|
I was talking to a guy who follows a bit of college football, and he mentioned rules against showboating. Do these exist in the NFL? Also what are the rules covering taunting and was it really such a severe issue that it required a 15 yard penalty?
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
e:poo poo, doublepost
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
The NFL has rules against excessive celebration / taunting which include: *Using props (including the ball) *Going to the ground in celebration outside of kneeing in prayer *Group celebrations *Spiking the ball in front of an opposing player *Actually taunting opposing players with words / actions. The NCAA has way way way more severe rules against excessive celebration, and the best thing I can recommend here is watch the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary: The U as to how those came about. The super short version is, old white people hate when black people do these things, so that's why those rules exist with such strict punishments. The longer version includes blah blah blah sportsmanship, blah blah blah, player safety, blah blah blah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
If slam dunking the ball over the goalposts is okay, then performing a full gymnastics routine on the bar should be just as kosher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Taunting is an issue, because if I knock you down and stand over you laughing at what I just did, your mates are likely to come after me and defend you from me being a dick to you, and that's how big-rear end fights happen. Discourage players from doing it with a major penalty (the NCAA also has a rule that anyone who commits two unsportsmanlike conduct fouls is automatically ejected), and suddenly those fights don't happen. It's not rocket science. Now, the NFL and NCAA both hate fun (because the rules are made by coaches, and fun and emotions get in the way of discipline and proper execution), so they've taken this principle and used it to very selectively and inconsistently ban a lot of things that aren't taunting, but look vaguely like taunting, and are also fun; but the basic principle that if you sack the quarterback and swing your nuts right over his head then you're going to eat a 15-yard USC is a sound one and it goes a really long way to keeping football about football. Taunting is also very distinct from what I like to call yakking, when there's two guys and they have a difference of opinion, and they both bullshit at each other for a little while and then split up. Yakking between two players who both want to go at each other isn't anything to worry about as long as the game itself is under control; but when a player goes after an opponent who isn't interested, or who can't yak back at him (usually because he's lying on his dick enjoying the pretty light show), that's where the flags start to come from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
The taunting does make sense in that regard, I have noticed a real lack of fights in american football compared to my native code(australian rules) so maybe those rules is part of the reason for that. The excessive celebration thing seems like absolute bullshit. I could understand if they had a time limit to get off the field/back to scrimmage after a touchdown or something, but not going to ground unless praying??? That is probably the most farcical loving rule I have come across in any sport ever. e:Is it allowed if I give a prayer to Thor which happens to look exactly like doing the worm or a spinneroonie?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
MonsterUnderYourBed posted:The excessive celebration thing seems like absolute bullshit. I could understand if they had a time limit to get off the field/back to scrimmage after a touchdown or something, but not going to ground unless praying??? I always wanted Rashard Mendenhall or someone to celebrate a touchdown with a Muslim prayer to see if it gets flagged
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
MonsterUnderYourBed posted:The taunting does make sense in that regard, I have noticed a real lack of fights in american football compared to my native code(australian rules) so maybe those rules is part of the reason for that. The sense I get from it is that the powers that be want the NFL to continue to look like a sporting event, not a derivative of professional wrestling. Anything that makes a travesty of the sport is frowned on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The sense I get from it is that the powers that be want the NFL to continue to look like a sporting event, not a derivative of professional wrestling. Anything that makes a travesty of the sport is frowned on. The most respected and popular sport in the world is defined by its celebrations. Players trademark that poo poo. If the NFL cared about their events having a veneer of integrity they would get NBC to quit playing loving Salsa music when Cruz scores a touchdown.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
MonsterUnderYourBed posted:The taunting does make sense in that regard, I have noticed a real lack of fights in american football compared to my native code(australian rules) so maybe those rules is part of the reason for that. The CFL has allowed ridiculous coordinated touchdown celebrations, and somehow everyone is still alive up there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeF8hsTebmE (apologies for the lovely music, but this video has The Bike).
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
R.D. Mangles posted:The CFL has allowed ridiculous coordinated touchdown celebrations, and somehow everyone is still alive up there. Legit. I look at celebrations in sports like playing Mortal Kombat. If you are going to beat me, you should at least have the courtesy to give me your coolest finisher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:Yeah but didn't Eli essentially do what VCD was talking about and refuse to play because the team was so awful? San Diego and New York were both 4-12 the year before that draft, it's not like Eli held out to go to some powerhouse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
What exactly are the during-game responsibilities of the various coordinators? I have heard commentators saying that the Offensive and Defensive coordinators are usually calling the plays and assignments, so what is the Head Coach usually doing during the game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:What exactly are the during-game responsibilities of the various coordinators? I have heard commentators saying that the Offensive and Defensive coordinators are usually calling the plays and assignments, so what is the Head Coach usually doing during the game? Head coach determines rotations and makes adjustments; also a head coach will typically call the plays on at least one side of the ball and have some oversight in that area. Really, it depends on the coach. E: Head coach is also typically speaking to the quarterback/middle linebacker through the radios in their helmets and will give them general feedback while a position coach may get into more specifics
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
Also the head coach almost always makes every decision in the game from the coaching staff. As in going for 2 points, going for it on 4th down, punting, calling trick plays, timeouts, challenges, what they're doing if they win the coin toss, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
Chilly McFreeze posted:If slam dunking the ball over the goalposts is okay, then performing a full gymnastics routine on the bar should be just as kosher.  I think that's the closest we'll ever get. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 07:26
|
|
|
So I was fantasizing about being sent back to the past and all the neat stuff I could do with my future knowledge and it got me thinking about football. If I get sent back a few decades in the past, how feasible would it be to terrorize the NFL with the West Coast offense a full 15 years before anyone ever even tried it (at the pro level at least)? I think finding the right personnel and getting them to play, dealing with people thinking you're a nut, as well as older rules that are restrictive to the passing game would all be obstacles but not insurmountable. Is there an ideal defensive/offensive scheme that a time-traveling HC could use to completely decimate the league? Would any NFL scheme from 1980 onwards do the trick? Would I destroy the fabric of space-time by introducing the Air Coryell during the 1960s? Other than my team's initial dominance, would it have any other effect besides just fast-fowarding the schematic attitudes of the NFL by 10-20 years? That last question is why part of me thinks this is a dumb hypothetical though. For example, if scheme A is introduced in 1990 and it takes the league by surprise, wouldn't it do just the exact same thing if you introduced in 1980? On the another hand, football schemes are so reactionary, and if scheme B is a reaction to scheme A and you follow down the alphabet that way, so you have a bunch of schemes reacting to each other like A - B - C - D - E, would you create a crazy alternate timeline if you just introduced E to the league before anyone thought of A? I feel like there's a strong chance it would simply leapfrog a certain period in the NFL's evolution with no other consequences (other than the disastrous butterfly effect you caused that ruined the rest of the world outside of the NFL, but that's a whole other discussion) . Or maybe you set off a chain of events that causes the NFL to suddenly turn into Super-Arena Metal Ball like that one scene of Starship Troopers? I realize this is a less a rookie question about basic NFL rules and really just a bizarre flight of fancy, but I needed to post this somewhere just to see if I'm being a weirdo nut for thinking about this so much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
I think part of what you'd run into is that football is a really complex game, with every player having a complicated series of reads and decisions to make on every play. Trying to introduce something radically different would screw up so many peoples' heads, trying to get their old habits out and develop new ones, that it would be an utter failure for quite a while. Evolutionary change is easier to deal with because it means small changes for everyone and is less total confusion. Probably the biggest difference you could make would be in transplanting modern training and conditioning regimens, along with improved injury treatments. Running a Single Wing in 1950 with today's players would be enough to blow everyone else away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Zone blitz wouldn't be around for 30 years so I say run and gun
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
I was going to say I'd try to implement the flexbone but it's pretty much a souped up veer so it wouldn't have been all that different back then The 46 defense might be an interesting choice to introduce early on the other side of the ball.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
When teams run off the field at the end of a half while there's still time on the game clock, has the defensive team ever called a timeout to be dicks? What would happen in that situation? The offense (or some form of it) have to hustle back to the field to snap the ball?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
JPrime posted:When teams run off the field at the end of a half while there's still time on the game clock, has the defensive team ever called a timeout to be dicks? What would happen in that situation? The offense (or some form of it) have to hustle back to the field to snap the ball? Yeah, there was a situation like that this season. Miami/FSU, I think. There was a penalty with about 5 seconds to go in the half. Ref declared a 10-second runoff and the half was over. Miami heads to the locker room. Meanwhile, Jimbo Fisher goes ballistic. He starts screaming at the ref that he had a timeout left that he wanted to use to avoid the runoff. "Oops," says the ref. So amidst all the turmoil, the ref goes out on the field, turns on his microphone, and corrects his mistake. Time is put back on the clock, FSU is charged with a timeout, and there is one more play to run. Miami has to get hustled back out of the locker room to defend this final play. Then FSU lines up and kicks a field goal as time expires for real. So yeah, teams will get called back out onto the field if they have to run one more play for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
I remember a game this year where the defending team had to fish their helmets out of a box on the sideline to go line up to stop an extra point. Maybe it was the packers/seahawks ridiculous game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Zorkon posted:I remember a game this year where the defending team had to fish their helmets out of a box on the sideline to go line up to stop an extra point. Yeah it was. I wouldn't have blamed them if they stayed in the locker room.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
I can't wait for the inevitable documentary on the strike
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:I can't wait for the inevitable documentary on the strike What strike?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 13:36
|
|
|
I don't want to poo poo all over the ND fake girlfriend thread but can someone tell me what the big deal is? It's the main headline at CNN and has a 2100-reply thread here in one day. I don't follow college football much and I read a few articles on it but I don't see why this is huge news.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
Notre Dame has a ton of fans around the country because of CATHOLICISM and their #1 star player was just made a gigantic fool of on an otherwise slow news day. He was duped into believing he had an Internet girlfriend, an experience that, as goons, I'm sure we all can relate to. Basically, it's a popular story because it's a popular story. If it'd been a less high profile player on a less high profile team it would've been page 3 sports section news.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
It's a big deal because the player involved in the story is the captain of the defense, Heisman Trophy runner up, and likely first round draft pick. Notre Dame knew about it as early as the end of December, and ESPN claims to have known but not run the story yet. That was before the National Championship Game, and the school sat on it. Notre Dame is also putting out the company line that Te'o was the victim of an elaborate hoax he knew nothing about, contrary to all the evidence. There is quite a lot of evidence that Te'o wasn't duped, but was in on the whole thing, and it's possible that his father was even part of it. The perpetrated hoax also has his fake girlfriend, who got into a life threatening car crash early in the year, dying of leukemia on the same day that his grandmother actually died. The underlying current of speculation on top of all the things that are definitely actually true, which need to be emphasized is just speculation, is that the reason he might have done it is he's gay and was covering that up. It's the holy trinity of prejudice with a Mormon man playing football at a Catholic school. Also the story is completely insane and there are only 3 more football games until August.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Knightmare posted:I don't want to poo poo all over the ND fake girlfriend thread but can someone tell me what the big deal is? It's the main headline at CNN and has a 2100-reply thread here in one day. Part of the Manti Te'o story that was told in the media all season long was how Te'o was "overcoming tragedy" from losing his grandmother and his girlfriend in a very short span, and how Te'o was playing inspired by their loss. Now it's come out that there was no dead girlfriend because there was no girlfriend, and it's still up in the air if Te'o was just a giant moron who got completely played or if he was in on the hoax all along (as the hoax was being perpetrated by someone who was a close friend of his, he's talked in the media about how she visited him, his parents have claimed to have phone conversations with her), or something in-between. thefncrow fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Jan 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
Rooster Brooster posted:Notre Dame has a ton of fans around the country because of CATHOLICISM and their #1 star player was just made a gigantic fool of on an otherwise slow news day. He was duped into believing he had an Internet girlfriend, an experience that, as goons, I'm sure we all can relate to. Basically, it's a popular story because it's a popular story. Its also because having grandmother and girlfriend dieing but he was able to pull himself together and play a very good game three days later was pretty much billed as Rudy: Part II.  He got quite a bit of national attention for it, which then rolled over into a lot of Heisman support and a nice narrative for several other awards that he won.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
I didn't see this talked about in the last few pages and I figure it's kind of old news but it came up with a buddy of mine so I figured I'd ask. Is there any reason to believe that Ray Lewis should have been found guilty of murder back when that whole situation happened? My buddy who hates the Ravens, and the Harbaughs was bringing this up the other day, saying that Lewis basically walked because he's such a big sports figure and that any one else would be doing time. He firmly believes Lewis committed murder and got away with it. Meanwhile my friend who's a Ravens fan, says Lewis was falsely accused and rightfully acquitted. Personally, everything I've seen of Lewis he seems like a decent guy. So, what's the deal here? Obviously both of my friends are biased here and I was looking for an outside look at Ray Lewis and that whole situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 13:19
|
|
|
In the 3rd Quarter of the AFC game, Ed Reed called for a fair catch, made the catch, and then a Patriots player made what sounded and looked like helmet to helmet contact. Is this just an example of referees being completely and utterly retarded in missing this, or is there some sort of rule where you're allowed to hit receivers on a fair catch?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 13:44
|
|
|
Reformed Pessimist posted:I didn't see this talked about in the last few pages and I figure it's kind of old news but it came up with a buddy of mine so I figured I'd ask. Is there any reason to believe that Ray Lewis should have been found guilty of murder back when that whole situation happened? Ray Lewis was an idiot and hung around with stupid friends who committed the murders. Ray was panicking and being really stupid and tried to cover everything up (destroying the suit) and keeping his mouth shut. He ended up ratting his friends out. Ray was found guilty of obstruction of justice. The lovely thing is Ray's friends were acquitted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Sour Diesel posted:The lovely thing is Ray's friends were acquitted. As I've heard it told, Ray Lewis was the key witness and the testimony he ended up giving was so useless that he basically ended up getting his friends off anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Reformed Pessimist posted:I didn't see this talked about in the last few pages and I figure it's kind of old news but it came up with a buddy of mine so I figured I'd ask. Is there any reason to believe that Ray Lewis should have been found guilty of murder back when that whole situation happened? Your buddy is a loving moron. Lewis was charged with murder because he was a sports star, not in spite of it. This was soon after OJ and some other athlete excesses, public opinion was against him from the start. The DA wanted to make a high-profile case to boost his career, at least that's the thought because there was zero evidence to convict Ray of anything other than having lovely friends and burning his suit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Ron Hitler-Barassi posted:In the 3rd Quarter of the AFC game, Ed Reed called for a fair catch, made the catch, and then a Patriots player made what sounded and looked like helmet to helmet contact. Is this just an example of referees being completely and utterly retarded in missing this, or is there some sort of rule where you're allowed to hit receivers on a fair catch? Anyone got a video of this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 12:35
|
|
|
It was incidental and Bill Leavy may in fact be retarded, yes
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Trin, I don't know who gave you that blue title, but it's certainly not warranted. Post more!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Anyone got a video of this? Can't find a video but if you find a game replay the snap for the punt in question is at 10:20 on the clock in the third.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 22:20
|
|