NFL 2011 Week 3

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

Also, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Not exactly true.

Part of the mystique around the Immaculate Reception was always who it hit first before it deflected. At the time, if it had hit a Steelers player, then Harris couldn't have legally caught it as the rule at the time was only one offensive player could touch it. However as far as I know that hasn't been the rule for at least ten years.

TheGameguru wrote:
thejustinbot wrote:

I hope Vick does come back next week.

And gets hurt again.

So he can complain about the refs again.

Ad nauseum.

It wouldnt be an issue if the NFL didnt create this mess in the first place.. some NFL QB's (we all know WHO they are) are under protection and get flags if you even so much as look at them wrong.. then theres the rest of the guys who pretty much for the most part get treated like the old days unless its blatant

Doesn't make a player whining about it any better. And saying "I don't get the calls other QBs get" when only three QBs get those calls is more than a bit disingenuous.

So who is your team?

I grew up a Steelers fan and have some fond feelings towards them still but for the most part I'm a football fan and care more about good games than any one team.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
I'm watching the Bucs game. Did the NFL get rid of the rule against two off players touching a forward pass? Because the Bucs just did it.

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

The Immaculate Reception controversy.

The rule stated in pertinent part that once an offensive player touches a pass, he is the only offensive player eligible to catch the pass.

The rule I was thinking of was rescinded in 1978.

thejustinbot wrote:
MilkmanDanimal wrote:

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

Also, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Not exactly true.

Part of the mystique around the Immaculate Reception was always who it hit first before it deflected. At the time, if it had hit a Steelers player, then Harris couldn't have legally caught it as the rule at the time was only one offensive player could touch it. However as far as I know that hasn't been the rule for at least ten years.

You know, you're right, I recall that, but I just looked it up and that rule was changed in 1978. It's completely prior to the start of my football watching. I withdraw my objection, except for the fact that I know how old Glanton is and the rules been changed for pretty much his whole life. I blame him.

CptGlanton wrote:
MilkmanDanimal wrote:
I'm watching the Bucs game. Did the NFL get rid of the rule against two off players touching a forward pass? Because the Bucs just did it.

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

The Immaculate Reception controversy.

The rule stated in pertinent part that once an offensive player touches a pass, he is the only offensive player eligible to catch the pass.

The rule I was thinking of was rescinded in 1978.

Frenchy takes it to the grave!!

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
thejustinbot wrote:
MilkmanDanimal wrote:

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

Also, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Not exactly true.

Part of the mystique around the Immaculate Reception was always who it hit first before it deflected. At the time, if it had hit a Steelers player, then Harris couldn't have legally caught it as the rule at the time was only one offensive player could touch it. However as far as I know that hasn't been the rule for at least ten years.

You know, you're right, I recall that, but I just looked it up and that rule was changed in 1978. It's completely prior to the start of my football watching. I withdraw my objection, except for the fact that I know how old Glanton is and the rules been changed for pretty much his whole life. I blame him.

WELL I'M SORRY FOR NOT FOLLOWING NFL RULE CHANGES WHEN I WAS THREE.

Haha here's some (likely soon to be pulled) footage of the trick play.

The Packers punt - Devin Hester and all of the Bears (except Johnny Knox) act like the ball is going to one side of the field. The Packers watch the Bears as they obviously can't see the ball, and all go to the wrong side. Johnny Knox is the lone player on the side of the field the ball actually goes to and returns it for a touchdown. Unfortunately, it was called back for holding.

The Bears also started a play where the ball was snapped to Forte as the quarterback, but got called on a false start.

CptGlanton wrote:
MilkmanDanimal wrote:
thejustinbot wrote:
MilkmanDanimal wrote:

There's no such rule, nor has there even been. There are rules against double forward passes or ineligible receivers touching the ball first, but the ball can carom off one offensive player and to another and it's a perfectly valid (if incredibly lucky) play.

Also, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Not exactly true.

Part of the mystique around the Immaculate Reception was always who it hit first before it deflected. At the time, if it had hit a Steelers player, then Harris couldn't have legally caught it as the rule at the time was only one offensive player could touch it. However as far as I know that hasn't been the rule for at least ten years.

You know, you're right, I recall that, but I just looked it up and that rule was changed in 1978. It's completely prior to the start of my football watching. I withdraw my objection, except for the fact that I know how old Glanton is and the rules been changed for pretty much his whole life. I blame him.

WELL I'M SORRY FOR NOT FOLLOWING NFL RULE CHANGES WHEN I WAS THREE.

See, totally your fault. Also, get offa my lawn, youngster.

Sources believe Kenny Britt has a torn MCL and possibly his ACL, xray tomorrow.

f*ck.

Gumbie wrote:

Sources believe Kenny Britt has a torn MCL and possibly his ACL, xray tomorrow.

f*ck.

At least Nate Washington had a good game.

Hasselbeck is playing surprisingly well. My Seahawks fan brother-in-law is giddy to see him doing well.

However, what is up with Chris Johnson?

Michael wrote:

Haha here's some (likely soon to be pulled) footage of the trick play.

Higher quality and unlikely to be pulled.

Grumpicus wrote:
Michael wrote:

Haha here's some (likely soon to be pulled) footage of the trick play.

Higher quality and unlikely to be pulled.

The hold was questionable, but that will likely open up running lanes for Hester going forward as other teams are forced to acknowledge the possibility of another fake. It might not have payed dividends today (thank goodness), but it very well may pay off in the future.

thejustinbot wrote:

Hasselbeck is playing surprisingly well. My Seahawks fan brother-in-law is giddy to see him doing well.

However, what is up with Chris Johnson?

Johnson looks slow and isn't hit holes with authority. I kind of expected this, which is why I passed on him in a draft. He may turn it on eventually, but right now he just doesn't seem ready to play.

Oh, and teams are keying off of him in order to stop him from running for 98 yards on one play.

Hasselback is playin really well. Props to the old guy.

I played Cedric Benson and Rashard Mendenhall this week over Daniel Thomas and Brandon Jacobs. Also Tony Gonzalez over Brandon Pettigrew.

I'm currently losing by 3.1 points.

Uuuuuuuunnnnnnnnggggg.

*On the other hand... I forgot I have the Steelers Defense. So I guess that worked out.

All I will say this time is hehe

Phishposer wrote:
Grumpicus wrote:
Michael wrote:

Haha here's some (likely soon to be pulled) footage of the trick play.

Higher quality and unlikely to be pulled.

The hold was questionable, but that will likely open up running lanes for Hester going forward as other teams are forced to acknowledge the possibility of another fake. It might not have payed dividends today (thank goodness), but it very well may pay off in the future.

I still haven't seen video evidence of any hold.

Psych wrote:
Phishposer wrote:
Grumpicus wrote:
Michael wrote:

Haha here's some (likely soon to be pulled) footage of the trick play.

Higher quality and unlikely to be pulled.

The hold was questionable, but that will likely open up running lanes for Hester going forward as other teams are forced to acknowledge the possibility of another fake. It might not have payed dividends today (thank goodness), but it very well may pay off in the future.

I still haven't seen video evidence of any hold.

Ditto here; I watched the video and couldn't see a hold anywhere on the field.

edit - I don't have a clue what the ref was looking at when he through that flag; there wasn't contact *anywhere* that I can see, let alone anywhere within probably 15 yards of where the flag landed.

editedit - Ok, the call was made against a player *NOT* on the field; even though the referee announced 21, it was actually against 29, and there isn't a #29. What a load of sh*t; those refs need fired and fined.

Woot. Panthers.

Well, that's one win. Probably their last win for a month or so. But we'll take it.

Boy, Newton was awful today. He wasn't dreadful -- he didn't make any stupid decisions that hurt him. But his passes were sailing as if the balls had jibs and a mizzen mast.

Gabbert, meanwhile, is ... well, let's say he and Jimmy Clausen probably had a lot to chat about after the game.

P.S. I know we all like to crap on Ben Russellfrussleburger. (I know I do.) But his heave to Mike Wallace last night was epic. That's about as good a long throw as you'll ever see. Credit where it's due.

AnimeJ wrote:

edit - I don't have a clue what the ref was looking at when he through that flag; there wasn't contact *anywhere* that I can see, let alone anywhere within probably 15 yards of where the flag landed.

editedit - Ok, the call was made against a player *NOT* on the field; even though the referee announced 21, it was actually against 29, and there isn't a #29. What a load of sh*t; those refs need fired and fined.

The hold was on the bottom on #35. You can see it seven seconds in at the 15 yard line.

I don't think you can evaluate Gabbert at all based on yesterday's game; I watched it just because the weather was so insanely bad it was fun to watch. It was ugly, but every game in that weather is ugly. The one really worrisome thing would be that he fumbled three snaps yesterday, which even a wet ball can't account for.

That end of half TD was loopy, though. Run everybody out on a Hail Mary except for Mike Thomas, who's all alone on the ten or so and catches an easy pass and powers into the end zone. Completely caught the Panthers off guard.

Enix wrote:

Gabbert, meanwhile, is ... well, let's say he and Jimmy Clausen probably had a lot to chat about after the game.

Gabbert had some painful issues with taking the snap from center. But besides that, all he did was put passes on target - many of which were subsequently dropped. The one bad pass I can point to is the lone interception thrown at the height of the monsoon. At no point was he bouncing passes off of defenders or really putting the ball anywhere but where it needed to go, or close to it (he's got a little work to do on the sideline throws - putting them where they can be caught, but a tad too far outside).

Or are you referring to protection? After two good games, the protection definitely broke down a bit this week. There's been some shuffling of the line, which I'm not so sure I am a fan of.

Gabbert was late on a few throws, but no more than I would expect from a rookie's first start.

Jacksonville needs to tailor the offense a bit to ease Gabbert's transition, as Carolina has for Newton.

Ditka came out in defense of Vick's complaining of the perceived "imbalance" in the rules towards protecting QB's. Ironically what was missed wasn't that Vick felt the ref's cost the Eagles the game.. since it didn't but that he is frustrated when he sees some defender glance at Brady's knee and draws 7 flags where he gets crushed and draws no flag.

I for one think the NFL should just scrap this rule completely and go back to the old way.. If you aren't going to protect every QB then protect none. Putting in MORE interpretation calls is just the wrong way to go here.

Jayhawker wrote:
AnimeJ wrote:

edit - I don't have a clue what the ref was looking at when he through that flag; there wasn't contact *anywhere* that I can see, let alone anywhere within probably 15 yards of where the flag landed.

editedit - Ok, the call was made against a player *NOT* on the field; even though the referee announced 21, it was actually against 29, and there isn't a #29. What a load of sh*t; those refs need fired and fined.

The hold was on the bottom on #35. You can see it seven seconds in at the 15 yard line.

At the bottom of the screen? I'm not convinced that was a hold as much as two people who weren't trying to do anything.

Psych wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
AnimeJ wrote:

edit - I don't have a clue what the ref was looking at when he through that flag; there wasn't contact *anywhere* that I can see, let alone anywhere within probably 15 yards of where the flag landed.

editedit - Ok, the call was made against a player *NOT* on the field; even though the referee announced 21, it was actually against 29, and there isn't a #29. What a load of sh*t; those refs need fired and fined.

The hold was on the bottom on #35. You can see it seven seconds in at the 15 yard line.

At the bottom of the screen? I'm not convinced that was a hold as much as two people who weren't trying to do anything.

But I would not call for a referee to be fined or fired for calling that a hold. There was another one just after that more to the center of the screen, but the commentator called the flag right after that first one, and he said it was inside the 20. It fits.

And refs get the wrong numbers all of the time. That is not a big deal, at all.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

I don't think you can evaluate Gabbert at all based on yesterday's game; I watched it just because the weather was so insanely bad it was fun to watch. It was ugly, but every game in that weather is ugly. The one really worrisome thing would be that he fumbled three snaps yesterday, which even a wet ball can't account for.

No, it's definitely more of a college-shotgun-QB-under-center issue than a wet ball one. He didn't fumble any snaps in the preseason, but things are different when the game is real.

Jacksonville should follow Carolina's lead on the QB development front. Both teams are built to pound the rock, but Carolina is practically running a college spread offense for Newton. It's certainly helping with his transition, although he was woefully off-target Sunday. Jacksonville ought to similarly loosen the grip on their offensive identity and run something more in line with what Gabbert is used to. For now, at least. At this point, I'm far more concerned with developing a franchise QB than winning in 2011. And if Gabbert can indeed become that guy, let's find out now.

That end of half TD was loopy, though. Run everybody out on a Hail Mary except for Mike Thomas, who's all alone on the ten or so and catches an easy pass and powers into the end zone. Completely caught the Panthers off guard.

You could tell it was a designed play intended to work exactly as it did, as tight end Zach Miller was throwing a block as soon as the ball reached Thomas - almost too soon. If he had blocked even a hair sooner, it would have been flaggable.

I might have seen something in the first 5 seconds before the shot switched. Watch #42 of the Packers on the left side of the line. Here sure looks like he's having his jersey yanked on... which actually makes a bit more sense since refs are supposed to throw the flag in the general direction of the penalty and that one chucked it 15 yards up the field (in the general direction of the left side of the original line of scrimmage) instead of across (towards the bottom of the screen). The more I watch it, the more I'm convinced that that was the infraction.

*Legion* wrote:
Enix wrote:

Gabbert, meanwhile, is ... well, let's say he and Jimmy Clausen probably had a lot to chat about after the game.

Gabbert had some painful issues with taking the snap from center ... Or are you referring to protection? ... Gabbert was late on a few throws ...

And he gave up a safety. You forgot to mention that.

Gabbert may very well be the JAX QB of the future, but he sure didn't look like it Sunday. He reminded me an awful lot of Clausen 2010 -- live arm, not as accurate as he should have been, no receivers, poor pass protection (against Charles Johnson, some other guy, two rookie linemen and two backup linebackers, no less) and a problem dealing with the basics, such as taking the snap from center (one of Clausen's many problems last year) and knowing to throw the ball away when you're in your own freakin' end zone.

You're in for a long season, brother. I've been there. It sucks.

@MMD: I'm sorry you got stuck watching that game. If that hadn't have been the Panthers swimming around there, I would have turned it off and done something else.