BBTV

I'm all for tricking defenses, but in that case the ref is supposed to announce it over the PA and to the defense, so it just seems silly to me to risk the confusion when the "trick" is going to be clearly explained. Again, it looks like the Lions were 100% fine here and the refs 100% wrong.

Yep it's on the ref. And what's with the new rules on editing posts? And all the Capchas? Post isn't embedding, but the crew is being demoted. https://x.com/_MLFootball/status/1741489658641420577?s=20

It's not the official's responsibility to assume who's supposed to report, even if they're given the heads up. What if Detroit decided to call a different play in that situation? With all the scuitiny on the refs, had they gotten that wrong, that would have been catastrophic (though ironically what we actually got was equally catastrophic.) I've never been in those pre-game meetings so I'm not sure what agreements are made, but there's still possibly some blame on 68 if he didn't get the ref to explicitly acknowledge him. It's similar to if a coach were to casually drop a red challenge flag without ensuring it's visible to the ref. As for not covering 68, I know I'm making a lot of assumptions here, but I'm not sure if Dallas would have covered him anyway (they probably would have, but we've seen plenty of trick plays where an eligible guy goes uncovered - the Philly Special comes to mind, as does Vabral's plays for the Patriots.) You're not wrong at all, I just don't think it's quite as black and white.

I still don't get trying to trick the defense into thinking someone else was eligible. They're not looking at who's talking to the referees. They're worried about getting their play call, recognizing the formation, and catching their breath. Even if the defense only heard "something 8" from the announcement, they should quickly scan and see 68 there in an eligible position. These are pro players, they should be able to see that quickly. Trying to trick by sending three players to the referee is harry high-school scat. Even if 70 is reporting all game long anyway, which is normal just for formation legality regardless of whether he's a target or not, they're not going to trick a professional defense (unless there's some real dummies out there, which is a fair assumption in many cases, but I don't get that sense from the Cowboys.) Especially on 2-pt conversions, where defenses are trained to look for tricks. There's failure all around. 68 should have gotten some kind of acknowledgement from the referee. The play shouldn't have called for three guys to be over there, which ended up causing the confusion in the first place. If it was my team, I'd be absolutely livid at the referee, but objectively, we can't hear what was actually said to the refs and until we do, I think the blame has to go both ways.

Also, if illegal touching is 5 yards, and then they got 5 yards for offsides, why was the next attempt from behind the 2 yard line? Wouldn't the net have been 0?

This, if true, is stupid: They ANNOUNCE who reports as eligible, not only on the mic, but also to the players. You can't fake it out like that. If that's what the Lions were trying to do, then they're idiots. They worked themselves into a shoot, brother. EDIT: Goff confirmed that 68 reported and 70 was a decoy. The ref thought that 70 reported, but he didn't - and wouldn't have had to based on where he was lined up. That's just freakin' stupid, for the reasons I said. You can't have a decoy when the whole thing is announced.

I think the blame falls on number 58, not 68. 68 is going over to report, but 58, who's fat ass has no business over there, is shielding the ref from 68. All the ref could see is 70. They're beating this to death and showing replays over and over, and nobody is mentioning that 58 is there for no reason, and IMO is the one that probably caused the issue. Dan Campbell said that they went over the play with the refs before the game - which is totally normal - and the refs said it was OK. But then he claims they told him that only one player is allowed to report? That's simply not true. At the end of the day, it falls on 68, who should have ensured that the ref looked at him and was like "I got you", or told him again when he wasn't announced as eligible. But I think it was 58 that prevented the ref from hearing, and had he not been there, Detroit wins the game. I don't think Dallas played defense any differently whether they announced 68 as eligible or not.

But that lineman literally cost them a chance for a second home playoff game. Who knows - they could still end up the 2, but it’s very unlikely. I don’t know how the bracket scenarios are, but it’d be funny if Dallas ends up the 2 and Detroit has to go to Dallas in the division round.

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. They had momentum, they’re on the road. Dallas was reeling and tired, and he didn’t want them to potentially start OT with the ball. I would imagine analytics show that going for 2 is the right play. Even if they don’t, it is. But after the penalty, maybe reassess. I still admire him, but it’s certainly questionable.

Oh my gods this game. Detroit loses because a guy doesn’t report as eligible? How the hell doesn’t he report? Assuming it isn’t the worst ref botch ever, that seemingly-little mistake may have cost them the 2 seed. Unbelievable. Regardless, my hat’s off to Dan Campbell. Gotta love his conviction.

Does Dallas' kicker even wear shoulder pads? It doesn't even look like he's wearing really thin ones - it looks like he's just wearing a jersey. This isn't from tonight, but same thing:

Why does it matter?

They're so dysfunctional that it just came out that coming out of their bye week (so right before the KC game), before demoting their DC, they had stripped him of third down calls! Imagine that - you're the DC, but you only call 1st and 2nd down and then there's a committee (that eventually became Patricia.) Meanwhile, the players' choice for the job - former DB coach Dennard Williams - was fired, and is now doing a good enough job with the Ravens that he's likely to be their next DC if/when Mike MacDonald gets a HC job. Complete organizational disfunction when it comes to these dope assistant coaches - which is part of what got Doug Pederson fired. The Eagles are probably the only team in the league that doesn't feel that the HC has final say in his assistants.

The system is beyond dumb. I don't think anyone's ever said anything to the contrary. But it is what it is. Completely irrelevant comparison. The NFL as a league has rules that objectively govern who makes the playoffs... just like the ACC does, and the SEC does, the B1G, etc. That's where this comparison ends. If the ACC said "sorry, we're going to bypass you for the championship game" then it's apples-to-apples. This 4-team playoff thing isn't governed by any league rules, since it's just a subjective committee of people that are picking teams from various independent leagues.

This is such a mind F. I'm cheering for Detroit, then like "oh F... that's bad!" Like the stupid "fumble out of the endzone == touchback" rule. I'm like "YES!! HAHA COWBOYS!" "Oh wait - crap."

I'm about to root hard for the Cowboys. I'm starting to feel actual pain in my stomach. May have to shower with bleach when this one is over. If both teams win out, then (I think) Detroit would get the #2 seed because of common opponents, they'd have a 1.000 percentage against Dallas, while the Eagles would only be .500 since they played twice. All other common opponents had the same outcome (or will, if both teams win out) .

Or this is what they are now. I genuinely don't understand any argument that how good they may have been 3 months ago has any relevance in a system where the teams are picked subjectively based on how well they're playing at this point in time. Wins matter - in conference play. If you were 1-12 because you have the absolute best players in the history of the world but they were all academically ineligible until the last game in November, which you won 233-6, you belong in that playoff.

In a perfect world, sure. I'm not sure any of us could possibly know what we'd do without being in that position. I'm a relatively-risk-averse person, so I think I'd not risk injury (if I'm good) or start the transfer process ASAP so I'm not left out (if I'm in that situation), but a person like me who's basically a coward would never be in that position to begin with. I can't possibly put myself in the mind of someone with that kind of talent and competitiveness and potential to earn millions. All I know is this FSU team is making a mockery of the bowl system, as they don't belong on a postseason field. Georgia is likely one of the top 4, but they just lost to another of the top 4, so one could argue that was their playoff opportunity. But FSU is proving the committee right. They don't belong on the field with any of those teams, and this will have at least a short-term impact on their recruiting.

Yeah it could go both ways. On one hand, they don't want to risk having bad tape if they get lit up by top competition for 4 weeks. On the other hand, a late 1st-rd or 2nd-rd guy could be on himself and use it as an opportunity to get good tape of him playing well against the top talent. Possibly even passing a guy that opted out. Unless you're a sure-fire top-10 or top-15 guy, it's such a hard choice to make. It's all millions of dollars, but the top half of the 1st round is many more millions.

I'm imagining this being said in emperor Palpatine's voice.

That's on the fly of the pants.

Wow, that's mighty generous of him.

Only when Christmas is a Saturday, Sunday, or Monday. NFL isn't going to have a triple header on a Wednesday.

Maybe just let them play in their normal uniforms. We don't need Christmas uniforms to remind me that I'm (not) watching them on Christmas. I know that I'm (not) watching them on Christmas because *checks the calendar* it's freakin' Christmas.

He was responsible? Didn't the taxpayers get stuck with half of the cost of the arena? And donate all the land?