|
Trin Tragula posted:A quarterback is considered defenseless at any time after a change of possession, as is a kicker during the kick and any return. The rule is there to make it easier for guys with no backbone to eject players who go "awesome, an interception, I'm gonna go take a cheap shot on the QB now"; but if the QB (or kicker) goes full-speed towards the ballcarrier and is then hit by an opponent above the shoulders or using the opponent's helmet, that's a targeting foul. Block that QB shoulder to chest, that's okay because the QB has involved himself in the play. Wonder when this rule changed - would have caused a penalty during the Bounty Bowl.
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:A quarterback is considered defenseless at any time after a change of possession, as is a kicker during the kick and any return. The rule is there to make it easier for guys with no backbone to eject players who go "awesome, an interception, I'm gonna go take a cheap shot on the QB now"; but if the QB (or kicker) goes full-speed towards the ballcarrier and is then hit by an opponent above the shoulders or using the opponent's helmet, that's a targeting foul. Block that QB shoulder to chest, that's okay because the QB has involved himself in the play. I'm legally required to post this as a term of my parole /cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4078736/qbhit.0.gif)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Thermos H Christ posted:I'm legally required to post this as a term of my parole 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Is there going to be a TFF Secret Santa this year?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Every time I see him sit up and totter hear the sound of R2-D2 falling over in my head
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:depending on how much you like the previously working class thing the Steelers logo is actually the same as US Steel (or at least used to be, I have no idea if they've changed), which once was the biggest thing in the world in Pittsburgh before the industry fell apart. The Steelmark is owned by the American Iron and Steel Institute and is supposed to be a marketing logo for steel as a material. Republic Steel in Cleveland(!) gave the Steelers the idea to put it on their helmets. For trademarking reasons, the Steelmark has an orange astroid and the Steelers logo has a red one. When I was a kid, we had a vacuum cleaner with a steel body that had the Steelmark on it and I often wondered where my mom found a Steelers vacuum. You may notice I called it a vacuum cleaner and that I use it to vacuum the carpet, not a "sweeper" that I "run" to "redd up" because my parents worked very hard to make me not a yinzer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Hijo Del Helmsley posted:Is there going to be a TFF Secret Santa this year? I hope so. SAS secret Santa is the best thing. Last year Fiz got me a LeSean McCoy jersey and then he got traded. So if Fiz has you, watch out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:18
|
|
|
Since there's no rules thread: Does anybody have any idea why the official might have put it back in his pants on this fair catch? I wasn't actually watching the game, I only saw that gif, so I don't have any more context.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Because it was a shitass garbage call is why Notice TWO Seahawks think it's a late hit there And the ref was blowing the play dead Edit: Three Seahawks thought it was a late hit Spoeank fucked around with this message at 07:34 on Oct 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:Since there's no rules thread: Does anybody have any idea why the official might have put it back in his pants on this fair catch? I wasn't actually watching the game, I only saw that gif, so I don't have any more context. For whatever reason he decided there wasn't enough contact to merit a flag. In other words Spoeank posted:it was a shitass garbage call is why
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:Since there's no rules thread: Does anybody have any idea why the official might have put it back in his pants on this fair catch? I wasn't actually watching the game, I only saw that gif, so I don't have any more context. If this is a potential late hit out of bounds, this is a great change of mind; the defender realises at the last moment that he's come in late and does everything possible to mitigate the contact that he's already made (which isn't that hard to begin with), he holds the runner up off the ground, he's not hopping up and down about "I hit you, I hit you", he does everything right, sure, that's not worth 15 yards. Unfortunately this is not a potential late hit out of bounds, this is a fair catch; you do not touch players who have made a fair catch signal, there is forcible contact, this is a foul. The only thing I can possibly think of is that might make this a reasonable thing to do is if there were a seriously late whistle that fooled the gunner into thinking "I gotta hit him in case they're going to let this play run" (which has been known to happen), he eases up as soon as he hears the whistle, and the B was then thinking "no, I created that situation with the late whistle, I'm not going to charge him 15 yards for my gently caress-up". If we can get a video with sound, that'd settle it; but this is also me scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard for an explanation that isn't "Dude, way to blow your playoff chances this year".
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 12:14
|
|
|
This isn't worth a thread and there doesn't seem to be a better place to ask this, so I'll ask this here... For football podcasts I had been listening to the Grantland NFL podcast and Doug Farrar & Greg Cosell's Chalk Talk podcast. Neither has updated for a while. The Grantland one is suspended, I guess. Chalk Talk appears to have died after week 3 as the guys have other more important things to do. I enjoyed the podcasts because they provided greater depth into football than typically found elsewhere. So what podcasts can I listen to now to hear people discussing lineman and coverage schemes?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
I have a question that I didn't know that there was a thread to post about in on SA. Last week in the Philly vs Giants game there was this interception:3rd&3 at NYG 23 (0:11) Sam Bradford pass intended for Zach Ertz INTERCEPTED by Landon Collins. No return. Touchback. in the end zone that I didn't get as a interception. Everyone has seen those plays where the offensive player pins the ball against the back of the defender, using his body as an extension of theirs, and get called for a completion. The only difference with this pass and called interception is that the defensive player was face to ball. A the end of the video posted there is an angle that clearly shows that Ertz has his hands around the ball underneath Collins when they come to the ground, however as the play continues Collins comes off the ground with the ball. My question through this is why? Why was this an interception when the offensive player pins the ball against the front of a defensive player facing away not the back face guarding? http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000561515/Landon-Collins-makes-diving-grab-for-first-career-INT
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
CanUSayGym posted:I have a question that I didn't know that there was a thread to post about in on SA. Because Collins clearly had control of the ball. It was not a shared possession situation. He had the ball on his stomach with his arms wrapped around it. The receiver made a weak attempt to knock the ball away, but never had more than a hand on it. If the roles had been reversed, it would have been an uncontroversial reception.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
CanUSayGym posted:At the end of the video posted there is an angle that clearly shows that Ertz has his hands around the ball underneath Collins when they come to the ground, however as the play continues Collins comes off the ground with the ball. My question through this is why? Hmmm. You're right, this is a far more interesting play than it appeared at first look. The killer angle to watch here is the one beginning at 30 seconds (I nearly didn't bother going that long, because at first look it seems like an interception most of the way, which the defender nearly blows at the end but then gets the ball back.) We can quite clearly see from this angle (and from this angle only) that the first player to gain control of the ball is A86 (Ertz), which he does by clamping the ball against B21's (Collins) helmet.  Although B21 subsequently puts his own hands on the ball, this no longer matters.  A86 has established control first. If this control continues all the way through the ground, he's going to get the catch. To deny it to him, B21 has to somehow cause him to lose control.  They hit the ground and bounce; A86 loses one of his hands but appears to maintain control with the other as B21 really begins working on the football, and then the broadcaster annoyingly cuts away from that killer angle before the critical moment. What then happens (but not clearly enough for further screencaps from other angles to be of any use) is that right as their momentum ends (and you're splitting hairs to be able to tell whether it's just before or just after), B21 rips the ball away, regathers it before it hits the ground, and is awarded the catch. So there's your answer; A86 did not complete the process of the catch to the covering official's satisfaction before he had the ball taken off him. In a situation like this, what I would be looking for to award A86 possession (and assuming that I'd correctly identified that he got control of the ball first and then maintained it, which is by no means a certainty; this would be seriously difficult to process everything first time) is for both players' momentum to stop and then to count off "1 mississippi" or "show me the ball" with A86 still in control. If the ball's taken off him before I can count that beat, as appears to have happened, then I've got to err on the side of letting it run, even though he clearly deserves the catch on style points. TL;DR This is an extremely difficult call to process properly at full speed and the covering official may well just plain not have seen that A86 got control first and been thinking "this is an interception" through the process, but even if he did he's still probably going to arrive at an interception. Also: I would not expect replay to overturn this, and I would not have been surprised if replay had overturned it from touchdown to interception; at the same time I also wouldn't have been surprised if replay had said the ruling stands for insufficient evidence to overturn, regardless of what the ruling on the field actually was. (I would be surprised if it was overturned from interception to touchdown.) Sometimes, regardless of how you decide when a catch has been completed, you get edge cases where it's simply impossible to say "yes, this is clearly X", and this is one of them. It's a very, very interesting play!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Would weight classes be feasible and/or a good idea in football?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:Would weight classes be feasible and/or a good idea in football? Maybe flesh out your idea more so we can answer it. Weight class by league, by position, gross weight of team?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:Would weight classes be feasible and/or a good idea in football? You're not the first to consider it. The St. Louis Republic, February 05, 1905 quote:Jack Wilbur, coach of the Christian Brothers’ College, makes a novel suggestion toward eliminating mass play in football, although there is little likelihood of its being accepted. He says: 175 pounds average for a team seems pretty reasonable. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Kids leagues are often segmented by weight
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:You're not the first to consider it. They in fact did adopt this and it still exists today. I give you Sprint Football. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_football My problem with it, other than the fact that I'm a big ole fatty who used to play line in HS, is that people like my brother who is 6'8" and like 190 but very skinny couldn't play despite being very athletic. It limits the height of a lot of the guys the can recruit. drunk leprechaun fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Oct 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
That's a hilarious list of former players. A president, vice president, and some rappers!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
I'm trying to imagine Donald Rumsfeld lighting someone up over the middle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:I'm trying to imagine Donald Rumsfeld lighting someone up over the middle. I see him more likely to call a play sending some other dude up the middle. Did I think there was a chance he'd get knocked out and fumble? Let me tell you, our intelligence told us they'd be in a zone defense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
drunk leprechaun posted:They in fact did adopt this and it still exists today. I give you Sprint Football. The only justifications for weight classes in sport are for handicapping (give the littler, weaker guys a chance to win something) or for safety reasons. Something like this seems totally at odds with everything the NFL is about, and If they did want to improve safety, they would change the rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
Not a direct football question, but could somebody please transcribe Michael Strahan's speech right in the beginning of this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOEIvXoZ1TE Not a native english speaker and can't find it on the internet. Edit: VVVVVVVVV Thanks guys! Mystic Stylez fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Nov 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
A lot of it is hard to hear, but I gave it a shot. "I'll tell you right now, baby, you got everybody watching. They ain't here for us, I've learned two things that bother me. One, most think we're just supposed to come out here and lay [indistinct]. And two, oh, the Giants are in the playoffs, they ain't got nothing to play for, rest their guys so they don't get murdered. They're in the playoffs too!" Then the music gets too loud, I can't hear the rest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
the [indistinct] part is somethin glike "we're supposed to just lay down and let them have this" but yeah the rest is unclear to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
My wife wants to watch a football game with me - specifically the Seahawks tomorrow. Her co-workers know all about the game, the team, etc. and wear Seahawks things on Fridays. I know next to nothing about football beyond most of the rules (as I played it a ton as a kid). We want to watch live, but that seems to require cable tv, which we don't have. Is there anything I can use with an apple tv and iPad combo to make this happen? It looks like even the NFL doesn't want this to work even if you pay them. Any search terms you can suggest or specific sites or whatever? I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not... edit: please don't suggest going out. We have an infant and no desire to be out even if that were not the case. Thanks! edit2: Looks like the game is on NBC - does that help me in any way? TreFitty fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Nov 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
TreFitty posted:My wife wants to watch a football game with me - specifically the Seahawks tomorrow. Her co-workers know all about the game, the team, etc. and wear Seahawks things on Fridays. I know next to nothing about football beyond most of the rules (as I played it a ton as a kid). We want to watch live, but that seems to require cable tv, which we don't have. Is there anything I can use with an apple tv and iPad combo to make this happen? It looks like even the NFL doesn't want this to work even if you pay them. Any search terms you can suggest or specific sites or whatever? I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not... Probably the easiest way is to get a digital antenna for your tv. There's a lot of good tv still being broadcast over the air. And if the game is on a national network, its likely to be there. Picture is really good too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
TreFitty posted:My wife wants to watch a football game with me - specifically the Seahawks tomorrow. Her co-workers know all about the game, the team, etc. and wear Seahawks things on Fridays. I know next to nothing about football beyond most of the rules (as I played it a ton as a kid). We want to watch live, but that seems to require cable tv, which we don't have. Is there anything I can use with an apple tv and iPad combo to make this happen? It looks like even the NFL doesn't want this to work even if you pay them. Any search terms you can suggest or specific sites or whatever? I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not... http://goatd.net/ Make sure your ad blockers are up to date.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
NBC also streams the game on their website if you can hook a laptop to the tv.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
What was the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty against Cincinnati at the end of the ARI-CIN game last night? I get that it has something to do with the defense calling out Palmer's cadence, but I don't understand what that means at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:What was the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty against Cincinnati at the end of the ARI-CIN game last night? I get that it has something to do with the defense calling out Palmer's cadence, but I don't understand what that means at all. Didn't see it, but the defense isn't allowed to shout out fake signals to confuse the offense and make them jump. Perhaps that was it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Yeah that's what it was, Peko supposedly yelled out what Palmer usually does to snap the ball.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
That makes sense. I was thinking he somehow knew the snap count and was alerting his teammates which didn't seem to me like it should be illegal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
The NCAA rule has better language to make it clearer what the rule's for:quote:No player shall use words or signals that disconcert opponents when they are preparing to put the ball in play. No player may call defensive signals that simulate the sound or cadence of (or otherwise interfere with) offensive starting signals. The equivalent NFL rule only has that first sentence. Fun fact: the NFL book says disconcerting signals is unsportsmanlike conduct, but the NCAA book has it as delay of game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Here's a hypothetical: The NFL has new PAT rules where a placekick is snapped from the 15 and a 2 point attempt is from the 2. What if a team lines up with a standard offense at the 2 but then the QB drop kicks the ball ala Flutie? What if they line up with a jumbo set and the QB drops to a knee before the snap, QB acts as holder and the RB kicks it through ala Chad Johnson in preseason that one time?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:Here's a hypothetical: The NFL has new PAT rules where a placekick is snapped from the 15 and a 2 point attempt is from the 2. What if a team lines up with a standard offense at the 2 but then the QB drop kicks the ball ala Flutie? What if they line up with a jumbo set and the QB drops to a knee before the snap, QB acts as holder and the RB kicks it through ala Chad Johnson in preseason that one time? If they try a kick from the 2 it's just a touchback and the conversion fails. No goal allowed from that distance. Offense has to specify what it's going to do when the ball is RFP, which determines where it's placed. They can't change their minds unless there's a penalty.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
How would a defensive penalty* affect the distance if it happened on the extra point field goal attempt if the offense decided to go for two after the penalty? *for the sake of argument we will say it is a presnap penalty like encroachment or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Cole posted:How would a defensive penalty* affect the distance if it happened on the extra point field goal attempt if the offense decided to go for two after the penalty?  They get to choose again. They can take the penalty from the 15 and kick, or take it from the 2 and run/pass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 06:11
|
|