Should Holt have caught the pass against Carolina?

[evil disco man]

If you're going to look for a Ram to bash, why pick Torry?

He has been a model player since he was drafted. He works hard, produces, is a positive and upbeat member of the team, and signed a long term deal to stay with the Rams rather than waiting to be a blue-chip UFA.

Surely, there are others who are more deserving of scrutiny.

It's the offseason, and we've been through every other player. :tongue:

[r8rh8rmike]

I agree Av. Whether you think he should have made the catch or not, the man did everything in his power to make a difficult grab. Surely no one questions his efforts. If he dropped one in the breadbasket, maybe there might be cause for legitamate criticism, but not in this case, no way.

[txramsfan]

I honestly don't think Holt did everything. He didn't leave his feet to stretch out for the pass. It was a 50 yard pass to begin with. Not very many QB's could hit that.

Someone mentioned the fact that maybe it should have been slightly underthrown. Is that Bulger's fault? On a fly pattern?

[r8rh8rmike]

Someone mentioned the fact that maybe it should have been slightly underthrown. Is that Bulger's fault? On a fly pattern?

Not necessarily, but the result might have been better. Remember Warner's throw to Bruce in SB 34?

[Nick]

Not necessarily, but the result might have been better.

I completely disagree. If Bulger underthrows that ball, he counteracts the position that Holt gained in beating his man. Torry was wide open. Had Bulger underthrown the ball, he would have brought the defender back into the play after being beat. Why would you want to do that? The SB 34 play was fairly special, because if I remember, Bruce was covered fairly closely and the defender overpursued, allowing Bruce to come back and get the ball. Not the case at all here.

As TX said, I don't think Holt did everything in his power to get that ball. He didn't make a dive. He didn't jump for it. No one's trying to bash Torry at all, but I think criticism toward him on that specific play is legit. For all the ability we saw out of Holt in 2003, there wasn't an abundance of it on that attempted catch in my opinion.

[Curly Horns]

Bottom line is Bulger overthrew the ball by a few yards. Holt did everything he could do to catch the pass. Diving or leaving his feet would not have helped in this case. He was running full speed and kicked it in just to stretch as far as he possibly could and snag it out of the air with one hand. He almost caught it, however, it was still a very difficult pass to catch. The timing was just not perfect and Bulger threw the ball a few yards to deep.

[r8rh8rmike]

I completely disagree.

What a surprise.

The SB 34 play was fairly special, because if I remember, Bruce was covered fairly closely and the defender overpursued, allowing Bruce to come back and get the ball. Not the case at all here.

Really? Seems to me that there was a reasonable cushion between Holt and the defender (we need to get a name here if this discussion keeps going) that would have allowed a step or two to make an adjustment and catch. I wouldn't think it would have had to be a huge adjustment because it was a fairly accurate pass by Bulger, right???

No one's trying to bash Torry at all

This is debatable.

[Curly Horns]

On one hand we can blame Warner for throwing a pick in SB36, completely excluding the fact that ryan tucker's whiff blew the play up, while on the other hand we place blame on Holt for not catching an overthrown ball by Bulger. Maybe it's just me, but I sense a bit of a double standard with these blame games.

[general counsel]

Ferter, correct me if i am wrong, but i thought it was rod jones that whiffed on the key block in sb 36 that led to the capt. kurt int. for the td.

general counsel

[Curly Horns]

Ferter, correct me if i am wrong, but i thought it was rod jones that whiffed on the key block in sb 36 that led to the capt. kurt int. for the td.

general counsel

My bad gc, it was jones and you might as well add conwell, because he was lined up outiside of jones. There was some miscommunication between the two. Hell you would think if I was going to call a guy out I could at least get his name right....LOL

[Nick]

Bottom line is Bulger overthrew the ball by a few yards.

How is that even possible? A yard is three feet. I'm 5'10" and my arm is slightly over two feet from my shoulder to the tips of my fingers. Holt is an inch or two taller than me (ESPN.com) so I'd imagine he'd have a few inches on my arm span, but nothing significantly different. Yet Holt was able to get a hand on the ball.

If the ball was in fact "a few yards" overthrown, Torry wouldn't have even been able to touch it. Does Torry Holt have a 6-10 foot arm? Of course not. So how was this pass a few yards overthrown? At most, considering Holt's ability to actually field the pass with one hand, the ball was probably no more than a foot or two away from what could be called a perfectly placed pass.

It would be difficult, in my opinion, to ask any QB to make that throw at that distance, much less a guy who hasn't even spent an offseason regimen perfecting his timing with the first unit.

[Nick]

What a surprise.

Almost as surprising as your endless criticism of our starting QB, eh?

I wouldn't think it would have had to be a huge adjustment because it was a fairly accurate pass by Bulger, right???

Make up your mind. You're now referring to a completely different scenario.

Your saying Holt's adjustment wouldn't have been a big one based on Bulger's throw, yet we're talking about a "What if" situation in which the throw was underthrown. Thus, you can't compare Holt's adjustment to the real throw -- as you seem to be doing -- but rather should be comparing it to the hypothetical, as I'm doing.

So, since the defender was "barreling down" on Holt (your words) then underthrowing the pass would have brought the guy closer to the play and made it a riskier attempt. By putting the ball in front of Holt, Bulger offers a better chance for success because he keeps the man in pursuit away from the ball and allows Torry alone to have a shot at a catch.

I'd like to see some reasoning behind why underthrowing the ball would have been (1) safer and (2) potentially more successful. Yes, it all worked out when Warner was hit in '34 and Bruce came back for the catch, but as I said, the position of the defender was entirely different. To use that as a reason as to how an underthrown ball would have been more successful here is a rather thin line of reasoning.

This is debatable.

Then debate it.

I believe there's a difference between criticizing and full-force bashing someone, and what I feel most of us are doing here is making a fair criticism of a specific play.

Apparently in your case, it's perfectly fine to call out Bulger on numerous problems you see, but the second someone criticizes Holt for a drop in a big game, we're bashing him. Go figure. :bored:

[Curly Horns]

How is that even possible? A yard is three feet. I'm 5'10" and my arm is slightly over two feet from my shoulder to the tips of my fingers. Holt is an inch or two taller than me (ESPN.com) so I'd imagine he'd have a few inches on my arm span, but nothing significantly different. Yet Holt was able to get a hand on the ball.

If the ball was in fact "a few yards" overthrown, Torry wouldn't have even been able to touch it. Does Torry Holt have a 6-10 foot arm? Of course not. So how was this pass a few yards overthrown? At most, considering Holt's ability to actually field the pass with one hand, the ball was probably no more than a foot or two away from what could be called a perfectly placed pass.

It would be difficult, in my opinion, to ask any QB to make that throw at that distance, much less a guy who hasn't even spent an offseason regimen perfecting his timing with the first unit.

Bottom line is Bulger overthrew the ball by a few yards. Holt did everything he could do to catch the pass. Diving or leaving his feet would not have helped in this case. He was running full speed and kicked it in just to stretch as far as he possibly could and snag it out of the air with one hand. He almost caught it, however, it was still a very difficult pass to catch. The timing was just not perfect and Bulger threw the ball a few yards to deep.

[Nick]

Well, I guess copying and pasting the same thing over again is supposed to clear something up? I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to imply though. Are you trying to say that Holt made up for Bulger's overthrow by increasing his speed to cover the distance to the ball?

That's interesting, because yesterday after watching the tape, this is what you said, Ferter: "He may slighty adjust his running speed, if so, it is not highly detectable in full speed replay and not at all noticeable in slow mo. He appears to be going full speed with minimal adjustments if any."

So yesterday, after reviewing the tape, your conclusion was that you couldn't see any real adjustment in what Holt was doing. But now, you're claiming Holt apparently "kicked it in" just to get to the ball, something that you yourself said was minimal if it even occured. It's interesting how "may slightly adjust his speed" turns into him "kicking it in" after a day of debate. Hmmmmm.

I think the real "bottom line" is this: Holt's running a fly pattern and was supposed to be going full speed in order to get down the field. Bulger threw the ball 50-yards in the air and delivered it not only in front of his receiver (so the defender was kept out of the play) but within arm's reach of Holt, whom you yourself say "certainly should have caught that ball." Holt got a hand on it and nearly made the grab, but we all know the result.

It's amazing to think of how much moaning has been heard about Bulger's long ball, and then in this situation where he delivers a very catchable pass, a pass that his receiver not only got a hand on but was able to bring in toward his body, it's still not good enough. For some people, I've come to believe it really never will be. :sad:

[general counsel]

I am not saying this is fair, but unless and until bulger wins a super bowl, i believe that there will be some fans that never give him credit for what he does are are very quick to blame him for what goes wrong. I am not saying this is the case for people on this board since the fans on this board in my opinion are about 1000x more observant and football savy than the average fans, but i think it is the case. it is part of the burden of the monkey of captain kurt on his back from the perspective of many fans.

That being said, i will tell you that in my opinion, the ball was overthrown. One of the things that isnt being discussed here is that there was no defender in bulgers face when he threw the ball if i remember it correctly. If i have that wrong, please correct me. The play fake was perfect. He was not hit as he threw. There was no pass rusher chasing him or even threatening to hit him.

I am a supporter of bulger, but with a receiver that open and no one in his face, the throw has to be better. It would have been a great catch by holt, and i still think he should have had it, but despite the distance, without a guy in his face, bulger has to be more on target given how open holt was. he did not have to thread the needle between either a safety and a corner, nor did he have a corner even within a step and a half of holt.

We are not talkiing about a run of the mill play in a run of the mill game or game situation. We are talking 4th quarter of a playoff game, and to win a title, plays like that have to get made and opportunities like that are very tough to miss.

This seems to be one of our more spirited football related debates in a while.

ramming speed to all

general counsel