On the off-chance you're not already sick of it, I enjoyed this particular article regarding the Dez Bryant catch/incompletion. There's some irreverence and derision, of course, but also some links to other takes. And it's clear just how nebulous this whole thing really is.
Here's the article. I admit that earlier, I was left with only the thought that although it's a stupid rule, it was called correctly. A receiver going to the ground has to maintain possession of the ball, Bryant didn't, so it was incomplete.
But if Bryant had already caught it, and was then in the process of making a football move -- say, stretching the ball for the goal line -- and then fumbled, he could be said to have caught the ball and been down by contact, so the actual fumble would have been after the play was over. That's the nebulous area. Had he caught the ball and proceeded to make the so-called football move, or was he still in the process of catching it?
I guess to a certain extent, I enjoy it when the NFL has rules which leave too much to interpretation and debate, since these are things they should anticipate before they happen, and they don't, and so stuff like this happens. And when it happens in the final minutes of a playoff game between the Packers and Cowboys that everyone is watching, well, the NFL gets what they deserve.
Of course, football fans and the Cowboys didn't deserve any of this. Or the Packers, who might very well have driven the field for the win even if Dallas scored there.
What controversial rules will come to light in the conference championship games this weekend? I can hardly wait.