We will get to Patrick Mahomes, obviously, because there has never been anyone quite like him, but this is the NFL, and that means that first we have to talk about a penalty that was called when many people think it should not have been called.
I found it interesting that the media, which thrives on controversy, starting with Greg Olsen (a lifetime NFC guy) talked about the controversy of the hold while never showing you the hold. They showed the third slightly iffy attempt at a hold without showing the not one, but two holds that kept Juju from being wide open alone on that side of the field.
The picture at the top shows you what some of the media people have been showing. The video above shows you the holds that caused the flag. Note how he uses the first jersey pull not only to impede, but to help himself change directions. Then he flat out grabs him around the torso because the first hold wasn't enough. Then, with Juju past him (after the video, closer to what they have been showing) he tries to grab him again because he is STILL beaten after two holds.
The dude would have been open by 5 yards at least in a quadrant of the field where there absolutely zero Eagles because of the Reid scheme. It was absolutely a first down play, and more than likely a TD - or him sitting down before scoring if he would have though of it.
Any blatant hold like that on a possible game changing play is going to get called. It is NOT calling it that would be game changing.
Vast majority of comments here are about the holding call. Not about Mahomes. So I guess everybody agrees with your assessment of him.
I CAN'T WAIT for electronic ball and strike calls in MLB. Then that sport will be the ONLY pro team sport where judgement calls can't (or very rarely can) decide the outcome. (Tennis is already there.)
I love college bb, and the NFL (because of Mahomes), but there are boatloads of judgement calls in these sports. And it seems like the same people who complain about the calls also complain about the time it takes for the refs checking the monitors to get the calls right.
Unfortunately we are stuck with judgement calls in football and basketball, and these long, loud arguments will only get worse, especially with betting.
Ugh, that was a terrible, terrible call by the ref. Even if it was a penalty, and it was, the guy even admitted it as you said, it was still one of the worst calls in NFL history. They called basically zero penalties all game. One offensive PI in the first quarter (against the Eagles), and then everything else was the kind of penalty you have to call. Offsides, delay of game, false start.
Now, apparently the Eagles and Chiefs (in particular the Chiefs) did not hold all game long, either the O line or the defense. There was no pass interference all game, except Zach Pascal in the first quarter. There were no other penalties except those the refs were forced the call because everybody on the defensive line stood up and started pointing at a guy on the offensive line.
The issue here is not whether the penalty happened, it's the inequitable administration of justice. They call no penalties all game, and then at the moment the game may be decided, they administer justice. With all the gambling going on in sports these days, and with the shady and cynical way the NFL operates, how can you not think that this call was more than just a ref innocently calling a penalty?
Amazing content and channel Joe. I'm just getting started here. I have a tweeter acct K.C. Sports Diary, but this place looks nice. Good potential. Great article too.
Look, if it's an egregious call like the non pass interference call against the Rams vs. Saints, OK. Go ahead and complain about the call & demand better officiating. When you get into the territory of "you can't call that penalty in that situation" I'm not a fan. Especially when it's not a borderline call. Maybe the defender could have been more effective in his holding, but he WAS holding. He was in man to man defense & was about to get beaten badly. And, once you stop a player's momentum & make him restart his route, it's impacted. That's WHY they make that call all day, every day. It was a good game with some great performances. Stop whining about the referees. There were a few 50/50 calls, and an argument can be made that they got all of them right. Remember, they're taught not to blow a whistle on a possible fumble & let it play out before going back to review. Inadvertent quick whistles are the worst, and they try to avoid them. The referees did NOT decide this game.
I agree it was holding, but when the refs haven't thrown flags all game (and don't try to tell me it was because there weren't any penalties committed), then they can't throw that flag in that situation. Combine that with what happened two weeks ago against the Bengals, well, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth, and yes, makes me question if these games are on the up & up, particularly with all the gambling be flung in my face.
And you're right, that one play didn't cost Philly the game, but it sure didn't help them either.
Great game!....Late penalty does not alter that....the holding was obvious and out in the....if Mahomes throws a better pass and the play is close and it is not called....all heck breaks out in KC...Ref did his job, the defender didn't.....Kelce gets a national platform to say something meaningful in the moment, and all he can do is whine about respect.....like he did the previous game....Mom must of loved his brother more, the guy needs counseling.
If only there hadn’t been that pesky scoop-and-score fumble that forced the tie score as the game closed out. Why in the world didn’t the officials rule that an incompletion so we could watch Mahomes win it in the final seconds with a two point conversion. That it was holding and it was a fumble should be disregarded when fan excitement is at stake. Perhaps if the Eagle fans hadn’t booed Dak at his award ceremony the holding infraction would have somehow been obscured.
...at least instantly have their chance of victory go to 99% - Butker has to make the kick (I saw Blair Walsh miss in -6 degrees and Romo botch a snap, so it's never instant victory in that situation).
Here’s how the world of non-Mahomes worshippers feels right now:
For years and years, Tom Brady (great as he was) always seemed to benefit from that magically-timed questionable call (or non-call) that ultimately led to another Patriots victory. No need to name specific plays or moments, but countless times just when it looked like the Patriots were done, a magical yellow flag would appear out of nowhere giving Brady another chance. (“If the game is on the line, give Brady the benefit of the doubt.”)
Now that torch seems to have been passed to Mahomes. In a few short years, how many times has Mahomes suddenly benefitted from questionable calls like the one on Sunday? Sorry Joe, but you know as well as anybody that “holds” like this are ignored as often as they’re called, which I think is the gist of your article.
The NBA’s practice of having a different set of rules for Michael or Kobe or LeBron was bad enough. But this is the NFL, and fans of the other 30 teams are starting to wonder if NFL refs are going to start to give Mahomes the breaks just like they did for Brady. Is it intentional? Or subliminal? One must wonder.
But when Patrick threw that uncatchable pass, the moment fans saw that late flag come flying through the air (a second or two later than it should have), fans from coast to coast thought “well, here we go again”.
Let’s face it, if that was Carson Wentz or Jacoby Brissett on a Sunday in October, it’s unlikely that it would have been called a hold. And the TV announcers would have brushed it off with a comment to the effect of “well, there might have been a little grab by the defender, but not enough to warrant a defensive holding call.”
It almost seems as if the NFL wants to create another love-him-or-hate-him hero/villain now that Brady’s gone. And there are NFL fans and former fans that don’t want to see it.
"I don’t see why you’d ever bet against Patrick Mahomes."
Let's not go too crazy here with recency bias. Just 2 years ago, Mahomes put up a 26-49, 0 TD, 2 INT, 52.3 rating as the Chiefs were smoked by the Bucs, 31-9 in SB 55. Mahomes is great, but this is on his resume as well.
I challenge you to watch that game again and tell me he was not the best player on the field by a wide margin. He had two unbelievable passes clang off his receivers' face masks. He threw a ball 30 yards while parallel to the ground and hit Darrel Williams in the face. He was scrambling left and put a pass to Tyreek Hill in a window that didn't exist. And he was almost as hobbled from the turf toe injury as he was with the high ankle sprain.
If Greg Olsen had seen the entire route before incorrectly focusing on the left hand, this would never have been discussed. Mike Pereira tried to stop him, but it was too late. The defender grabbed the jersey with his right hand as the offensive player was trying to pass. The refs never "let this go" -- they sometimes may not see it because they are screened or because there is so much to watch -- it's textbook defensive holding. The ref saw it and made the only correct call on the NFL's biggest stage. Good for him. Olsen, on the other hand, has half the audience frothing over a ref doing his job well.
Thanks Joe. I don't think you put the fire out, but you probably lessened it. Every time I watch a football game with anyone (not often), they see at least 4-5 instances of dirty hits, bad calls or coaches mistakes negatively impacting the game. They never seem to notice that every one they see hurts only their team. I know it's human nature but it's exhausting having a reasonable conversation about it. As always, you've put this phenomenon in a non-critical way that should generate thought. Thanks.
Of course you are right, but I don't think that means recognizing it and giving it some thought is a wasted exercise. Self-awareness is essential to growth.
One of the things I heard about all week was the all-time great Philly D-line and O-line, but this, like many games, was won in the trenches, and the Chiefs won that battle on both sides.
The Eagles protected Hurts (who had nearly superhuman effort) fairly well, allowing only two sacks in a ton of dropbacks, but the oft stated idea that they were going to run the ball down the Chiefs throat - especially if they got a lead - proved to be false. The Chiefs allowed 3.6 yards per carry, 2.6 if you take the QB out of the equation. They pretty much had to abandon the run (other than QB sneaks) and put the game completely in Hurts almost capable enough hands.
As for the unstoppable D-line, they had zero sacks and one tackle for loss (The Chiefs had 5 of those). They allowed over 6 yards per carry, 5.7 if you take the QB out of it.
The one thing everyone seemed to be sure of is that both the Eagles lines would dominate the game, but they lost the battle on both ends.
I would quibble and say both offensive lines won, which is why we got 73 points out of the game. I would add that the field contributed to the advantage. Poor field conditions tend to favor the offense since they know where they are going and defenders have to react. Those two sacks were both plays where Hurts was scrambling outside and was forced out of bounds for a tiny loss. I think the Chiefs definitely had a game plan of forcing Hurts to run the ball instead of the backs, and to throw the ball into tight windows, which he did repeatedly. I had a ton of respect for Hurts coming into the game, but even more afterwards.
Both teams had to play on the same field, so this is not an excuse for why the Chiefs won or Eagles lost (I am a Chiefs fan.) But I do think it had an impact that favored the offenses.
The local paper (well, I live in DC, so it's the Washington Post) had an article on Sunday about various bets one might want to make on the game. One of the suggestions in that article was to take the under (at 50½ points) because, among other things, Carl Cheffers would be the game's referee, and his crew led the NFL in flags per game for the last two seasons and dinged the Chiefs for 11 flags in the Super Bowl two years ago. The article's point was that flags erase scoring plays and kill drives—but flags can also extend drives, as we saw last night. (And, obviously, the under at 50½ was not a good bet last night.)
But it does seem that if you're going to commit a defensive hold and hope the ref won't bother throwing a flag, Cheffers is the wrong ref to try that with.
There is also a prop bet on what color Gatorade they will dump on the winning coach. I don't think they actually dumped any Gatorade on Andy Reid, and I am sure you could have bet on that result also.
But to the point you made, L.H., it demonstrates how big of a presence the referees have on a game.
Even if we disregard the holding call, the last two minutes of that game were a total waste. My wife watches about five minutes of football every few years, and knows virtually nothing about it other than "touchdowns = good." So when Kansas city ran to the end zone and then slid to a stop without scoring she had a lot of questions for me.
Strategically it was a smart move, and it helped seal the win... But for football entertainment it was a total waste and all the casual fans who only watch the Super Bowl it was really lame. I was hoping they would miss the field goal and force overtime as some form of cosmic football justice.
I say this as someone who was vaguely rooting for KC, but without a strong loyalty.
Short of changing the rules of the game, for example to stop the clock after every play in the last two minutes, what else could you do in any game that allows one team possession and the chance to play out the clock? Had the Chiefs completed a pass for the first down instead of getting the penalty, the exact same result would have obtained, but without the whining. So what's the point?
What I am "whining" about--and hey, maybe I am whining--is that with two minutes left in a tied super bowl, one of the most potent defenses in the league laid down to intentionally allow their opponent to score a touchdown, and one of the most potent offenses led by the best living quarterback went to great effort to avoid scoring a touchdown. That is a pain to watch, in much the same way as intentional walks are.
Patrick Mahomes is Mike Trout (or whoever you think is the best baseball player alive) in the world series coming to bat in the game 7 ninth inning, against a power closer (The Philly defense), and the power closer chooses to walk Trout, and Trout refuses to walk, and then a pinch hitter (the field goal guy) comes in and bunts in the winning run and everyone celebrates as though something great happened. I do not care that it is good strategy for winning. It is bad strategy for entertaining the fans. That is what I am whining about.
They could enable the exciting finish even more like they do in the NBA - the "full" timeout - the ball is placed at mid-field for either a Hail Mary or a 67 yard field goal attempt. :D
I found it interesting that the media, which thrives on controversy, starting with Greg Olsen (a lifetime NFC guy) talked about the controversy of the hold while never showing you the hold. They showed the third slightly iffy attempt at a hold without showing the not one, but two holds that kept Juju from being wide open alone on that side of the field.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-films-video-james-bradberry-holding-juju-smith-schuster-super-bowl/np6853plq7seq0uzap4nep1e
The picture at the top shows you what some of the media people have been showing. The video above shows you the holds that caused the flag. Note how he uses the first jersey pull not only to impede, but to help himself change directions. Then he flat out grabs him around the torso because the first hold wasn't enough. Then, with Juju past him (after the video, closer to what they have been showing) he tries to grab him again because he is STILL beaten after two holds.
The dude would have been open by 5 yards at least in a quadrant of the field where there absolutely zero Eagles because of the Reid scheme. It was absolutely a first down play, and more than likely a TD - or him sitting down before scoring if he would have though of it.
Any blatant hold like that on a possible game changing play is going to get called. It is NOT calling it that would be game changing.
Vast majority of comments here are about the holding call. Not about Mahomes. So I guess everybody agrees with your assessment of him.
I CAN'T WAIT for electronic ball and strike calls in MLB. Then that sport will be the ONLY pro team sport where judgement calls can't (or very rarely can) decide the outcome. (Tennis is already there.)
I love college bb, and the NFL (because of Mahomes), but there are boatloads of judgement calls in these sports. And it seems like the same people who complain about the calls also complain about the time it takes for the refs checking the monitors to get the calls right.
Unfortunately we are stuck with judgement calls in football and basketball, and these long, loud arguments will only get worse, especially with betting.
Ugh, that was a terrible, terrible call by the ref. Even if it was a penalty, and it was, the guy even admitted it as you said, it was still one of the worst calls in NFL history. They called basically zero penalties all game. One offensive PI in the first quarter (against the Eagles), and then everything else was the kind of penalty you have to call. Offsides, delay of game, false start.
Now, apparently the Eagles and Chiefs (in particular the Chiefs) did not hold all game long, either the O line or the defense. There was no pass interference all game, except Zach Pascal in the first quarter. There were no other penalties except those the refs were forced the call because everybody on the defensive line stood up and started pointing at a guy on the offensive line.
The issue here is not whether the penalty happened, it's the inequitable administration of justice. They call no penalties all game, and then at the moment the game may be decided, they administer justice. With all the gambling going on in sports these days, and with the shady and cynical way the NFL operates, how can you not think that this call was more than just a ref innocently calling a penalty?
They missed a more definite holding on JuJu by the same player which would have given the Chiefs some points.
Amazing content and channel Joe. I'm just getting started here. I have a tweeter acct K.C. Sports Diary, but this place looks nice. Good potential. Great article too.
Look, if it's an egregious call like the non pass interference call against the Rams vs. Saints, OK. Go ahead and complain about the call & demand better officiating. When you get into the territory of "you can't call that penalty in that situation" I'm not a fan. Especially when it's not a borderline call. Maybe the defender could have been more effective in his holding, but he WAS holding. He was in man to man defense & was about to get beaten badly. And, once you stop a player's momentum & make him restart his route, it's impacted. That's WHY they make that call all day, every day. It was a good game with some great performances. Stop whining about the referees. There were a few 50/50 calls, and an argument can be made that they got all of them right. Remember, they're taught not to blow a whistle on a possible fumble & let it play out before going back to review. Inadvertent quick whistles are the worst, and they try to avoid them. The referees did NOT decide this game.
I agree it was holding, but when the refs haven't thrown flags all game (and don't try to tell me it was because there weren't any penalties committed), then they can't throw that flag in that situation. Combine that with what happened two weeks ago against the Bengals, well, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth, and yes, makes me question if these games are on the up & up, particularly with all the gambling be flung in my face.
And you're right, that one play didn't cost Philly the game, but it sure didn't help them either.
Great game!....Late penalty does not alter that....the holding was obvious and out in the....if Mahomes throws a better pass and the play is close and it is not called....all heck breaks out in KC...Ref did his job, the defender didn't.....Kelce gets a national platform to say something meaningful in the moment, and all he can do is whine about respect.....like he did the previous game....Mom must of loved his brother more, the guy needs counseling.
If only there hadn’t been that pesky scoop-and-score fumble that forced the tie score as the game closed out. Why in the world didn’t the officials rule that an incompletion so we could watch Mahomes win it in the final seconds with a two point conversion. That it was holding and it was a fumble should be disregarded when fan excitement is at stake. Perhaps if the Eagle fans hadn’t booed Dak at his award ceremony the holding infraction would have somehow been obscured.
hahahahaha!
If Mahomes throws a TD to JuJu and the refs throw the flag, do the Chiefs accept and take points off the board? I think they have to.
100% of the time they would take the penalty because it ends the game. A TD would give Philly a chance to tie or even win on a 2 pt conversion.
That's why it's such a huge call because it was the ONLY way the Chiefs could instantly win the game.
...at least instantly have their chance of victory go to 99% - Butker has to make the kick (I saw Blair Walsh miss in -6 degrees and Romo botch a snap, so it's never instant victory in that situation).
Yes, it's technically only 99% or so.
But regardless it's greater than the chance the Eagles score a TD with 1:40 and a timeout left. Hence you'd 100% of the time take the penalty.
Here’s how the world of non-Mahomes worshippers feels right now:
For years and years, Tom Brady (great as he was) always seemed to benefit from that magically-timed questionable call (or non-call) that ultimately led to another Patriots victory. No need to name specific plays or moments, but countless times just when it looked like the Patriots were done, a magical yellow flag would appear out of nowhere giving Brady another chance. (“If the game is on the line, give Brady the benefit of the doubt.”)
Now that torch seems to have been passed to Mahomes. In a few short years, how many times has Mahomes suddenly benefitted from questionable calls like the one on Sunday? Sorry Joe, but you know as well as anybody that “holds” like this are ignored as often as they’re called, which I think is the gist of your article.
The NBA’s practice of having a different set of rules for Michael or Kobe or LeBron was bad enough. But this is the NFL, and fans of the other 30 teams are starting to wonder if NFL refs are going to start to give Mahomes the breaks just like they did for Brady. Is it intentional? Or subliminal? One must wonder.
But when Patrick threw that uncatchable pass, the moment fans saw that late flag come flying through the air (a second or two later than it should have), fans from coast to coast thought “well, here we go again”.
Let’s face it, if that was Carson Wentz or Jacoby Brissett on a Sunday in October, it’s unlikely that it would have been called a hold. And the TV announcers would have brushed it off with a comment to the effect of “well, there might have been a little grab by the defender, but not enough to warrant a defensive holding call.”
It almost seems as if the NFL wants to create another love-him-or-hate-him hero/villain now that Brady’s gone. And there are NFL fans and former fans that don’t want to see it.
"I don’t see why you’d ever bet against Patrick Mahomes."
Let's not go too crazy here with recency bias. Just 2 years ago, Mahomes put up a 26-49, 0 TD, 2 INT, 52.3 rating as the Chiefs were smoked by the Bucs, 31-9 in SB 55. Mahomes is great, but this is on his resume as well.
I challenge you to watch that game again and tell me he was not the best player on the field by a wide margin. He had two unbelievable passes clang off his receivers' face masks. He threw a ball 30 yards while parallel to the ground and hit Darrel Williams in the face. He was scrambling left and put a pass to Tyreek Hill in a window that didn't exist. And he was almost as hobbled from the turf toe injury as he was with the high ankle sprain.
That game is among the best of his career.
If Greg Olsen had seen the entire route before incorrectly focusing on the left hand, this would never have been discussed. Mike Pereira tried to stop him, but it was too late. The defender grabbed the jersey with his right hand as the offensive player was trying to pass. The refs never "let this go" -- they sometimes may not see it because they are screened or because there is so much to watch -- it's textbook defensive holding. The ref saw it and made the only correct call on the NFL's biggest stage. Good for him. Olsen, on the other hand, has half the audience frothing over a ref doing his job well.
Thanks Joe. I don't think you put the fire out, but you probably lessened it. Every time I watch a football game with anyone (not often), they see at least 4-5 instances of dirty hits, bad calls or coaches mistakes negatively impacting the game. They never seem to notice that every one they see hurts only their team. I know it's human nature but it's exhausting having a reasonable conversation about it. As always, you've put this phenomenon in a non-critical way that should generate thought. Thanks.
Talking about those things is part of the allure of Sports.
Fans do the same in Baseball (ball/strike calls), Basketball (foul calls), Hockey/Soccer (penalties) and so on.
Of course you are right, but I don't think that means recognizing it and giving it some thought is a wasted exercise. Self-awareness is essential to growth.
One of the things I heard about all week was the all-time great Philly D-line and O-line, but this, like many games, was won in the trenches, and the Chiefs won that battle on both sides.
The Eagles protected Hurts (who had nearly superhuman effort) fairly well, allowing only two sacks in a ton of dropbacks, but the oft stated idea that they were going to run the ball down the Chiefs throat - especially if they got a lead - proved to be false. The Chiefs allowed 3.6 yards per carry, 2.6 if you take the QB out of the equation. They pretty much had to abandon the run (other than QB sneaks) and put the game completely in Hurts almost capable enough hands.
As for the unstoppable D-line, they had zero sacks and one tackle for loss (The Chiefs had 5 of those). They allowed over 6 yards per carry, 5.7 if you take the QB out of it.
The one thing everyone seemed to be sure of is that both the Eagles lines would dominate the game, but they lost the battle on both ends.
I would quibble and say both offensive lines won, which is why we got 73 points out of the game. I would add that the field contributed to the advantage. Poor field conditions tend to favor the offense since they know where they are going and defenders have to react. Those two sacks were both plays where Hurts was scrambling outside and was forced out of bounds for a tiny loss. I think the Chiefs definitely had a game plan of forcing Hurts to run the ball instead of the backs, and to throw the ball into tight windows, which he did repeatedly. I had a ton of respect for Hurts coming into the game, but even more afterwards.
Both teams had to play on the same field, so this is not an excuse for why the Chiefs won or Eagles lost (I am a Chiefs fan.) But I do think it had an impact that favored the offenses.
The local paper (well, I live in DC, so it's the Washington Post) had an article on Sunday about various bets one might want to make on the game. One of the suggestions in that article was to take the under (at 50½ points) because, among other things, Carl Cheffers would be the game's referee, and his crew led the NFL in flags per game for the last two seasons and dinged the Chiefs for 11 flags in the Super Bowl two years ago. The article's point was that flags erase scoring plays and kill drives—but flags can also extend drives, as we saw last night. (And, obviously, the under at 50½ was not a good bet last night.)
But it does seem that if you're going to commit a defensive hold and hope the ref won't bother throwing a flag, Cheffers is the wrong ref to try that with.
There is also a prop bet on what color Gatorade they will dump on the winning coach. I don't think they actually dumped any Gatorade on Andy Reid, and I am sure you could have bet on that result also.
But to the point you made, L.H., it demonstrates how big of a presence the referees have on a game.
Even if we disregard the holding call, the last two minutes of that game were a total waste. My wife watches about five minutes of football every few years, and knows virtually nothing about it other than "touchdowns = good." So when Kansas city ran to the end zone and then slid to a stop without scoring she had a lot of questions for me.
Strategically it was a smart move, and it helped seal the win... But for football entertainment it was a total waste and all the casual fans who only watch the Super Bowl it was really lame. I was hoping they would miss the field goal and force overtime as some form of cosmic football justice.
I say this as someone who was vaguely rooting for KC, but without a strong loyalty.
Short of changing the rules of the game, for example to stop the clock after every play in the last two minutes, what else could you do in any game that allows one team possession and the chance to play out the clock? Had the Chiefs completed a pass for the first down instead of getting the penalty, the exact same result would have obtained, but without the whining. So what's the point?
What I am "whining" about--and hey, maybe I am whining--is that with two minutes left in a tied super bowl, one of the most potent defenses in the league laid down to intentionally allow their opponent to score a touchdown, and one of the most potent offenses led by the best living quarterback went to great effort to avoid scoring a touchdown. That is a pain to watch, in much the same way as intentional walks are.
Patrick Mahomes is Mike Trout (or whoever you think is the best baseball player alive) in the world series coming to bat in the game 7 ninth inning, against a power closer (The Philly defense), and the power closer chooses to walk Trout, and Trout refuses to walk, and then a pinch hitter (the field goal guy) comes in and bunts in the winning run and everyone celebrates as though something great happened. I do not care that it is good strategy for winning. It is bad strategy for entertaining the fans. That is what I am whining about.
They could enable the exciting finish even more like they do in the NBA - the "full" timeout - the ball is placed at mid-field for either a Hail Mary or a 67 yard field goal attempt. :D
I, for one, was very entertained by that play. Head's up moves by both teams.
Nice deflection.
What team did you pick?