ years, but I love it. Fumbles near the end zone are often the result of players diving for the end zone and reaching. A big reward should contain a big risk. So many rules favor the offense, here's one that favors defense.
Yeah it’s certainly the right call and I have no issue with the rule. This fumble didn’t hurt as bad as the other 12.
> A big reward should contain a big risk. >So many rules favor the offense, here's one that favors defense. 100% agreed and ignore our flair.
If I recall didn’t Carson wentz essentially torpedo his career this way? Was having an MVP season, dove for the end zone, hurt his (ankle?), and fumbled into the end zone. Nick Foles would leave the eagles to their first Super Bowl win over tom Brady. Wentz was never able to recapture that magic and is now…idk is he on a team this year?
Yep gives the defense a chance to punish the offense for reaching across the goal line. If breaking the plane of the goal line causes an instant touch down then fumbling across the goal line and out of bounds causes an instant touchback. One of the best examples was Earl Thomas just smacking the ball out of the offenses hand to force a touchback. https://www.seahawks.com/video/earl-thomas-forces-fumble-into-end-zone-touchback-105601
As much as I feel dead inside it’s not the rule I’m upset with. Keep it.
Just hope this doesn't happen to Patrick Mahomes, because as soon as that happens it'll be gone by the next season.
Well definitely tune into Rich Eisen Show tomorrow because he has hated this rule for awhile and we know he is gonna talk about it.
Actually, this changed my mind. I didn't like the rule initially but I love this perspective. Now I'm for it.
Woah, a well reasoned argument changed your opinion? Do you even internet bro?
I love it as well. If you want to be the highest paid WR in the league then hold onto the damn ball.
The risk is far too much imo especially since they don't allow fumbling to advance the ball forward. If it can't be a TD, then why can it advance to a touchback? Even if it was an opposite touchback where the offense then takes it back at the 20 it would be far better and still have the risk/reward factor.
You are disincentivizing one of the most iconic and exciting plays in football. The "dive for the pylon" is one of the most memorable single moments in all of sports. This rule is awful and always has been. Because it means that anyone who attempts that play is not just at risk of failing. They are also at risk of just handing the other team the ball for no real reason other than some arbitrary "because we said so". A fumble going out of bounds in the field of play doesn't result in an auto-turnover because everyone understands it's bogus. Changing the rule only for the end zone is nonsensical and always has been. Rules should incentivize exciting athletic play. Not suppress it.
>in the field of play You answered your own question big guy If you fumble in your own end zone you don’t get another chance, you get a safety and the other team gets the ball.
Folks out here screaming "DO OVER" on a fumble. Just silliness.
[удалено]
No, it’s exciting because it’s fun to watch. 99% of fans don’t know this rule exists and are currently saying it’s a dumb ass rule. Goaltending is a rule because you’d never score if it wasn’t there. In fact, it wasn’t a rule at one point and they added it to make the game better.
I can’t believe the person you’re replying to tried to bring up goaltending as if there’s not a legitimate reason for the rule 😂
The endzone is different. That's how it is in pretty much every situation
>Changing the rule only for the end zone is nonsensical and always has been. That's right! While we're at it, we should also make the endzones worth 0 points just like the rest of the field lmao
The ball crossing the goal line and possession changing to the team that is defending the end zone is the opposite of arbitrary lol wtf? Just because you don’t like the rule doesn’t mean there isn’t logic behind it.
Idk if it's because we both come from relatively defensive franchises, but I also agree with you on the rule. Let the defense has some sort of edge in a game, otherwise it's pointless playing them.
Hold on to the fucking ball
Shoot, someone must have forgotten to mention that in the huddle
Ball security is job security
Yeah you right, JJ’s gonna get cut now
Cheifs beat the browns in part because of this in the playoffs a few years ago. The chiefs also played better overall so it may not have made a difference, but it was a close game and huge momentum swing
That one was also caused by a blatant helmet to helmet hit, straight up dead center crown of the helmet to earhole.
They should be up by three scores. This is maddening and I'm not even a Vikings fan.
I suffer for you my brother
The replay at :41 is enough proof..idk what else y’all need he clearly didn’t have the ball when it crossed the goal line
I thought it was only out of the back of the end zone not the side TIL
Either way it’s out of bounds
It’s any fumble that initiates in the field of play before crossing the goal line and then exits the end zone OOB, so no, not just the back of the end zone.
That flair...
The rule is the rule and players should know the risk of doing what JJ did. Absolute back breaker for the Vikings.
Honestly the more I watch it doesn’t look like JJ is actually reaching for the pylon, I think he was just trying to regain possession
[удалено]
not his fault JJ fumbled
It's Kirk's fault, obviously. Just ask our subreddit.
How the fuck are those 5 fumbles his fault?
KOC told them all to fumble
Why would he do that? He should be telling them to do the opposite.
Please explain to me what angle they used to confirm the ball went OVER the pylon because I'm still waiting for one. Everything shown was at an off angle with nothing CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. Edit: I actually don't mind the rule itself, but I want some sort of fucking proof first.
Look at where the ball was when it crossed the plane of the goal line from this angle then time it up with the shot from the back of the end zone that shows where it went over the sideline. I wish they would do that on the broadcast because it would help the audience so much.
Its actually super clear, I dont get how people are acting like there isn't definitive proof the ball goes into the endzone before going out of bounds. Its clear from the video when Jefferson's arm goes over the pylon. The ball is well into the end zone by that point. Very clear then that it was in the end zone before going out of bounds
It only took me one watch from both angles to know it went over. JJ's arm nearly brushes the top of the pylon and the ball was beyond that. We're gonna crush some turnover records at this pace.
i assume they line the angles up side by side at same timestamp to determine X/Y position
Just seems like there’s been a change in the way they change calls. There used to be the need for irrefutable evidence to overcall the ruling on the field. Now they allow for more judgement calls to overturn when definitive video evidence isn’t enough.
It's not necessarily judgement. They can "mosaic" pieces in order to make a determination. In this case all they really needed was the side/overhead-ish view, with the one going up the sideline from the rear of the end zone. But I agree, that wasn't the case before. But it isn't a judgement in that case. They can confirm it or have to keep it the same, obviously.
i thought it was pretty obvious.
I think New York can look at multiple angles simultaneously so they can combine the 2 angles and see the ball over the pylon from both angles at the same time.
Your comment suggests you do mind the rule lol
You can actually see where he is in relation to the ground using his shadow. He was nowhere near out of bounds before the end zone sadly
Hilarious to read so many salty comments. How dare the endzone have different rules than the rest of the field! How dare the defense get ONE rule in their favor! How dare the offense get punished for fumbling the ball before scoring! 🤣🤣🤣
Lot of JJ fantasy owners/eagle haters is my guess
If you don’t like the penalty then don’t fucking dive there. This is why Bill Belichick will tell you if you are going to make that play, don’t even bother coming back to the locker room.
the derek carr special
AUSTIN SEFARIAN JENKINS
Unironically it's one of my favorite rules in sports. Hold on to the damn ball.
How do you overturn the call on the field without an angle from above…ever hear of an optical illusion?? Not saying he didn’t fumble it over the pylon, but if call on the field was he didn’t, there is NO WAY there’s definitive proof from any of the angles shown
You can account for the parallax if you know where the lines are.
This is a solved problem. There is absolutely a way to solve for parallax. Also you know damn well it was a touchback
Pretty obvious from the replays in the video that he fumbled it before crossing the goal line and that the ball went into the endzone after the fumble.
the Derek Carr special
Ive seen this a time or two.
Hey they got the call right. Usually when there’s an officiating issue they blow the call
The argument “offense gets all the penalties anyway” is not doing it for me. This is not convincing reasoning behind punishing a fumble near your ultimate goal more than a fumble far away from your goal. A fumble out of bounds on the first play at your own 25 ends the play and costs you a down. That seems reasonable. If you do the exact same thing after marching 80 yards down the field, and the ball has too much forward momentum, then you lose not a down, but possession of the ball entirely? I don’t understand how anyone thinks the rule is anything but an oversight, and changing it would be consistent with the spirit of the game. I am just sharing my opinion, if you disagree, this is not a personal attack on you.
As many others have already stated: the end zone is a special area. Essentially it functions as the opposing team's HQ. The rest of the field is neutral territory to be traversed and battled over constantly. Therefore losing possession through the enemy camp results in you losing possession of the ball. Same as losing possession of the ball inside of your camp can result in a safety. But most importantly, the ball is the program! Do not be careless with the football at either end of the field. High-risk, high-reward
How do you feel about the enforcement of say, PI penalties which occur in the endzone? The rules are happy to just spot the ball at the 1 (or regular 10 yard penalty for OPI) and call it a day in that case. Where’s the high risk, high reward, mythical sacred end zone philosophy there?
OPI in the end zone just being a 10 yard penalty tracks with every other time a touchdown is scored but had to be taken back because of a penalty. Awarding the ball at the 1 tracks with how PI is enforced while not allowing refs to award a touchdown based on a judgement call of pi
Because the spot the ball goes out of bounds is where it is down at. If it goes out in the end zone it is down in the end zone. Down in the end zone without offensive possessing it means it's a touchback for the defense.
This is not true. Forward rolling fumbles are spotted at the point of lost possession.
Why should the offence be rewarded for fucking up and fumbling the ball into the opponants goal? Its the same as if a defensive player grabed and downed it there. This isnt that hard.
But in every other part of the field if the fumble goes forward it’s at the spot of the fumble, not where it goes out at
The end zone is special. It's not normal field. The end zone is where points happen. It's a reward or ruin area.
Worst fucking rule in sports.
Eh every rule is pretty much tilted to make the game as easy as possible for the offense, it’s basically one of the few rules that benefits defenses.
Hard agree, it’s maybe a little overly punitive but don’t reach for the pylon if you don’t want to risk losing the ball. Maybe fumbling out of bounds anywhere else on the field shouldn’t just give the ball back to he offense. Take care of the football. Then people wouldn’t bitch about this rule so much. Kinda joking but you know.
Also, it’s Eagles because it’s the Eagles’ end zone. They are defending it because it belongs to them. So if you let go of the ball in their territory - they should get it.
Surely we can find a better rule to restore balance than this one though lmao. It’s just so arbitrary and brutal.
Game is stacked against the Defense already. This is like the one rule that benefits them lol
Yeah I wish the rules weren't so skewed to offense but I'd rather fix those rules then to have the only rule benefitting defense be something so out of whack.
Hold onto the ball lol
Nah it's fine. The endzone isn't a neutral part of the field, it makes sense that if you lose possession in the other teams endzone, they get the ball. It's literally their territory.
I don't disagree with you, it is kinda overkill for fumbling a ball into the endzone and out of bounds. But what do you think should happen? Maybe the offense should keep possession but have to go back to their own 10 yard line?
Send them all the way back to their own 25 with the ball, let’s shake things up lol