Create Account


Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x


The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Field goal technology

#1

I did not watch the game Thursday night, but saw this picture on NFL.com:

 

[Image: 15553263245_2307452d61_z.jpg]

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);"> 

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">Jim Nantz calmly explained we'll now know exactly how far a field-goal would have traveled if it didn't collide with the screen behind the uprights.

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);"> 

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">Huh? The attempt was blocked. And everyone who watched the game knew it was 58 yards. What was CBS trying to show us that we did not already know?


Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#2

1)  Jim Nantz is an idiot.  If he actually tried to do the math himself, his head would implode.

 

2)  There are two calculations to consider: (discounting air friction, wind resistance, etc.)

 

a) How deep into the stands the ball would have carried.       [Image: c1da5860501561519415962ddda5e85e.png]

 

b)  How far would the ball had gone, were there no stands and the landing point was in the same horizontal plane as the spot of the kick.

 

                                                                                                [Image: eb3b67e6645cdcf8b61cd1385387df54.png]

 

 3)  Don't you ever sleep?


When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.
Reply

#3

Quote:I did not watch the game Thursday night, but saw this picture on NFL.com:

 

[Image: 15553263245_2307452d61_z.jpg]

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);"> 

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">Jim Nantz calmly explained we'll now know exactly how far a field-goal would have traveled if it didn't collide with the screen behind the uprights.

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);"> 

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">Huh? The attempt was blocked. And everyone who watched the game knew it was 58 yards. What was CBS trying to show us that we did not already know?
 

Don't you realize there were more than one field goals (and attempts) in the game? You really need to pay attention and think things through.

 

And I'll take Jim Nance over Sneakers any day. If Sneakers tried to call a game his tongue would explode.

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.
Reply

#4

Incase Adam didn't make it clear, the field goal pictured was not the field goal that was blocked.


Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!