Dallas Cowboys: 21 Months Later, Dez Still Caught It!

The Dallas Cowboys have long since put the painful memories that abruptly ended the 2014 season in the past. But for the record…Dez still caught it.

Tomorrow the Dallas Cowboys return to the scene of the crime. The place where the 2014 Cowboys’ NFC Championship hopes were stolen in one devastating and highly controversial moment. One second the Dallas Cowboys have seemingly set themselves up for certain victory, the next moment the game (and season) is over.

Sure, the Dallas Cowboys visited Lambeau last year in The Wasted Season of 2015. But as the name indicates, last season was pretty pointless. This season, the Cowboys have significant postseason hopes.

The last time we’ve had hopes this high was…well…21 months ago.

We’ve all heard it before – “get over it.” Whether it’s referring to that punk kid who stole your snack pack, the special someone who broke your heart, or the jackwagon who cut you off this morning, it’s generally good advice.

But sometimes it’s hard to move on. Sometimes it’s darn near impossible to move on. On that fateful January day in Green Bay, moving on wasn’t even an option. They say time heals all wounds. Well, I got news for you, “they” are idiots. Time ferments and festers. It doesn’t heal. Vindication heals, vegence heels, penicillin heels, but time doesn’t do anything on its own.

Case in point: #DezCaughtIt is still alive and well.

More from Dallas Cowboys

• West coast, Texas coast, burnt toast: Cowboys don’t need more runs
• Brandin Cooks will change the way defenses play the Dallas Cowboys
• Why the Dallas Cowboys defensive X-Factor is EDGE Sam Williams
• Dallas Cowboys: 3 head coach options if McCarthy fails in 2023
• Dallas Cowboys: Is CB Jourdan Lewis a tradeable asset?

The Catch Rule

According to the NFL Rule Book, the Catch Rule is this:

"A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps."

At face value this seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation but it doesn’t take long to start finding the holes.

So first, he has to get two feet in bounds. Check.

Then, he needs to either be capable (that’s right, be “capable”. Not actually “do”) of avoiding or warding off contact, tucking the ball, turning up field, or taking additional steps. Check?

Not to completely rehash and dissect the play that wasn’t, but “the Catch Rule” that overturned what was clearly a catch, is no clearer today than it was 21 months ago. Step 2 of the catching process drips in subjectivity. That’s why so many people are passionately defending both sides of this. It’s all subjective, so in a way, both sides are right!

To make matters worse, the NFL’s vice president of officiating, Dean Blandino, tried offering his clarification, only further mucking up an otherwise obvious judgement.

"“This isn’t an all-inclusive list,” Blandino said. “Let’s say a player controls the ball and he stumbles for 10 yards and he doesn’t necessarily tuck the ball away. Well, I think at that point common sense would dictate that he had the ball long enough. But for the most part the player turned upfield and tucked the ball away and braced for contact, or he got hit prior to doing those things and the ball came out and was incomplete.”"

Great, Dean. So, not only is the catch criteria subjective, but you say “common sense” will trump any possible missed criteria.

Common Sense?

Then where is the common sense here? Whether it’s Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant, Larry Fitzgerald, or any of the other should-be simple calls, common sense evades. Perhaps we should call them “incomplete catches” because they are so clearly “catches” and only a poorly written/interpreted rule could make it “incomplete”.

As my grandad used to say, “just ‘cause you call a sheep a goat doesn’t make it a goat.”

And that, my friends, was a catch no matter what an official wants to mistakenly call it.

21 months and I’m still as mad today as I was then. 21 months and nothing has been done to remove some of the subjectivity from a completely ridiculous rule.

How about just sticking with two feet down with clear possession? I think we can all live with that ,and at the very least, it would lead to a little consistency from the officials. Naw, what am I thinking? That may reduce official reviews, leading to less commercial breaks, less commercials, and less NFL revenue. That certainly can’t happen!

For the record: I do not think the Dallas Cowboys would have won that game even if the catch had been ruled complete. The Green Bay Packers still would have had roughly four minutes on the clock and the Dallas Cowboys’ pass rush showed no signs of stepping up and stopping them.

Next: The Dallas Cowboys '214' Still Getting Better

Nope, this isn’t about being a sore loser because either way I think the Packers would have won. This is about a ridiculous interpretation of a ridiculous definition of a ridiculous process that voided a ridiculous (-ly awesome) catch. It abandons all common sense and that’s why I defiantly proclaim, #DezStillCaughtIt