finfanfromrochester

Allen seems to me like a guy that can thrive on turf. If the Bills can stuff Latavius Murray at the line, which isn't that hard to do, then they'll have a shot at keeping it within, say, 14 points.

I was going to ask how this clown became a DC in the NFL, but then I realized that the Raiders DC is equivalent to any other team's waterboy.

The ball is only blurry because it's moving at a higher speed than the players, and the photo is focused on the players, not the ball. The contact between the two is most definitely evident while the ball is still in the air, based on that image. But still my point is that if I had been watching that in real time, I wouldn't ever call it PI. It was a bang-bang play. All I was saying was that once you freeze the shot, one could still technically make the argument it is PI. Even though it's only a difference of milliseconds, there's contact beforehand. If PI worked like that around the league though, there would be 5-10 more penalties a game. So I am actually in agreement with you.

You need to look again. The ball is clearly in view on the left side. It's just blurry. I'll circle it if you'd like.

He's running right into him. Helmet to helmet contact. Arm wrapped inside the receiver like that will get a call every time. The only reason it's debatable is because of how quickly it happened.

I mean that image pretty clearly shows the ball still in the air while contact is being made by the defender.

Check out this image and let me know what you guys think. From a completely technical perspective, that was actually PI http://i.imgur.com/0ArAX3m.png

That was an amazing juke by Miller. I don't know if it's ironic that it happened to Mckelvin, but I won't deny that I got some pleasure out of seeing it. No one in the NFL should ever guarantee a victory. May the Leodis Mckelvin story be a warning to all those big-mouths in the league.

I can agree on that. That first half both teams looked identical. Same strengths, same weaknesses.

I agree that Tannehill is innacurate with long distance throws, but in terms of a talent perspective, I'd give Miami the edge. In my opinion: QB - Miami RB - as of last night, Miami, with Jackson and Spiller healthy it's Buffalo. Although I love what I see from Damien Williams WR - I give the edge to Miami. Watkins and Wallace are pretty evenly matched at the moment, even though Watkins has the potential to be one of the best ever. I'd take Landry, Hartline, Gibson, and Matthews any day over Wiliams, Woods, and Hogan. TE - Miami - Clay is better than Chandler, imo OL - Buffalo DL - Buffalo, but it's close LB - Miami currently. With Alonzo back next year maybe Buffalo CB - Miami with Finn healthy. Safeties - Miami easily K-Buff P-Miami Just a biased Miami fan's honest opinion so take it for what it's worth.

well I wouldn't compare that play to those where Brady or Manning hits the ground in front of the RB. Usually those passes occur within a yard or two of the RB. The thing about the IG call was the fact that Watkins did make that cut toward the middle of the field right after Orton gets rid of it. So while the ball is in the air going towards the sideline, Watkins is actually running away from it for an instant. After he makes the cut back towards the sideline, it's way too late and the ball falls a good 6-7 yards away from him. That's a pretty substantial distance. I've been watching it over and over and, to me, it just seems like the right call. But in reality it could've easily gone either way. I suppose my point is that it's not as awful of a call as folks on this board are making it out to be. Definitely controversial, though.

But that's sort of the point of the intentional grounding penalty. Orton knew that he didn't have enough time for the route to develop, but he threw it anyway to avoid the sack. Watkins was a good 10 yards away from the ball.

The PI was definitely too close to have made that call, but the intentional grounding was clearly the correct call. Orton got rid of the ball before Watkins even had time to cut back towards the sideline. So when Orton got rid of it, Watkins was actually running towards the middle of the field with his back to the ball. The only reason Orton threw it so soon was because of the pressure. If he had waited for the route to develop he would've been sacked. And the holding went both ways. There were at least a couple instances where Miami's D line was clearly being held, yet no call. With a 2-0 turnover differential, Buffalo had plenty of opportunities to win the game. They didn't get any help from the refs, but that most definitely isn't the reason they lost. The O line crumbled in the second half, and once Orton got rattled he just wasn't the same.

Have to agree. If you have a 2-0 turnover differential, then you should almost always expect to win the game. The story of both of these squads so far this season is not capitalizing in the red zone. For the first half the Dolphins also lived up to that, but by the second half the teams really started to distinguish themselves.

I wasn't confident in his abilities after the first few games, but now I am sold he is our long term solution at QB. This is his first year in a new, vastLy different offensive scheme, and with the help of Bill "the quarterback whisperer" Lazor, Tannehill could really become elite in a couple year's time. I mean look at what happened to Foles this year after Lazor left. Coincidence? maybe, but I like to believe otherwise.