Did we give up to soon on Chad Henne...?

[LandShark13]

Dude, the NFL made 2 major rules changes because of Dan Marino and our running game in the 70's.

They changed the rule prior to Marino, that you could only bump the receiver at the line of scrimmage, within 5 yards. Dan Marino could not be stopped, because of pass interference calls.

In the 70's, you could cut a wide receiver at the line of scrimmage, that's why you really don't see many great running teams anymore, but I must preface by saying, free agency has destroyed the art of the NFL according to the older rules.

Adrian Paterson was an exception to the rule.

No, no, no it wasn't until 1996 the NFL committed to stringently enforcing the 5 yard rule. Prior to that receivers were getting mauled as they ran their routes with little to no calls. On top of that you would be hard pressed to see a roughing the passer call. It would have to be blatant.

 

[Finfan Griff]

Henne blows

 

[dolphans1]

No, no, no it wasn't until 1996 the NFL committed to stringently enforcing the 5 yard rule. Prior to that receivers were getting mauled as they ran their routes with little to no calls. On top of that you would be hard pressed to see a roughing the passer call. It would have to be blatant.

Your wrong, the rule was changed after Marino arrived, in other words, he had the luxury of the 5 yard bump rule (was it changed in 96...?, I can't recall), they changed it if I recall, a few years later, as long as you were going back and looking for the ball you could make contact.

If that rule were in place today (you can't touch a receiver beyond 5 yards), Manning and Brees would be unstoppable today, and who knows how many yards they'd have.

 

[Dmarino110]

winning 3 out of 4 games suddenly makes him elite? No. If a QB isnt elite in 3 years, move on or atleast find competition.

tell that to drew brees





Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

 

[NJ Dolphan]

Jaguars have won 3 out of there 4 last games with Chad Henne, which begs this question, should we have been more patient with Henne...?

Can Ryan Tannehill win 3 out of our next 4 to get to the next level...?

If we finish 9-7, I feel that will be progress. (meant to say if we at least win 3 to finish out 9-7 or 10-6)
View attachment 11827

For the love of god, please stop misusing the phrase, "begs the question." It "Raises" the question.

Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[dolphans1]

For the love of god, please stop misusing the phrase, "begs the question." It "Raises" the question.

Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Begs the question is actually a term that comes from logic, and it's used to indicate that someone has made a conclusion based on a premise that lacks support (1, 2). It can be a premise that's independent from the conclusion (3) or in a simpler form, the premise itself can simply be just a restatement of the conclusion itself (4, 5).

For example, let's say Squiggly is trying to convince Aardvark that chocolate is healthful, and his argument is that chocolate grows on trees, so it must be healthful. Aardvark could rightly say there's no proof that something is good for you simply because it grows on a tree. Some things that grow on trees are poisonous--Chinaberry tree fruit, for example (6). So Squiggly's argument is based on a faulty premise.

Aardvark could correctly say that Squiggly's argument begs the question. What does growing on trees have to do with being healthful, anyway?

 

[mrbunglez]

Holy mackerel this thread is all over the place, 'begs the question' is this guy for real?

 

[dolphans1]

Holy mackerel this thread is all over the place, 'begs the question' is this guy for real?

Sounds like a statement this fellow would make, HOLY MACKERAL BATMAN, THE RIDDLER IS "ALLOVER THE PLACE", WHAT COULD HE MEAN?..... (notice how you misspelled the word all over?) if that's not a "tit"-for-"tat"....

 

[LandShark13]

Your wrong, the rule was changed after Marino arrived, in other words, he had the luxury of the 5 yard bump rule (was it changed in 96...?, I can't recall), they changed it if I recall, a few years later, as long as you were going back and looking for the ball you could make contact.

If that rule were in place today (you can't touch a receiver beyond 5 yards), Manning and Brees would be unstoppable today, and who knows how many yards they'd have.

I'm not wrong. the rule was there but almost never enforced. In 1996 they added language to ensure that it would be enforced more stringently. Again they added that language because prior to that the penalty was almost never called. If Dan played in an era where Duper and Clayton couldn't be touched passed 5 yards who knows how many yards he would throw for. Charles Woodson says 100K but that maybe a little low lol. j/k

 

[Gonzo]

I disagree, NFL plays in the 80's were a lot more sophisticated, when Marino played, you couldn't touch, I repeat, touch a receiver beyond 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, nowadays, you can wipe a receiver out, and it appears on non-calls I've seen, you don't even have to look back at that ball.

They actually changed that rule (bump rule) because Marino was unstoppable.

d-1

I didn't think it was possible, but this might actually be more clueless than your original post.

 

[mrbunglez]

Sounds like a statement this fellow would make, HOLY MACKERAL BATMAN, THE RIDDLER IS "ALLOVER THE PLACE", WHAT COULD HE MEAN?..... (notice how you misspelled the word all over?) if that's not a "tit"-for-"tat"....View attachment 11829

Wow really? I have no idea where you learned your English language, but if you want to say 'allover' is the correct way to spell it, kudus to you for making me laugh.

 

[Gonzo]

Sounds like a statement this fellow would make, HOLY MACKERAL BATMAN, THE RIDDLER IS "ALLOVER THE PLACE", WHAT COULD HE MEAN?..... (notice how you misspelled the word all over?) if that's not a "tit"-for-"tat"....View attachment 11829

Actually, you are in error. Allover and all over are essentially interchangeable; however, "all over" is most correct in the way he used it, while "allover" is used in describing something that is completely covered, like a wall in allover wallpaper, or Madison and Surtain were allover the WRs before the rule change that lead to current QBs demolishing previous QB records.

 

[Daytona Fin]

http://www.sportsattic.com/araig/NflRulesHistory.htm

1996
The five-yard contact rule will be enforced more stringently.

 

[NJ Dolphan]

Holy mackerel this thread is all over the place, 'begs the question' is this guy for real?

I am not really a grammar nazi, and don't care about typos or grammatical errors all that much.

Misusing "begs the question" and "ironic" are two things though that really get under my skin, and I can't resist the urge to speak up. Otherwise, I'm generally passive about such things.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[NJ Dolphan]

Begs the question is actually a term that comes from logic, and it's used to indicate that someone has made a conclusion based on a premise that lacks support (1, 2). It can be a premise that's independent from the conclusion (3) or in a simpler form, the premise itself can simply be just a restatement of the conclusion itself (4, 5).

For example, let's say Squiggly is trying to convince Aardvark that chocolate is healthful, and his argument is that chocolate grows on trees, so it must be healthful. Aardvark could rightly say there's no proof that something is good for you simply because it grows on a tree. Some things that grow on trees are poisonous--Chinaberry tree fruit, for example (6). So Squiggly's argument is based on a faulty premise.

Aardvark could correctly say that Squiggly's argument begs the question. What does growing on trees have to do with being healthful, anyway?

Right, but Chad Henne's supposed recent success only raises the question of whether the Phins gave up on him too early. The premise does not include an assumption that is the very conclusion you are attempting to prove.

A simpler example of something that begs the question is when a prosecutor, trying to prove the defendant's guilt tells the jury, the defendant has shown no remorse for his crime.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD