OT: Other Sports aka CSU Football Thread XX

[JoemAvs]

well the NFL is saying the Pats offense yesterday was legal.

Get ready for a floodgate of copycats, and eventually we'll move to a lineup of 4 TE's, 4 WR's, 2 RB's and 1 QB on the field.

This is going to destroy the game. I'm a purist that's pissed. If I wanted to see a bunch of skinny fast dudes throwing around the football to each other I'd just watch Aussie 7's. That game already exists.

I always wondered why teams don't do that tbh.

But I agree that it might be potentially disastrous.
Still. Why hasn't that been tried before?
It obviously was not against the rules and it gives you a huge advantage.

 

[AdamCalderHero]

As a relative newcomer to the NFL (ive watched my fair share of games but dont know the intricacies) what was it that the pats did differently? Did they run with less linemen?

 

[Bonzai12]

yeah they trotted out more WR's and less offensive lineman. Then they declared some of them ineligible to be receivers, while some guys were eligible (they basically made some WR's into offensive lineman or decoy on the plays). It confused the defense and the argument is that the officials did not allow the Ravens to know who was eligible and who wasn't.

I don't know all the details of the rulebook, but the conversation is usually between the offense and the officials when declaring the ineligibles/elgibles. If it's a good official he will usually get on the loud speaker and say who is ineligible (at least they used to do that a couple years back). I don't know if it's deception or not, but it's definitely NE trying to find every single hole in the rule book they can to win.

 

[JoemAvs]

yeah they trotted out more WR's and less offensive lineman. Then they declared some of them ineligible to be receivers, while some guys were eligible (they basically made some WR's into offensive lineman or decoy on the plays). It confused the defense and the argument is that the officials did not allow the Ravens to know who was eligible and who wasn't.

I don't know all the details of the rulebook, but the conversation is usually between the offense and the officials when declaring the ineligibles/elgibles. If it's a good official he will usually get on the loud speaker and say who is ineligible (at least they used to do that a couple years back). I don't know if it's deception or not, but it's definitely NE trying to find every single hole in the rule book they can to win.

Even if they announce loudly it has to be crazy confusing for the defense.
They probably have 5-10 seconds max after the announcement before the snap.
Try re-adjusting your defense during that timeframe.
Odds are that it leads to confusion and blown coverages anyways.

 

[RockLobster]

yeah they trotted out more WR's and less offensive lineman. Then they declared some of them ineligible to be receivers, while some guys were eligible (they basically made some WR's into offensive lineman or decoy on the plays). It confused the defense and the argument is that the officials did not allow the Ravens to know who was eligible and who wasn't.

I don't know all the details of the rulebook, but the conversation is usually between the offense and the officials when declaring the ineligibles/elgibles. If it's a good official he will usually get on the loud speaker and say who is ineligible (at least they used to do that a couple years back). I don't know if it's deception or not, but it's definitely NE trying to find every single hole in the rule book they can to win.

Good coaches use the rules to their advantage. If there's nothing in the rulebook that states that the opposing team be given time to ID who is/isn't an eligible receiver, then it's not "deception" (which is what Harbaugh was going on about last night) and it's not illegal. This is what he was saying last night:

"We wanted an opportunity to be able to ID who the eligible players were," Harbaugh said. "What [the Patriots] were doing was they announce the ineligible player and then Tom [Brady] would take them to the line right away and snap the ball before we had a chance to figure out who was lined up where. That was the deception part of it. It was clearly deception."

I guess Harbaugh would also like the league to change the rules and allow the opportunity to review an opponents Offensive playbook before every game as well--I mean they need to figure out who is lined up where and what to do. Not showing your playbook is deception! (sarcasm)

So Brady is supposed to stand around and wait for the Defense to figure out their scheme? Screw that noise. If that were the case then we wouldn't have No-Huddle offense as well. The camera went back and replayed one of these plays, and it was pretty clear (at least to this viewer) that Vereen reported himself ineligible--maybe his players weren't paying attention.

John is trying to find excuses for why his team lost, why not look at his self-proclaimed "Best QB in the NFL" Joe Flacco?

 

[Hasbro]

well the NFL is saying the Pats offense yesterday was legal.

Get ready for a floodgate of copycats, and eventually we'll move to a lineup of 4 TE's, 4 WR's, 2 RB's and 1 QB on the field.

This is going to destroy the game. I'm a purist that's pissed. If I wanted to see a bunch of skinny fast dudes throwing around the football to each other I'd just watch Aussie 7's. That game already exists.

They'll have a rule change like they did after Cincy used that trick with No Huddles in the 90's.

 

[tigervixxxen]

As a relative newcomer to the NFL (ive watched my fair share of games but dont know the intricacies) what was it that the pats did differently? Did they run with less linemen?

I didn't watch the game that closely so I need an explanation too.

It wouldn't work in the long run because usually you need linemen for a reason.

 

[Bonzai12]

They'll have a rule change like they did after Cincy used that trick with No Huddles in the 90's.

I hope so - basically they went with 4 OL.

I guess people could see this coming for a long time though. The move towards the athletic TE and blocking WR has already happened. Now the Pats are trying to dual purpose even more players on the field (the OL positions).

I guess some could see this as progressive, but maybe I'm just getting older and don't want to see the change. I still like the running game and defense in the NFL. I'm getting really tired of all these pass offenses. As a guy who played CB in high school I think it's absurd how badly the balance of calls are against the offense. If a DB commits pass interference, it's automatic first down. Holding, automatic first down. Illegal contact, automatic first down...the list goes on and on and on....For the defense I think there's a total of 2 penalties that are loss of down. I wish that would change and balance out more. If the offense does anything wrong, it's back up the ball a little bit and let the offense try again. For the defense any penalty call is a complete back breaker in yardage and usually first down. It's so freaking demoralizing of a balance for the defense that I honestly can't see why any player would want to play on that side of the ball anymore.

 

[tigervixxxen]

It's certainly going to be old school football when 3/4 of the league's decent QBs retire and only Luck and Rodgers are the good ones around. Nobody sees this as a problem where colleges don't develop pocket passers anymore.

 

[AdamCalderHero]

So just to clear this up, is there a rule that you must have at least 5 ineligible players on your offence? Ive seen occasions where you bring in an extra o-linemen (usually close to the goal line or 3rd/4th and short) and the offence runs play action and an o-linemen catches a ball. I guess this is something similar except its the opposite.

 

[Hasbro]

28th anniversary of the drive today.

 

[Hasbro]

So just to clear this up, is there a rule that you must have at least 5 ineligible players on your offence? Ive seen occasions where you bring in an extra o-linemen (usually close to the goal line or 3rd/4th and short) and the offence runs play action and an o-linemen catches a ball. I guess this is something similar except its the opposite.

And he has to report to the ref as an eligible receiver, which is then announced.

 

[LieutenantDangle]

Big day for the guys in Orange. Hope they can pull this one off.
I'm gonna be rocking my von miller jersey all day win or lose. Might even wear it at my hockey game

 

[ABasin]

well the NFL is saying the Pats offense yesterday was legal.

Get ready for a floodgate of copycats, and eventually we'll move to a lineup of 4 TE's, 4 WR's, 2 RB's and 1 QB on the field.

I'm not concerned, really. Any more than I was with the wildcat.

If offenses start putting RBs on the offensive line, it shouldn't take too long for DEs to blow them up and get a free pass to the QB. If I saw that play correctly, the only reason it worked, is that Baltimore covered Vereen as if he were eligible, when he wasn't. If the DE opposite him simply blew him aside on the way to the QB, this wouldn't even be a discussion. If defenses see this more regularly, they won't be tricked by it, and it'll actually turn into a detriment to the offenses running it. IMO, it won't ever be any more a part of football than a fake punt or field goal.

Nice 2nd half by NE last night.

 

[Skip2myBordyloo]

Broncos just don't have the gas to win it all.

 

[tigervixxxen]

If the Cowboys don't win this I'd get worried. History GREATLY favors one upset per round. All 1/2s next week is NOT happening.

 

[Pokecheque]

well the NFL is saying the Pats offense yesterday was legal.

Get ready for a floodgate of copycats, and eventually we'll move to a lineup of 4 TE's, 4 WR's, 2 RB's and 1 QB on the field.

This is going to destroy the game. I'm a purist that's pissed. If I wanted to see a bunch of skinny fast dudes throwing around the football to each other I'd just watch Aussie 7's. That game already exists.

I doubt that'll happen anymore than seeing a defensive end drop back into coverage to fool the QB into throwing a pick.

 

[JoemAvs]

If the Cowboys don't win this I'd get worried. History GREATLY favors one upset per round. All 1/2s next week is NOT happening.

I am sorry for you guys but I really don't want to see the Seahawks and Cowboys determining the Patriots opponent.

I doubt that Peyton beats the Patriots in Foxborough and even if he does I really don't want to see you guys slaughtered against the Seahawks again.

Sorry .


Go Packers!


What a call! Karma for last week?

Kind of disagree with it (or atleast the rule).

 

[tigervixxxen]

Look at history. I've been calling it for over 10 years. There's only been two SB 1vs1 in a long time. I'm not sure if there has been 1/2 vs 1/2 much either.

 

[JoemAvs]

Look at history. I've been calling it for over 10 years.

. I agree with you.

Was talking about the incredible catch by Dez that got overturned by the refs after a challenge by McCarthy.

I agree with you.
Odds are very high that either the Packers somehow manage to blow this one or that Luck goes to Denver and defeats his predecessor on his way to establish the start of his legend (really think he will end up as one of the best if not the best when he hangs it up).

 

[Bonzai12]

Atmosphere is awesome in the stadium. Let's do this!

 

[hockeyfish]

As a Packers fan, we finally get retribution for that damned Seahawks B.S. touchdown whatever one or two years ago. Still steaming from that, can't even remember when it happened.

 

[RockLobster]

LOL.

Skip Bayless is going ape s**t on Twitter.

That POS is the scourge of Sports Reporting...I actually wouldn't even call what he does "sports reporting". He's nothing more than a sensationalist.

 

[hockeyfish]

LOL.

Skip Bayless is going ape s**t on Twitter.

That POS is the scourge of Sports Reporting...I actually wouldn't even call what he does "sports reporting". He's nothing more than a sensationalist.

I didn't even know he was still around. Also, why are you following him?

 

[RockLobster]

I didn't even know he was still around. Also, why are you following him?

Oh, make no mistake, I am NOT following him. I saw someone mention that Bayless was going off so I checked it out myself.

Bayless is lower than pond scum in my book.