- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
How is that idea laughable but the fact that it goes to the defense as a touchback isn't ridiculous
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:31 pm to Tiger1242
Because any team near the ez could fumble it out on 4th down and retry from the 20 over and over til they scored or ran the clock out.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:34 pm to grape nutz
quote:
Because any team near the ez could fumble it out on 4th down and retry from the 20 over and over til they scored or ran the clock out
Wait what the hell are you talking about? When did I say they get to replay the down?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:39 pm to Tiger1242
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:40 pm to Tiger1242
That was already answered.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:42 pm to grape nutz
loss of down and moving the ball to the spot of the fumble seems like a better solution to me personally
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:42 pm to lsutigers1992
How in the world does that rule stop that? There was no time on the clock during that play.
You have poor comprehension I guess
You have poor comprehension I guess
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:50 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
You have poor comprehension I guess
Says the dude that posted this:
quote:
IMO it should be a touchback but the offense keeps the ball.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:52 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Makes sense to me 
Taking the ball back to the 20 is a big big consequence without taking the ball away
Taking the ball back to the 20 is a big big consequence without taking the ball away
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:54 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Taking the ball back to the 20 is a big big consequence without taking the ball away
Why should the offense be rewarded with possession?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:55 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
What happens when the offense fumbles out of bounds at any other part of the field?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 6:56 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
What happens when the offense fumbles out of bounds at any other part of the field?
Don't deflect.
Answer my question.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:01 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
What happens when the offense fumbles out of bounds at any other part of the field?
By that logic safety's shouldn't count because what happens when the offense is tackled on any other part of the field?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:02 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Answer my question.
quote:
Why should the offense be rewarded with possession?
Okay my answer is you aren't rewarding the offense possession, they already have possession so why should they lose possession because they fumbled out of bounds?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:04 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Okay my answer is you aren't rewarding the offense possession
Yes you are.
quote:
they already have possession
No they don't.
quote:
fumbled out of bounds
Nope. They fumbled out of the end zone.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:05 pm to Tiger1242
Interested to see the NY headlines tomorrow morning after that huge gafe. Cost NYJ the game in one of the worst calls I've seen in a long time
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:09 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
The offense is the team that fumbled, therefore they were the ones who had possession when the fumble happened....
When a receiver catches the ball in the end zone but his foot is on the white line on the boundary or back of the end zone he is considered out of the boundary right? So when the football goes out of play in the end zone it is out of the field boundaries, which is out of bounds.
Since I answered all your questions answer mine. Why should the defense be rewarded possession?
The offense is the team that fumbled, therefore they were the ones who had possession when the fumble happened....
When a receiver catches the ball in the end zone but his foot is on the white line on the boundary or back of the end zone he is considered out of the boundary right? So when the football goes out of play in the end zone it is out of the field boundaries, which is out of bounds.
Since I answered all your questions answer mine. Why should the defense be rewarded possession?
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:15 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
I'm being intentionally correct.
quote:
The offense is the team that fumbled, therefore they were the ones who had possession when the fumble happened....
Correct, but the play doesn't stop there, does it.
quote:
When a receiver catches the ball in the end zone but his foot is on the white line on the boundary or back of the end zone he is considered out of the boundary right? So when the football goes out of play in the end zone it is out of the field boundaries, which is out of bounds.
The field of play and end zones are not the same. Your hypothethetical is not useful.
quote:
Since I answered all your questions answer mine.
You haven't. Why should the offense be rewarded with possession?
Hypotheticals, what ifs, and deflections are not answers.
Posted on 10/15/17 at 7:19 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Oh my god you are pathetic, don't answer my question, just keep making the same points over and over that adds so much to an argument.
Best way to tell when you've bested the person you're debating, they spend all their time poking holes in your argument without ever defending their's
Best way to tell when you've bested the person you're debating, they spend all their time poking holes in your argument without ever defending their's
This post was edited on 10/15/17 at 7:20 pm
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News