do the rest of the owners have to approve of the sale?

I assumed it was his joining a Wikipedia club.

Yea, I’m aware of the pizza anecdote, but this was not at all scintillating of a scoop. Every single catered lunch I’ve ever seen in a corporate setting is WAY overbought, with the folks not involved in the meeting (myself often among them) swooping in for those sweet leftovers. Honestly, it’s great when you’re a…

Our own Diana Moskovitzused to work at NFL Network and this week she wrote about her time there. The whole thing is well worth reading but I just wanna point out this passage:

Virtually all cars come with some level of scratch-resistant clear-coat straight from the factory, which should provide some level of protection. It’s really only a concern if you take it to a carwash repeatedly, over the course of a number of years. And if your paint is only deformed, and not stripped entirely,…

Franco Harris was a HoFer in his own right. Not sure this play defines his career, rather than is simply a part of it. David Tyree he is not.

It’s certianly not the end-all-be-all, but it provides the singular opportunity for teams to observe all of the prospects in common conditions, thus creating a conversion/baseline by which they can compare tape that occurs in different leagues, different conditions, different surfaces, different systems, etc.

Thank god I found you, a sensible person!

That’s not the question. If a receiver has established possession, then crosses the GL, then yes its a TD. People are saying that they shouldn’t have to complete the catch because its a TD once the ball crosses the GL.

Whether the rule is good or not is not the point. I’m referring to people who can’t seem to get the difference between a RB crossing the plane and a WR who catches the ball in the EZ/at the goal line.

All as a part of a single action. Maybe you can say you think he caught it, THEN lunged, but the alternative interpretation isn’t very far-fetched.

Quite simply, the RB in your scenario already has unquestionable possession of the ball.

People must be being willfully dense on this, right?

And there’s a huge inconsistency between running the ball into the end zone (get the tip in by a micrometer and it’s a TD) and a catch in the end zone (have to fulfill the NFL’s insane catch rules for it to be a TD, breaking the plane of the end zone be damned).

Crazy call. Even Nantz and Romo thought the review was a formality.

You’re conflating things here. There is no question about the possession for a running back. Had he caught the ball at the 5 yard line, run across the goal line and the ball come loose when he landed in the end zone, there would be zero issue. He hadn’t established possession of the ball, though.

No, there would have been no run-off for a spike.

If that was a running back it would be a TD with zero questions raised.

I’ll never understand why this rule is so hard for people to understand.

This is a complete red herring. As he goes to the ground he needs to complete possession. Ball hits the ground and jars loose, thus the knee down and crossing of the plane are irrelevent.