Dan Schneier on the Pick 6

[Rambo89]

Another point is that Barkley failed to account for that DB to his left and got blindsided by him, other wise he would tuck the ball in quickly...and yes, that was a catch and fumble imo also.

How can Barkley account for that when he's running his route with his head turned up field? 

Ball should never been thrown to him in that spot where he was in a vulnerable position especially when there was an open guy up field.

[kingm56]

Another point is that Barkley failed to account for that DB to his left and got blindsided by him, other wise he would tuck the ball in quickly...and yes, that was a catch and fumble imo also.

The rule is clear...the ball never hit the ground; thus, it's an interception.  I'm not sure how you could possibly view this as a fumble.  Worse, if DJ makes the correct read here, this could have been a big play for our Giants...

[GloryDays]

A fumble as far as I know, the ball does not have to hit the ground. The only requirement is that the receiver completes the catch and makes a football move, which I think he did... whether it was a fumble or interception, it does not affect the result anyway.

[MightyGiants]

The rule is clear...the ball never hit the ground; thus, it's an interception.  I'm not sure how you could possibly view this as a fumble.  Worse, if DJ makes the correct read here, this could have been a big play for our Giants...

Had the ball not been caught when Barkley fumbled it away and the ball was recovered on the ground by Dallas, the officials would have given the ball to Dallas on the fumble recovery rather than calling it a dropped pass.   They would have pointed to the football moves Barkly made after catching the ball as proof it was a catch and a fumble.

[Woody]

That was on Barkley ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Woody]

Had the ball not been caught when Barkley fumbled it away and the ball was recovered on the ground by Dallas, the officials would have given the ball to Dallas on the fumble recovery rather than calling it a dropped pass.   They would have pointed to the football moves Barkly made after catching the ball as proof it was a catch and a fumble.

So if he had run a full five yards and the same hit and recovery happens it is an interception by rule ? I Dont think so


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Woody]

It should be corrected by league review this week


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rambo89]

That was on Barkley ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How if he has no idea the defender was right there to blast him?

[Woody]

How if he has no idea the defender was right there to blast him?

Do you really think that players in NFL see everything? Players know they are going to get hit. No excuse other than it was a great tackle/hit by the defender happens all the time in this league . Point is it was a fumble and not int.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rambo89]

Do you really think that players in NFL see everything? Players know they are going to get hit. No excuse other than it was a great tackle/hit by the defender happens all the time in this league . Point is it was a fumble and not int.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When they're trying to catch the ball in that spot as a check down they are expecting if they're getting the ball it's because there is an open field not because a defender is right on them because the QB missed the read that the X was open downfield.

[DaveBrown74]

The play counted as an interception, not a fumble. So those who claim it was a fumble and not an INT are stating their opinion and presenting their opinion as fact.

Further, even if you feel the official scoring screwed Jones by giving him the INT, unless you're wearing blue tinted goggles and deliberately manipulating things in your mind to suit an underlying agenda, you need to concede that Jones was absurdly lucky to not have a third pick in that game. He made an awful throw that went right to a Dallas defender who simply dropped the ball. 95 out of 100 times (at least) that is a pick.

So I think two INTs on the night is more than fair, even if you genuinely think the Barkley play was 90% or more on Barkley, which is hardly an indisputable fact and definitely up for debate.

[kingm56]

The play counted as an interception, not a fumble. So those who claim it was a fumble and not an INT are stating their opinion and presenting their opinion as fact.

Further, even if you feel the official scoring screwed Jones by giving him the INT, unless you're wearing blue tinted goggles and deliberately manipulating things in your mind to suit an underlying agenda, you need to concede that Jones was absurdly lucky to not have a third pick in that game. He made an awful throw that went right to a Dallas defender who simply dropped the ball. 95 out of 100 times (at least) that is a pick.

So I think two INTs on the night is more than fair, even if you genuinely think the Barkley play was 90% or more on Barkley, which is hardly an indisputable fact and definitely up for debate.

Over the course of the season, int balance out. 

[Dgoodmantrublu]

This is exactly the kind of play of why I don't believe you can win a Super Bowl with Jones. You can have a good team when conditions are good. But I think his ceiling is Alex Smith. Playoff QB, not a great QB. This doesn't mean Sunday was his fault. It wasn't. But he wasn't good enough.

[Rambo89]

This is exactly the kind of play of why I don't believe you can win a Super Bowl with Jones. You can have a good team when conditions are good. But I think his ceiling is Alex Smith. Playoff QB, not a great QB. This doesn't mean Sunday was his fault. It wasn't. But he wasn't good enough.

Almost every single person here that has been labeled a "Jones hater" has felt similarly for the last 2-3 years about Daniel Jones.

[4 Aces]

That's not a cover 3, it's a cover 2 zone. Turkey hole wide open.