Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.
Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.he now posting about hockey? wth is Rahimgate? wtf knows what the Denver hosiers are blaming this titanic loss on, but I'd be amused to find out what it is.
Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.
Rahim is blamed because it's hilarious how he took a bad angle and then futilely leaped yards off the ball. But when CBS replayed the wide shot of the play, it didn't even look like a prevent defense (this doesn't excuse Rahim's bad angle). Looked more like Cover 2 to me. Now I realize prevent is often maligned as it gives up play after play in the middle of the field. But if there's a time to "prevent" the opponent from executing a big play, it's when you're up a TD and they have little time and no time outs to stop the clock.Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.
Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.
fact of the matter is that play did cost them the game. regardless what happened prior, had he just done his job they would have won that game. not saying the entire blame of the loss goes on him, but if he just played some defense and did the only job he should have done on that play, they would be playing the pats in a few days.
he had 1 simple task - stay between the last defender and the endzone. once he realize how f'ed he was, he jumped about 2 seconds too early to make a play on the ball. it was a terrible pass that was under thrown and should have been picked off with ease.
Blaming it on one play is hilarious. Typical though.
You can say this for so many games and situations, it makes the arguement invalid. The team, as a whole, is responsible for the loss - not one individual player. That play did not cost them the game anymore than Peyton's interception or the conservative play calling.
Thanks to both of you. Certain fans who shall remain nameless need to read and digest these comments.
That play is singled out only because it came at the end of the game. In terms of score you could just as easily blame the missed field goal or the pick 6. If either of those plays go the Broncos way (in a vacuum of course), that Ravens score at the end is meaningless. And on the flipside, if it wasn't for Holliday's freak double runback, the Broncos could quite conceivably have been behind for the entire game.
While that play decided the game, it by no means lost it singlehandedly.
fact of the matter is that play did cost them the game. regardless what happened prior, had he just done his job they would have won that game. not saying the entire blame of the loss goes on him, but if he just played some defense and did the only job he should have done on that play, they would be playing the pats in a few days.
he had 1 simple task - stay between the last defender and the endzone. once he realize how f'ed he was, he jumped about 2 seconds too early to make a play on the ball. it was a terrible pass that was under thrown and should have been picked off with ease.
terrible pass? lol, bitter redskins fans are hilarious.
Rahim is the safety that blew his coverage. Google shows "RahimGate" isn't exactly catching on.
You can say this for so many games and situations, it makes the arguement invalid. The team, as a whole, is responsible for the loss - not one individual player. That play did not cost them the game anymore than Peyton's interception or the conservative play calling.
terrible pass? lol, bitter redskins fans are hilarious.
not bitter at all. if you weren't such a homer you could admit the pass was terrible and underthrown, and should have been picked off. it should have been a routine int but the broncos defender was busy playing bad football.
99% Red Sox would have won World Series if Buckner fielded the ball
99% Cubs would have gone to World Series if Bartman hadn't "interfered."
...these are ridiculous statements, of course. The Red Sox blew that game well before the grounder went near Buckner. Cubs SS (can't remember his name for the life of me), blew a huge play after that, and Prior was in way too long, etc.
I disagree. Clearly Flacco threw it up and hoped his receiver could make a play, or draw PI. He threw it as far as he could, and the CB in coverage wasn't close to Jacoby Jones at the end. Obviously the safety should've been in a lot better position but that doesn't make it a bad throw. Jones pulled up at the end when the ball came in, but I wouldn't call that underthrown if it traveled 55 yards in the air (moving left, throwing right).not bitter at all. if you weren't such a homer you could admit the pass was terrible and underthrown, and should have been picked off. it should have been a routine int but the broncos defender was busy playing bad football.
just mentioning that you will very rarely, if ever, be able to single out one moment in one game that wins or loses it for a team, especially when these plays happen with plenty of time on the clock.
single out that blown coverage: well, who's to say that Baltimore would not have turned around and converted on the next play, or the Broncos show up and botch yet another possession within seconds? The course of the game will change on these moments, as they do not exist in a vacuum. And as a team sport, you really have to look at the whole of the game and fault a series of mistakes or bad calls (coaching calls) and failures to adjust.
How about accepting that the losing team simply got outplayed by a superior team that day? Baltimore was clearly the better team that day. There isn't a logical argument for Denver being the better team. I mean, honestly: they would have won, right?