re: If that's not a catch rule has gone too far

They've been saying for years and years that you have to maintain control going to the ground in the endzone. See Calvin Johnson.

I don't agree but the NFL has treated the endzone differently for a Decade. It used to be the opposite, the second you caught the ball with two feet down it was a TD even if it was stripped.

But calling that a non-TD is nothing fricking new now and this era. So I don't know what you're going on about?

That was a catch.

quote:

---

It makes zero sense that he has to maintain the catch all the way out of bounds, yet a runner only has to have possession and have any portion of the ball go over the goal line and it's a TD and play is over.

---

Jacob Hester tweeted that earlier and it was the smartest thing I've seen someone tweet in a while.

Again, by the NFL’s own rules regarding a player possessing the ball “in the field of play,” the boundary marker is irrelevant in determining possession of the ball.

If they want to keep rolling with this nonsensical interpretation of a catch, they should at least strike this portion of their own rules so that they’re at least not contradictory.