|
Victor Kiam and Doug Flutie pimp Remington shavers
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:25 |
|
|
MonsterUnderYourBed posted:In the Ravens - Giants game, a pass was ruled incomplete with the reasoning given that there was no second action. Can anyone explain what this means since I'd never heard the term before. In order to be considered in control of the ball, the rules state that the receiver must make a "football move" (whatever the hell that is) after catching it, so as to demonstrate that they themselves consider the ball caught and are now going to run, pivot, jump, or whatever to further progress the ball down the field. At that point, if the ball falls out of his hands, it's ruled a fumble and either team can recover. If, on the other hand, the player never makes this so-called "football move" with the ball, they have not demonstrated control of the ball and it is ruled instead as simply a dropped ball and therefore incomplete pass.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
Larch posted:So we have 'an act common to the game' which is then further defined parenthetically. Seems like a quibble, but to me 'an act common to the game' is different from 'a football move'. Somehow. So are you arguing that the "game" in question might actually be baseball, and therefore it might be interpreted as a "baseball move"? This is semantic nitpicking. "Football move" is a colloquialism used by announcers in explaining the rule, rather than spinning out the literal legalese of the official rule.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 04:47
|
|
|
MonsterUnderYourBed posted:What happens in the case of a player going down in the action of receiving, how is control determined if the player is unable to perform an act common to the game because they are already down? Is it a "feels right" combination of time ball is held and level of control exerted on the direction of the ball? He just has to maintain possession all the way to the ground in that case (without the ground helping him catch it). The "football move" clause is there to help refs distinguish between a catch and a fumble versus an incomplete pass.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 05:28
|
|
|
Larch posted:I'm saying that those words don't appear in the rulebook, and that other, slightly different words do appear. It's not a personal attack on you. I just think that greater understanding becomes more likely when the text of the actual rules is known. This greater understanding then leads to more useful discussion. No, I put "a football move" in quotes to indicate it was a euphemism. You're trying to pretend a difference exists when in fact there isn't any. Your quibbling over this is unworthy of a king.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 06:18
|
|
|
Vaya con Dios!!! posted:Thanks guys... I think some of that, at least, comes from looking at coverages when they get to the line and figuring out if there's a mismatch. A receiver who might be #2 or #3 on the checklist may become #1 when they see who's covering him. On-the-fly reads may be about reading zones. i.e. If the linebacker is covering you off the line, break in; if it's a cornerback, break out. Or if the corner is blitzing, run a different route to give the QB a dumpoff option. Things like that. There's only so much that can be handled pre-snap. Most plays have fail-safe options in case the defense comes out in a formation you didn't expect or do something off trend. Others probably have better interpretations of what's going on, but that's my understanding of it, anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:No, the exception is only if he's forced out by a foul by a defender. I've seen (b) called several times. Sometimes a receiver will step out of bounds while fighting for position with a defender and neither notices. He then gets called for illegal touching when he catches a pass.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:I'm arguing a pretty obscure point, which is that I don't think (b) can ever technically apply, because it looks like a receiver who goes out of bounds (unless illegally forced out) is automatically an ineligible receiver. So it's definitely a foul (and I think we've all seen it called before), it's just because of (a), not (b). I think von Metternich got it above. "Eligible receiver" means ends and backs who can otherwise legally catch a forward pass. If he steps out of bounds, he remains an eligible receiver based on the definition of the term - he's just not allowed to be the first one to touch the ball. If he became an ineligible receiver, then any receiver who steps out of bounds and continues his route would get flagged for "ineligible receiver downfield." Since that flag is not thrown, they must not be ineligible receivers.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
spidoman posted:Is an early preseason game (Seahawks at Chargers) worth spending money to attend? My limited knowledge of preseason play tells me no. That's a value judgment you'll have to make for yourself. On the one hand, it will be bad football played by the 3rd stringers and free agents trying to make the team. On the other hand it's football.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Benne posted:So in other words, it's totally random and two teams get stuck with 5 preseason games for no real reason. Got it. Fortunately, nobody watches it anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2013 06:10
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:1. Not definitively I don't think, you can probably figure out when the AFCE gets the NFCN next but it would depend on the previous year's finish. Actually, the Packers do have their own HoF so he could be inducted into it before the general Pro HoF.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 14:08
|
|
|
Blitz7x posted:How do casinos come up with the odds for bets? Do they have expert statisticians? Of course. The odds are always stacked so that the house inevitably wins in the long run. For betting on sporting events, the line is chosen based on public perception. The goal is to get equal amounts bet on both sides, so the losers pay the winners and the house cut means a profit regardless of who wins.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:This is kinda a dumb question but has there ever been a majorly successful punt defense? Like, in the sense of has anyone ever gotten back there and taken down the kicker? I always see it and kinda wonder what the purpose of it is other than maybe stopping a fake out? I'm not really sure what you're asking. Punts get blocked fairly regularly. Snaps get messed up and sometimes punters drop the ball. Thus, sending rushers is usually a good idea. The punter stands back so far so that he has time to catch the ball and kick it before the rushers get there under most circumstances. What do you mean by "punt defense" specifically?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
Febreeze posted:So I've always wondered this but where did the term "homer" like "Patriots homer" come from, exactly? TFF is the only place I've seen the term used and I always thought it had something to do with the Simpsons but never actually knew. I've always understood it to mean a guy who had tunnel-vision about his own club, and didn't really care about any other teams in the league or the players on them. Consequently, they tend to lapse into "my players are all awesome and yours all suck because they're not on my team." A normal Pats fan would be into the NFL in general and the Pats specifically is their favorite, but seeing them as a subset of a larger organiation. A homer would then a fan of the Pats only, and gently caress everyone else. Homer comes from the obsession with their home-town or home-team. That's how I've always understood it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2013 06:39
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:What do they do with the jerseys of cut players? I think they'd be too big for little children to wear. They go recruit a new player with the same name.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
k3nn posted:How much do superbowl tickets usually cost? Am I better off buying them early or waiting til the teams get decided? I'm planning to travel across to see it (as a UK-based Broncos fan this will be the first time I see my team play) but wondering what the cheapest way to attend it will be. StubHub says they have 563 tickets left for about $3000 each. VividSeats seems to have more, starting at $2500. Good luck.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Normally you should not have to expect anything beyond having fun. But since you are going to a Philly home game I would recommend bringing some kind of weapon for the half-time Thunderdome. Also, being in Philadelphia, batteries, rocks, and other small, hard projectiles stuffed in your pockets are not merely tolerated but encouraged.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:How come nobody ever does a fake fg/punt in the NFL? They're risky. The NFL, in particular, is dominated by risk-aversion in decisions. Coaches get fired frequently for trivial reasons, so high risk/high reward situations are avoided. Nobody ever loses their job for punting, but they will if they give up a winning touchdown after a fake punt gets stuffed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
Benne posted:I think he's talking about the return man kicking the ball. I don't know about the kicking stuff, but in Canadian football, a touchback costs you 1 point (a rouge). Since the score was tied, letting the ball die in the endzone would cost them the game. Hence, I guess their rules allow kicking the ball immediately on a catch to get it out. I don't think American rules have that. There is a fair catch free kick, but the catch has to be on the field of play (not the endzone) and play stops while the kick is set up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Any idea why the home team is allowed to have two more people in the bench area? Usually the wind direction is the biggest factor, or sometimes field conditions or the position of the sun.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:Here's a gif: Sideline interference would be the penalty. The refs can assess any compensation up to and including awarding a touchdown if it was severe enough. This has happened before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoCf3WqVyx4
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
GNU Order posted:The BCS rankings are a combination of coaches polls and computer rankings right? Nearly every school has an assistant of some stripe do the poll for them. I don't know of any coaches who consider it a productive use of their time on a Sunday.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
Insane Totoro posted:Okay so there was eight inches of snow today on the ground in the Eagles' stadium. Football plays in any conditions, other than active lightning.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
CobwebMustardseed posted:What does the phrase "standard down" mean? In what context? On the face of it, it would seem to apply to the usual downs used to advance the ball down the field, as opposed to the untimed downs for extra points.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
CobwebMustardseed posted:I was reading a breakdown of the Rose Bowl and it said that Stanford's offense does not play well on standard downs. Ah, he's using it in the sense of "non-urgent" downs, where there is not a necessity to gain a lot of yardage in a hurry, like 3rd and long. He essentially means downs when the playbook is wide open and the choice for what play to run is unconstrained. Both teams prefer to run the ball and only pass when it seems necessary, and do not do a lot of tricks or fakes. His point in the middle paragraph is that both teams are actually pretty good at passing when they want to be and either or both might open the game up more to try to surprise the other. Football Outsiders, where the stat comes from, says this about it: quote:Passing Downs are defined as:
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Here's a reason why NFL teams don't use shield punt: one of the major advantages it gives you is the ability to release players downfield into coverage a lot quicker and make the returner's life more difficult, because not everyone is trying to hold their blocks until the kick. You're looking for a couple of linemen to just chip a rusher and then get away into coverage, it doesn't matter about those couple of guys getting through the line because the shield deals with them, and that then lets your punter kick the ball deeper because you can get in the returner's face easier and force him to fair catch or let the ball go. It's also easier to cope with overload rushes because the shield can see them coming, in the meantime you've just had 3-4 unopposed guys who can haul it downfield, and as long as your snapper puts the ball in the right place the punter's almost certainly got just enough time to get the ball away. Interestingly, I was just reading about this tonight. I've got the ebook version of "Anatomy of a Game: Football, the Rules and the Men Who Made the Game" by David Nelson and just passed a section on this very rule. To quote Nelson: quote:Hall also addressed in his annual report for 1928 the Rules Committee's concern that the punt return, one of the game's most spectacular plays, was dramatically decreasing in numbers. It was becoming common practice for punt receivers to allow punts to strike the ground because a muffed kick could be recovered and advanced by the kicking team, possible because the receiving team had few players in position to prevent a touchdown. This procedure was robbing football of one of its traditional plays. Under the new rule the kicking team was permitted to recover a kick but prohibited from advancing it. The Rules Committee chairman boasted, "We have seen in the past season more and better catching and running back of punts than for several years"(11). So no advancing of muffed catches came in 1928 because returners were too isolated and the risk was too great so they were letting them roll to a stop rather than risk giving up an easy touchdown. Ends only downfield early to cover kicks was tried in 1968 in college, but it made returns too easy at their level and covering returns was too much of a headache. The NFL then picked it up in 1974 and stuck with it to make punt returns a more important part of the game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:If a team has the ball on their own goal line, is there really any penalty for taking a delay of game penalty? As I understand it, it is 5 yards or half the distance. No, but refs are empowered to take action on repeated fouls. If a team committed multiple fouls deliberately they could award a safety in that situation. Similarly, at the other end of the field a defense deliberately fouling repeatedly could be dealt with by awarding the touchdown to the offense.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Huh I had no idea that was the rule. Do you remember a time that happened? I always assumed it was like Zeno's Endzone. I don't know that it's ever been enforced (at least I've never heard of it) but it's in the NFL rules: Rule 12, Section 3 Unsportsmanlike Conduct quote:FOULS TO PREVENT SCORE
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
swickles posted:Can you have more than one guy call for a fair catch? Like the second the ondide kick happens can everyone just do the arm wave regardless of who its going to? Sure. It means that whoever catches the ball can't advance it. Anybody signalling for a fair catch makes it a fair catch for everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
OperaMouse posted:Real smart quarterbacks can run a no-huddle offense, with minimal input from an OC during a drive. Defenses do this to an extent - changing coverages and rushing/blitzing assignments based on the offensive alignment. They're limited, though, as most offenses can run multiple plays from the same formation, so defensive players have to memorize long checklists of what their assignment is in a huge number of different situations and react after the snap to what the offense is doing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Febreeze posted:Why is contact within 5 yards legal for DBs but not after? Does it have something to do with run blocking? It's also a sop to reality. If a DB is unable to touch a receiver at all, he'll get beat every time because the receiver is going forward while the DB has to turn around to run with him. So a DB has to check the receiver in order to have a chance of staying with him. On the other hand, we don't want safeties whacking a receiver out of the blue 20 yards downfield and taking him completely out of the play. Thus the DBs can do their business within 5 yards of the line and have to let the receiver run his route beyond that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:It's entirely possible that they'd done something like making it illegal in the 1940s for no reason and then just stopped calling it instead of taking it out of the rulebook (or it was a holdover from original NCAA rules that just stopped getting called). The NFL is very bad at keeping its rules in good order; IIRC there's some horrendously complicated bits in there somewhere that are written in complete non-English that only make sense when you remember that it used to be a penalty if you threw an incomplete pass. I suspect it was made a rule in the first place due to somebody throwing a punch and then claiming he was aiming for the ball and missed. There was a lot of stuff about open hand versus closed fist at one point - an open hand was fine (for stripping the ball), but a closed fist was a punch and thus was out. The advent of face masks eliminated a lot of that stuff, and the rule was probably a vestige of that era.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:Something that just occurred to me and this seemed like the only place to ask - in NCAA overtime, do you automatically win if your team is on defense first and gets a pick-6/fumble-for-TD? I don't think so. I don't think you can advance a turnover in overtime. The team's possession just ends.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
OK, thanks. I guess what I've seen is where the turnover ends the game as a defensive stop.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
Blitz7x posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4utf-X0qJT0 From that angle I would guess for rolling him over and throwing him to the ground rather than just making a clean tackle. If the ref thought he had the option for the straight tackle and instead deliberately chose to throw him to the ground when "in the grasp", it's roughing. Edit: From the rulebook "Rule 12, Player Conduct posted:Article 13, Roughing the Passer So I guess the ref felt the QB was in a defenseless position (in the act of throwing the pass) and the rusher was obliged to avoid throwing him down. Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 20:16 on May 12, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
indigi posted:Why is the draft only 7 rounds if every team scrambles around signing a grip of UDFAs every year The main purpose of the draft is to keep the league competitive - the weakest teams get the first shot at the best talent. After seven rounds, there isn't enough differentiation in talent any more to make much of a difference, so formally drafting players isn't worth the effort. Letting teams scramble and sign whomever they want from then on is more efficient (and ultimately cheaper, the real reason).
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:25 |
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:(Now, for extra bonus points: the Texas/A&M game has been transported into the instant replay era, you're the replay official. Is the ball still being held by the holder when the kicker kicks it, and does that actually matter to anything?) I'll bite. The holder dropping the ball makes it a fumble and an illegal kick, negating the entire play. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKLKbpWLHJ8&t=241s It's pretty obvious from this angle. The ball bounced a couple times and the holder never did have control of it. It was kicked off the ground. Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jul 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 21:31
|
|
