Martavis

[cubanstogie]

Tony Dungy just said he didn't think it was a catch. How could a guy getting paid to analyze football even try and dispute that catch, he had complete control entire time. Martavis stepped it up. Not a ton of touches but had a few big plays. He is going to have to step it up even more next week, I think AB will go but probably won't be 100%.

[Count Steeler]

Heard Rich Eisen say the same thing this morning. They say he didn't have control and 2 feet in bounds.

[tube517]

Yeah, sorry Rich you Tom Brady** lover. He got both feet in. I swear I hate all these jagoffs in the media.

[teegre]

Heard Rich Eisen say the same thing this morning. They say he didn't have control and 2 feet in bounds.

Michael Irvin immediately shot Eisen down, saying that Bryant had control: one hand on the ball and the ball against his a$$.

Eisen is just grasping at straws.

[stillers4me]

That was the sickest catch I've ever seen.

[ALLD]

It was a unique catch for the ages that was overshadowed by the poor unsportsmanlike play by other players during the rest of the game. As I have said before, the best receivers use a mix of basketball and football in their skill sets.

[Mojouw]

I spent all night thinking it wasn't a catch. If Bryant WAS a catch, then what about Dez Bryant's last season? Or some of the non-catches by Calvin Johnson?

Honestly, I could have seen that call last night going either way. I don't blame the talking heads for not being sure what is and is not a catch. It is the biggest rule change the NFL needs to make. Make the catch rules consistent and obvious. In particular, if a RUNNER only has to break the plane and can then fumble the ball and it be a TD - why does a pass catcher have to get two feet down with possession (catch by rules) AND have the extra requirement of this whole control all the way to the ground nonsense? It isn't even logical - at least to my mind.

I can totally see why Eisen and others saw Bryant's catch as control, one foot down, two feet down, and then a loss of control and then a regaining of control and then hitting out of bounds without ever restablishing in bounds. That is a scenario that could and has been ruled a non-catch this season by review.There is just no consistency.

[cargojon]

I spent all night thinking it wasn't a catch. If Bryant WAS a catch, then what about Dez Bryant's last season? Or some of the non-catches by Calvin Johnson?

Honestly, I could have seen that call last night going either way. I don't blame the talking heads for not being sure what is and is not a catch. It is the biggest rule change the NFL needs to make. Make the catch rules consistent and obvious. In particular, if a RUNNER only has to break the plane and can then fumble the ball and it be a TD - why does a pass catcher have to get two feet down with possession (catch by rules) AND have the extra requirement of this whole control all the way to the ground nonsense? It isn't even logical - at least to my mind.

I can totally see why Eisen and others saw Bryant's catch as control, one foot down, two feet down, and then a loss of control and then a regaining of control and then hitting out of bounds without ever restablishing in bounds. That is a scenario that could and has been ruled a non-catch this season by review.There is just no consistency.
The thing to remember is Bryant's non-catch actually hit the ground. The catch last night never hit the ground.

Dungy hates any team that beat the Colts in any important game ever. Watch him talk about the Steelers or the Saints, he hates them both. In his mind, both "stole" super Bowl rings from his lover Peyton Manning.

[hawaiiansteeler]

That was the sickest catch I've ever seen.

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/54u_4mI5-GRYvW9Hq_9gAUfWLMw=/400x0/filters:no_upscale%28%29/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/5890599/butttd.0.gif

[TheropodX]

Yes one of the greatest catches in Steelers history imo. For some reason I got the idea of making a bronze sculpture a la the Heisman. I spent too much time on this not to share... Lol I wish this was real--I would buy one in a heartbeat!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYWS_LEUwAAw53Q.jpg (https://twitter.com/Stage2David/status/686116132734898176)

By the way, I was once a member of the SFF... nice to see there's still an active fan forum!

[steelreserve]

Basically, some people will argue that you "lost control" if the ball moves at all, even if it was in your hands the whole time and you were the one moving it.

There was no time Bryant wasn't in control of it, and if you want to nitpick over it, then go ahead I guess, but it's not going to take the points off the board.

[Count Steeler]

Martavis IS the ASSMAN.

[cubanstogie]

Basically, some people will argue that you "lost control" if the ball moves at all, even if it was in your hands the whole time and you were the one moving it.

There was no time Bryant wasn't in control of it, and if you want to nitpick over it, then go ahead I guess, but it's not going to take the points off the board.
I have seen this catch 5 times this morning and the ball was always against his body with no movement. I realize I am biased but no way that is not a catch.

[SteelMember]

The way things are micro-analyzed anymore, I was sure it was going to be overturned. Great circus catch though.

[cold-hard-steel]

Martavis IS the ASSMAN.

Million to one shot,million to one.

[86WARD]

Martavis IS the ASSMAN.

Lol.

[vasteeler]

Martavis IS the ASSMAN.

http://media3.picsearch.com/is?j7xuTRJPDnfEXhSlbEdEj9GWYKgULUraPV5xVn945VA&height=240

[Psycho Ward 86]

I spent all night thinking it wasn't a catch. If Bryant WAS a catch, then what about Dez Bryant's last season? Or some of the non-catches by Calvin Johnson?

Honestly, I could have seen that call last night going either way. I don't blame the talking heads for not being sure what is and is not a catch. It is the biggest rule change the NFL needs to make. Make the catch rules consistent and obvious. In particular, if a RUNNER only has to break the plane and can then fumble the ball and it be a TD - why does a pass catcher have to get two feet down with possession (catch by rules) AND have the extra requirement of this whole control all the way to the ground nonsense? It isn't even logical - at least to my mind.

I can totally see why Eisen and others saw Bryant's catch as control, one foot down, two feet down, and then a loss of control and then a regaining of control and then hitting out of bounds without ever restablishing in bounds. That is a scenario that could and has been ruled a non-catch this season by review.There is just no consistency.

sure there's consistency. Mike Pereira has explained all of those and his explanations make perfect sense. it's the fact that the fans are so set in their ways as to what a catch is that makes them wonder so much.

Martavis momentarily bobbles it even against his leg BUT he ultimately keeps it under control just in time while tapping both feet in. The ball 'moves' across his thigh and butt, yet its stuck like glue to his hand without wobbling around.

Cant think of a good comparable example, but the best i can think of is Antonio Brown's helmet catch his rookie year. He uses his helmet as a surface for control just as Martavis uses his thigh/ass for control. Pretty sure Pereira covered Bryant's catch as well

[katmandu]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYWS_LEUwAAw53Q.jpg (https://twitter.com/Stage2David/status/686116132734898176)

By the way, I was once a member of the SFF... nice to see there's still an active fan forum!That's great !! How'd you do it ?

What is SFF ??

[ALLD]

Or when a runner switches whatever side the ball is on to defend from tacklers. The ball is moving, but the runner has complete control.

[TheropodX]

SFF is/was Steelers Fever Forums.

For the trophy image, I started with a photo and then spent (too much) time in photoshop... here's an updated version:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYompSCWwAAWTDX.jpg (https://twitter.com/Stage2David/status/687404389217210368)