• The KillerFrogs

2025-26 NFL thread

SW toad

Active Member
Stop It Michael Jordan GIF
So called Paradox what do you think about CJ Strouds upbringing? Don't respond with flaccid. Please check with a reputable mental health PHD. And once again don't be Low T.
 

FroggleRock

Active Member
OK, NFL rules experts. We need to know why the Cooks catch was ruled and interception, but the Adam’s catch was complete and down. Side-by-side they look exactly the same.
 

Schwartz is being lazy or provoking or both.

AI -
The Davante Adams catch wasn't ruled an interception because
officials determined he established possession, got two feet down inbounds, and had control long enough to perform a "football move" (like turning upfield or taking a step) before the ball came loose, making him down by contact, even as he went to the ground, unlike the controversial Brandin Cooks play where Cooks didn't survive the ground, according to rules experts.

Key Factors in the Ruling:
  • Possession & Control: Adams secured control of the ball.
  • Two Feet Down: Both of his feet landed inbounds.
  • Football Move: He initiated a movement (turning upfield) before losing control.
  • Down by Contact: Because he met the criteria for a catch and was down (knee touched) before the ball was stripped, the play was ruled a completed catch, not an interception, explains Yahoo Sports.
Contrast with the Brandin Cooks Play:
  • On a similar play, Brandin Cooks was ruled not to have completed the catch because he did not survive the ground (maintain control through the act of going down) and didn't make a clear football move before losing the ball, according to Yahoo Sports and this Facebook post.
Why the Confusion?
  • The plays looked similar, sparking debate over the nuanced NFL catch rule, with many fans and analysts questioning the different outcomes for Adams and Cooks, notes this ABC News article and this MARCA article.
 
Last edited:
Top