Thread: Practice / press conference notes - week 3 (Packers week)

Nicki Jhabvala Retweeted
Joe Rubino
‏Verified account @RubinoJC
33m33 minutes ago

Oh snap! @johnElway says @NFL officials admitted to him this week that they were “Dead wrong” on the Bradley Chubb roughing the passer call vs Chicago.

Originally Posted by Denver Native (Carol)

Nicki Jhabvala Retweeted
Joe Rubino
‏Verified account @RubinoJC
33m33 minutes ago

Oh snap! @johnElway says @NFL officials admitted to him this week that they were “Dead wrong” on the Bradley Chubb roughing the passer call vs Chicago.

Yep, they were.

Originally Posted by spikerman

Yep, they were.

How were they wrong?

Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne

How were they wrong?

by being incorrect?

Sutton didn’t practice today with sore ribs

Originally Posted by VonDoom

Sutton didn’t practice today with sore ribs

Hes been taking a pounding!
I really like him. Id like to see winfree in there and less of hamilton.

Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne

How were they wrong?

That wasn’t roughing the passer. There was no intent to punish the QB.

Von Miller to 'grind harder' as Broncos look for sacks, win vs. Packers

video and article
https://www.denverbroncos.com/news/v...win-vs-packers

Originally Posted by spikerman

That wasn’t roughing the passer. There was no intent to punish the QB.

I want to understand this. I'm asking questions, not to argue, but to gain understanding.

Do the rules ask the referees to determine an "intent to punish" the QB as part of the penalty? That seems likely impossible. I've previously, from last year, understood that the issue was when a player let all of their weight come down on the QB. But you seem to be saying that if it didn't appear that the defensive player "intended to punish" the QB that having their weight come down on the QB wouldn't be a penalty.

Am I understanding that right? If so, I like the spirit of that, but can't see how that can be enforced as it's entirely subjective.

Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne

I want to understand this. I'm asking questions, not to argue, but to gain understanding.

Do the rules ask the referees to determine an "intent to punish" the QB as part of the penalty? That seems likely impossible. I've previously, from last year, understood that the issue was when a player let all of their weight come down on the QB. But you seem to be saying that if it didn't appear that the defensive player "intended to punish" the QB that having their weight come down on the QB wouldn't be a penalty.

Am I understanding that right? If so, I like the spirit of that, but can't see how that can be enforced as it's entirely subjective.

I’m not a referee so I don’t know if they use the word “punish,” but you’re looking for intent or dangerous hits (i.e. low). In both the Chubb call and the roughing call last night (and maybe the call on the Bears - I don’t remember clearly) it was obvious that the players did not intend to land with their full weight on the QB. It was a normal take down and was not late. When someone wants to use their body weight on a player it seems pretty obvious. The player may flop on the QB or drive him into the ground. It was fairly obvious (to me) that none of that was happening.

Originally Posted by VonDoom

They’ll practice and talk later but here are some TV maps. Early start this week remember:

https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2019&wk=3

Alright, alright, alright........get to watch the Broncos beat the Packers at Lambeau.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

You know, kudos to Emmanuel for not “no commenting” that. Fangio is going to apparently “Isaiah McKenzie” him at left tackle for some inexplicable reason, so what other choice do the team leaders and veterans have but to keep trying to get through to him?

It's not "for some reason" it's because Elway didn't give him another T he could use, and he went into the season with only 1 backup T on the roster (not counting Rogers whom they apparently can't use).

So once Wilkinson had to fill in for injured James at RT there was nobody left to replace Bolles. Unless James comes back or they sign somebody off waivers or trade for a guy they are stuck with Bolles.

They got nobody else.

Originally Posted by Cugel

It's not "for some reason" it's because Elway didn't give him another T he could use, and he went into the season with only 1 backup T on the roster (not counting Rogers whom they apparently can't use).

So once Wilkinson had to fill in for injured James at RT there was nobody left to replace Bolles. Unless James comes back or they sign somebody off waivers or trade for a guy they are stuck with Bolles.

They got nobody else.

Bring back the tiger for your avi.

Mike Klis
‏Verified account @MikeKlis
3h3 hours ago

Officially, neither the Bears’ Goldman or Broncos’ Chubb we’re fined for their roughing-the-passer penalties last week. #9sports