Gabriel Davis with Week 10’s Toe Drag Swag!

[blacklabel]

If you tap one foot two times would that count? That’s technically two steps…I thought he caught it. I though Saleh was a big dummy for throwing the challenge flag after the teams already switched personnel and he had five minutes to look at it, and he couldn’t put it together that even if he would’ve won the challenge and the pass was incomplete it wouldn’t have mattered because of the PI call. I’m sure he’s a good dude and knows some stuff but as a head coach I don’t think he has a clue what he’s doing. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

8 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

Here is every video I could find (slowed down).

wow look at all that time Josh had to throw. 
 

😆  

 

All the arguments over the good catch…. 
 

that yellow hanky slowly fluttered to the field 

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by SlimShady'sSpaceForce

[transplantbillsfan]

On 11/15/2021 at 9:15 AM, dave mcbride said:

Um … he didn’t actually get the second foot down. It was pretty clear. The Jets didn’t challenge because it wouldn’t have mattered given the PI call.

 

Pretty obvious this is what happened.  I loved the effort on his part and keeping it as a catch obviously pads both his and Allen's stats, but it wasn't a catch.

 

But it really wouldn't have mattered because it was DPI and we would have gotten the ball where he caught it, anyway.

[Scott7975]

19 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Pretty obvious this is what happened.  I loved the effort on his part and keeping it as a catch obviously pads both his and Allen's stats, but it wasn't a catch.

 

But it really wouldn't have mattered because it was DPI and we would have gotten the ball where he caught it, anyway.

 

Obvious except he got the foot down or better to say his toe didnt come up until after he had caught the ball.

[Patrick Duffy]

Great game by Davis. Sometimes when getting a decent look at him running, he looks kinda like he's still in some pain or something. Just doesn't look quite right to me. Or maybe that's just the way he runs and I just didn't notice it before.

 

[transplantbillsfan]

37 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Obvious except he got the foot down or better to say his toe didnt come up until after he had caught the ball.

 

It was a fantastic non-catch by him, but it was a non-catch, plain and simple.  It was called a catch on the field, but the Jets absolutely would have won that if they challenged it.

 

Davis's right foot never touches in-bounds after he gets control of the ball.  You can see that in both angles, but especially the EZ angle.  When the ball initially hit his hands, his right foot AND left foot were down, but then the ball bounces in the air--this means he doesn't have control yet--and then before he catches the ball again his right foot comes off the ground and doesn't touch the ground again until it's out.

 

Wouldn't have mattered in terms of the flow of the game or the result of the play... it only matters for stats.  But it was not a catch.

[Scott7975]

21 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

It was a fantastic non-catch by him, but it was a non-catch, plain and simple.  It was called a catch on the field, but the Jets absolutely would have won that if they challenged it.

 

Davis's right foot never touches in-bounds after he gets control of the ball.  You can see that in both angles, but especially the EZ angle.  When the ball initially hit his hands, his right foot AND left foot were down, but then the ball bounces in the air--this means he doesn't have control yet--and then before he catches the ball again his right foot comes off the ground and doesn't touch the ground again until it's out.

 

Wouldn't have mattered in terms of the flow of the game or the result of the play... it only matters for stats.  But it was not a catch.

 

100% wrong

[Buffalo716]

1 hour ago, blacklabel said:

If you tap one foot two times would that count? That’s technically two steps…I thought he caught it. I though Saleh was a big dummy for throwing the challenge flag after the teams already switched personnel and he had five minutes to look at it, and he couldn’t put it together that even if he would’ve won the challenge and the pass was incomplete it wouldn’t have mattered because of the PI call. I’m sure he’s a good dude and knows some stuff but as a head coach I don’t think he has a clue what he’s doing. 

2 separate feet

[Mango]

I guess maybe this belongs here. 
 

Has anybody seen Gabe Davis’ mom?

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CWZhnhVlHRM/?utm_medium=copy_link

 

(Also if anybody could show me how to shrink a picture photo on my iPhone to paste it here that’d be great)

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

[HappyDays]

12 minutes ago, Mango said:

I guess maybe this belongs here. 
 

Has anybody seen Gabe Davis’ mom?

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CWZhnhVlHRM/?utm_medium=copy_link

 

(Also if anybody could show me how to shrink a picture photo on my iPhone to paste it here that’d be great)

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

I see that getting two body parts barely in bounds runs in the family

[transplantbillsfan]

3 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

100% wrong

 

Please watch the clip and explain to me in detail how that was a catch. I just explicated how it clearly wasn't and referred directly to the clip.

 

Maybe you're thinking of a different catch. If so, no worries.

 

Otherwise feel free to explain how one foot being in bounds and one foot being out of bounds after the WR gains control is a catch.

 

Are you thinking of college rules and applying them to the pros?

[Scott7975]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Please watch the clip and explain to me in detail how that was a catch. I just explicated how it clearly wasn't and referred directly to the clip.

 

Maybe you're thinking of a different catch. If so, no worries.

 

Otherwise feel free to explain how one foot being in bounds and one foot being out of bounds after the WR gains control is a catch.

 

Are you thinking of college rules and applying them to the pros?

 

Because his right toe is on the ground after he controlled the football.  I already posted a picture of his toe.  Albeit it is blurry but its not easy zooming an image and then uploading it at 200kb

[transplantbillsfan]

2 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Because his right toe is on the ground after he controlled the football.  I already posted a picture of his toe.  Albeit it is blurry but its not easy zooming an image and then uploading it at 200kb

 

I assume you're referring to this:

 

On 11/16/2021 at 9:51 AM, Scott7975 said:

 

I watched it with a bunch of folks that think it was a catch so what does that mean?  It means even with no PI it wouldn't be overturned because there isn't conclusive evidence to do so. Your own video slowed down shows his right foot dragged from the behind shot.  

 

Yes, I will agree to disagree.

 

Can you seriously not tell this is a toe?  I mean just lol.  I think everyone, blurry or not, can tell that's a toe.

 

 

And this shows a toe on the ground.

 

Are we just supposed to take your word that he's got control of the ball at this point? Are you afraid to show the entire picture?

[transplantbillsfan]

17 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

 

Here is every video I could find (slowed down).

 

 

Initially, I didn't think it was a catch. However, I do believe he had possession while his right foot was still down.

 

Here are two angles at the moment I thought he clearly had possession and it sure looks like his right foot is still on the ground. I didn't see the ball really move after this point:

 

 

I believe it is a catch. At worst, I really do not think there would have been enough evidence to overturn the call on the field.

 

Thank you for posting that. Now I think we can see it's not a catch.

 

First of all the still image shows his right foot off the ground.

 

Secondly... and most importantly... the slow motion video shows he wasn't in control of the catch with both feet in bounds. In fact, upon watching that multiple times, I don't even know if his left foot was in.

 

Don't you guys see him bobbling it? He does it right to the moment he lifts his left foot.

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Thank you for posting that. Now I think we can see it's not a catch.

 

First of all the still image shows his right foot off the ground.

 

Secondly... and most importantly... the slow motion video shows he wasn't in control of the catch with both feet in bounds. In fact, upon watching that multiple times, I don't even know if his left foot was in.

 

Don't you guys see him bobbling it? He does it right to the moment he lifts his left foot.

 

The bobble happens before the still image in that picture.  My zoom in is also of the picture you say his foot is off the ground.  You are wrong.  Get past it.

[Bubba Gump]

He tapped the right foot, got the left down easily. 100% a catch.

[billsfan1959]

2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Thank you for posting that. Now I think we can see it's not a catch.

 

First of all the still image shows his right foot off the ground.

 

Secondly... and most importantly... the slow motion video shows he wasn't in control of the catch with both feet in bounds. In fact, upon watching that multiple times, I don't even know if his left foot was in.

 

Don't you guys see him bobbling it? He does it right to the moment he lifts his left foot.

 

To me, the still image does not show his foot off the ground and he does not lose possession of the ball from that point forward.  Like I said, IMO, it is a catch and, at worst, there is insufficient evidence to overturn the call on the field - which still makes it a catch.

[machine gun kelly]

I hope we seen him more.  If Bease’s ribs are slowing him down, why not sit him and use the hell out of GD.  That’s the point of having a deep WR group.

 

Allow Bease to get to 100% as we’ll need him down the stretch.  You never know who might get dinged up and will need Bease back in two weeks.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

5 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

The bobble happens before the still image in that picture.  My zoom in is also of the picture you say his foot is off the ground.  You are wrong.  Get past it.

the Ref was right there He saw the entire play. 
 

Nate Burleson (the inventor of TDS) said it was a catch and I believe the professional. 
 

3 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

To me, the still image does not show his foot off the ground and he does not lose possession of the ball from that point forward.  Like I said, IMO, it is a catch and, at worst, there is insufficient evidence to overturn the call on the field - which still makes it a catch.

 

People see what they want to see 

[transplantbillsfan]

10 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

The bobble happens before the still image in that picture.  My zoom in is also of the picture you say his foot is off the ground.  You are wrong.  Get past it.

 

So we're supposed to just take your word for it that a zoomed in image is after that bobble?  Do you actually know which bobble I'm even talking about?

 

Watch this video graciously posted by @billsfan1959

 

Watch beginning at second 44.  At first you think he might have it at second 48... which is possibly when you take your still--we don't know... we apparently just have to take your word for it.  But as you watch from that angle you can see the ball is still moving and actually almost jumps out of his hands and he doesn't regain full control until second 52/53, when his right foot is undeniably in the air and his left foot also probably is.  Then go to 1:02 and from the back angle you can see his right foot is up in the air after he gains control.

 

This is a stupid argument because it was inconsequential in terms of the game.  If it was challenged, we would have ended up there anyway.  It's also inconsequential because it's still a great representation of Davis's incredible concentration and talent.  And we KNOW he's great at those sideline catches already.

 

It's just that this one wasn't actually a catch.  That's okay.  Davis still needs more field time.  It's just that it wasn't a catch.  And you're weird obstinate obsession arguing that it was doesn't change that.