Was There A Broncos Game Last Night?

[OrangeHoof]

...or was that just a refereed practice session? I swear the refs racked up more yardage than the Seahawks did.

I know - first game of the pre-season, yada yada but this was while all the regulars were still in. It was ridiculous. I've waited six months for this???

[silkamilkamonico]

...or was that just a refereed practice session? I swear the refs racked up more yardage than the Seahawks did.

I know - first game of the pre-season, yada yada but this was while all the regulars were still in. It was ridiculous. I've waited six months for this???

Everybody was bad, the refs were terrible, the Seahawks players couldn't stay onsides, and the Broncos looked very undisciplined and not very well coached.

It will get better from all partys above.

[TXBRONC]

...or was that just a refereed practice session? I swear the refs racked up more yardage than the Seahawks did.

I know - first game of the pre-season, yada yada but this was while all the regulars were still in. It was ridiculous. I've waited six months for this???

Agreed there were several ticky tacky calls. Even so there were several positives to take away from the game.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Vic Lombardi @VicLombardi · 14h

RT @KurtEarl14: Surely they don't intend to call the regular season this way, right?-->>they always exaggerate calls in preseason

I am hoping that, because of the new rules, the referees went overboard to stress the new rules

[artie_dale]

Could have been that way specifically since it was the Seahawks who were playing (call it a lot both ways to emphasize the refs aren't going to go lightly about the Hawks' physical DB play).

[TXBRONC]

Could have been that way specifically since it was the Seahawks who were playing (call it a lot both ways to emphasize the refs aren't going to go lightly about the Hawks' physical DB play).

I think there is a lot truth to this, however there weren't a lot pass interference calls against the Seahawks that I can remember. Where they Seahawks were nailed to the wall was on personal fouls like hands to the face, unsportsman like conduct, and hands to the face, and one flag for a chop block. Those things have been as much a part of Seahawks m.o. as the defensive holding that their secondary is known for. Carroll has no problem with his players taking cheap shot at an opponent.

[Northman]

Apparently it was kind of like this everywhere. I was reading an article on another game last night and apparently there were a lot of penalties called in that one too.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Who put the playground monitors in charge of the NFL?

Maybe the Broncos picked the wrong year to get nastier and more physical on defense.

Instead of a grudge match against Seattle on Thursday night, the referees demanded Denver play a game of patty-cake.

New safety T.J. Ward brings a big load of mean to the Denver defense.

But, if the Broncos' opening preseason game of 2014 is any indication, the NFL will now allow less contact than what can be seen in the Lingerie Football League.

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/kiszla/ci_26298080/broncos-seahawks-preseason-game-nfl-appears-prefer-two-hand-touch

[tripp]

Can't help but think the Seahawks offense wouldn't have scored if it wasn't for the fact that we had so many penalties that kept that drive alive. Dammit I'm still bitter about that SB.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

DENVER – Go ahead and blame Seattle's Legion of Boom for what will surely be a rash of flags this season, for defensive holding and illegal contact and pass interference, but the men who precipitated that rule are going to take it as a compliment.

Indeed, Seattle's scary secondary has changed the NFL with their bump-you, grab-you, hold-you, smash-you style of defense that they rode to a Super Bowl title last year.

But here's the rub: the NFL's rule makers might not be able to catch up with the Legion of Boom.

"We understand where the game is going, and we adapted to the rule change," Seattle safety Earl Thomas told USA TODAY Sports.

rest - http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/seahawks/2014/08/08/seattle-defense-not-phased-by-legion-of-boom-rules/13767339/

[BroncoJoe]

Are Hoof, Silk and tomjones the same person?

[Denver Native (Carol)]

DENVER (AP) -- The Seattle Seahawks' preseason opener against the Denver Broncos devolved into a game of flag football, which wasn't unexpected in light of the NFL's renewed emphasis on illegal contact and holding.

Surprisingly, only a handful of the 25 penalties called in Denver's 21-16 win Thursday night fell into those categories - and all of those were whistled on the Broncos.

Many believe the NFL's crackdown is in direct response to the Seahawks' ''Legion of Boom'' defense and the Super Bowl champs' habit of pushing, pulling, tugging and shoving wide receivers.

rest - http://sports.yahoo.com/news/plenty-flags-fly-during-seahawks-230358980--nfl.html

[Dapper Dan]

I have no idea what kind of defensive holding they're calling. They never showed the replays.

[Simple Jaded]

Of course the Legion of Boom wasn't fazed by their namesake rules, they didn't have them shoved up their ass like the Broncos did.

[sneakers]

Isn't preseason when the refs experiement with calling things a certain way and test out other rule changes

[atwater27]

Isn't preseason when the refs experiement with calling things a certain way and test out other rule changesIf they want to lose viewers and revenue, they are doing the right thing!

[Joel]

During the SB bye, I saw an article claiming the Competition Committee planned multiple Seahawks Rules for the offseason—then history greatest passing scored all of ONCE in 60:00, and its best WR briefly left with what folks here said was a separated shoulder (big heart returning to catch our only score.) So yeah, no real surprises (Seattles ejection was a nice touch; you can take the thug out of the game, but can't the game out of the thug.) I'm getting tired of starting the season against the team that ENDED our LAST season though; past time we made that impossible.

[OrangeHoof]

I'll be happy to see regular-looking extra points again. These other ones just look weird. I understand the premise that the PAT has become too automatic but, instead of making the kick harder, why not just make a TD worth seven points unless the scoring team declares they will "go-for-2" then one point will be removed and the ball spotted at the 2-1/2 for one untimed play? Same result, less time wasted and less injuries due to players trying to block a kick.

[Cugel]

Well, I suppose it's just the pre-season and there's a lot less contact in practice so there's going to be some penalties. Even the refs need some time to get ready for the season apparently. They sure weren't ready for game 1. I don't know what you can take away from that game when there's absolutely zero momentum permitted due to all the flags.

The league is going to have to have a talk with those refs, because if this had been a regular season game it would have been a national scandal. In August, meh! I'll give the refs a mulligan and wait to see what happens in game 2.

[BroncoWave]

I'll be happy to see regular-looking extra points again. These other ones just look weird. I understand the premise that the PAT has become too automatic but, instead of making the kick harder, why not just make a TD worth seven points unless the scoring team declares they will "go-for-2" then one point will be removed and the ball spotted at the 2-1/2 for one untimed play? Same result, less time wasted and less injuries due to players trying to block a kick.

I think this is absolutely what they should do. The extra point is such a pointless (pardon the pun) play.

[Joel]

I'll be happy to see regular-looking extra points again. These other ones just look weird. I understand the premise that the PAT has become too automatic but, instead of making the kick harder, why not just make a TD worth seven points unless the scoring team declares they will "go-for-2" then one point will be removed and the ball spotted at the 2-1/2 for one untimed play? Same result, less time wasted and less injuries due to players trying to block a kick.
REALLY like this idea. It preserves the 2-PAT when teams NEED one, but avoids wasting time setting up for a PAT while commentators show three different replay angles of what we JUST SAW. More importantly, it avoids the rare-yet-still-too-frequent case of teams missing the playoffs because of a light drizzle (basically what happened when we beat the Bungles Christmas Eve '06.)

The Hidden Game of Football made a good argument for 7 pt TDs (with a similar example, right down to involving Denvers penultimate game, except in '86:) We won & clinched the AFCW on a 'Skins missed PAT, which clinched the NFCE & playoff homefield for the Giants, while the 'Skins had to play an extra game to reach the NFCCG: At NY, who then beat us in the SB. The (very good) argument was three playoff berths—much less BOTH SB teams—shouldn't be decided by one of the 4% of missed PATs happening in just the wrong game.

All that's changed about PATs is they're no longer good 96% of the time: They're good 99.6% of the time. As in "of 1267 PATs last year, all but 5 were good." It's automatic—except when it's not, and it sucks when that rare dumb luck costs a team a game or playoff berth. Not "if," WHEN; it happened at least as recenty as 7 seasons ago, probably more recently than THAT if we checked all games since. Had KC lost OR we won the last game, we'd have been the AFCs #6 seed and Cincy stayed home: Just because of a light rain in the second half.

The books counterargument was that making TDs a flat 7 pts would mean no time spent waiting for the kicking team to trot out for the inevitable, so networks would have to push TD replays into the commerical break, and "TV gives up ad time like the Russians gave up Stalingrad." That makes sense; one of most reliable bladder-relievers/fillers of a game is that nearly EVERY kick is followed by a commercial, so TDs usually result in TWO: One after the PAT, then ANOTHER after the kickoff. One play (not even a scrimmage play) bookended by TWO commercials.

So the book concluded the PAT wasn't going anywhere, and since the only OTHER thing that changed since was the NFL adding the 2-PAT, it seems the authors were right. It's too bad, because, as they note, the PAT actually MEANT something 80 years ago, when 7-6 games were routine because TDs were uncommon enough and even short kicks tricky enough the PAT was a truly exceptional bonus reward for doing something "extra."

Now that 99.6% of PATs are good, they aren't a bonus for doing something extra, they're a PENALTY for being one of the poor unlucky SOBs who missed 5 out of 1200 kicks. It's usually not even the kick, but a bad snap or a bad hold. I mean, c'mon, these guys are the elite of professional athletes, and they only do ONE thing: Kick a football, incessantly, till they can do it in their sleep. And it ain't a hard kick; my WIFE can kick a football 12 yds through a 10' high 18½' gap. The only reason it EVER fails is because of rare and phenomenally bad luck.

Should that decide a game, much less a playoff berth or who goes to the Super Bowl? If we keep playing long enough, sooner or later one of those 5 in 1200 misses will decide who gets a Lombardi and who gets the shaft, and if you think Wide Right's notorious, just wait until a miss from thrice as close loses a Super Bowl.

[Timmy!]

Oh not this shit again.

[OrangeHoof]

While the PAT might have allowed for replays and extra commercial time, the gap is now provided by the near-legislated replay of every scoring play to assure it was a touchdown so the ref has to go under the hood and don the headset just to confirm what is often obvious to those watching at home.

Therefore, eliminating the standard PAT would not eliminate the time gap needed for replays since the new mandating of a replay accomplishes the same thing.

[weazel]

there are going to be a lot of penalties this season. The league wants to crack down on the bullshit the Seahawks were getting away with all last season.

[Joel]

While the PAT might have allowed for replays and extra commercial time, the gap is now provided by the near-legislated replay of every scoring play to assure it was a touchdown so the ref has to go under the hood and don the headset just to confirm what is often obvious to those watching at home.

Therefore, eliminating the standard PAT would not eliminate the time gap needed for replays since the new mandating of a replay accomplishes the same thing.
Good point; there'd literally be NO loss. In fact, it could even be BETTER if (instead of network tape) they just cut to the refs feed.