2019 Game Ball Thread: Wk. 4 at Bills

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,454
He really hasn’t been getting great separation.
Sure, but they have been using him in some TE routes, where separation is less likely and he uses his physical prowess to make the catch.

I'm not sure 60 catches for like 800 yards is anything to sneeze at. Especially since he's making only $2 million.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,293
Providence, RI
I'm not sure anyone is saying the hit shouldn't have been a penalty. Helmet to helmet contact will get flagged.

Posters are reacting to the peanut gallery calling for ejection. The replays clearly show that the play was not worthy of an ejection.
I'll make the argument that if they were calling this by the way the rule is written that it should not have been a flag on Jones but should have been a flag on Allen. Helmet to Helmet hits on a runner are not illegal. That's illegal is lowering your head to initiate and make contact with your helment
"It is a foul if a player lowers his head to initiate and make contact with his helmet against an opponent. " the rule applies to both defensive and offensive players.

Everyone seems to universally agree that Jones attempted to initiate contact with his shoulder. I have not seen anyone arguing against that. When you watch the replay it's pretty clear that the crown of Allen's helmet slams into Jones' ear hole. So if we put that all together... Jones lead with his shoulder and the crown of Allen's helmet initiates the contact. Well the crown of Allen's helmet cannot hit the side of Jones' head unless Allen first lowered his head.

Watching in slow motion and applying the rule as written would suggest that the flag was thrown on the wrong player.

Now, I 100% understand why the flag was thrown. They would never, ever throw that flag on a QB and likely would never throw it against a running back or WR.
I fully understand that Refs watching these types of hits in real time are always going to toss the flag against the defender on icky looking hits. So I am not foolish enough to argue the reality about why the penalty was called but with the benefit of slow motion and an accurate enforcement of the rule I don't see how you can decide that Jones was the one to get flagged.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
34,656
Sure, but they have been using him in some TE routes, where separation is less likely and he uses his physical prowess to make the catch.

I'm not sure 60 catches for like 800 yards is anything to sneeze at. Especially since he's making only $2 million.
I’m not sneezing at it. Never said Gordon didn’t have value. But I thought we’d be getting more from him with Gronk gone and my observation from watching the games is that he’s not getting a whole lot of separation, some of which may be injury related. Would love to see the All 22 for his routes because maybe that tape tells a different story. Still plenty of time for him to make more of an impact and I will be rooting for him like crazy to do so.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
20,080
South Korea
I’m not sneezing at it. Never said Gordon didn’t have value. But I thought we’d be getting more from him with Gronk gone and my observation from watching the games is that he’s not getting a whole lot of separation, some of which may be injury related. Would love to see the All 22 for his routes because maybe that tape tells a different story. Still plenty of time for him to make more of an impact and I will be rooting for him like crazy to do so.
Someone mentioned that Gordon was double-teamed on key downs. Is that true?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
34,656
Someone mentioned that Gordon was double-teamed on key downs. Is that true?
Definitely true in some cases so some of this may be that he’s getting more attention from defenses. Thanks, AB (Sorry, need about a month to get the disappointment out of my system).
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
Doesn’t the rule on runners require leading with the crown of the helmet? It applies to both runners and defenders, btw, so I’m unsure why, by rule, Allen didn’t commit a foul. He’s the one who dipped his helmet towards Jones.

Here’s the defenseless player rules, which don’t apply here because his forward progress was not stopped:

So which rule are we dealing with?

Edit - I guess it would be the targeting rule, but I cannot find an official rulebook definition and every article I see says the same thing: an NFL player—offense or defense—shall be penalized 15 yards for lowering his head to make contact with a player.


Ok, well guess who did that? Josh Allen. Jones stood straight up and tried to lead with his shoulder. The crown of Allen’s helmet hit the side of Jones’s. By the definition of the rules I can find, Jones should not have been penalized, but Allen should have.

Belichick is right to stand by Jones because there’s not much else Belichick can do to coach it differently.
 
Last edited:

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,941
Doesn’t the rule on runners require leading with the crown of the helmet? It applies to both runners and defenders, btw, so I’m unsure why, by rule, Allen didn’t commit a foul. He’s the one who dipped his helmet towards Jones.

Here’s the defenseless player rules, which don’t apply here because his forward progress was not stopped:

So which rule are we dealing with?
Ugly hits involving QBs, punters or kickers tend to draw flags on the other team.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
Ugly hits involving QBs, punters or kickers tend to draw flags on the other team.
Sure, but in terms of the actual rules, Jones did nothing wrong. Allen did. It would be nice for the league to do the right thing and deliver a hefty fine to Allen for his dangerous play.

I do wonder what would have happened had Allen popped back up and Jones been laid out.
 

Garshaparra

lurker
Feb 27, 2008
149
McCarver's Mushy Mouth
I was shocked to not see Meyers in the slot yesterday. He looked very good there in the preseason, better than outside. Maybe with Washington coming to town this week, they'll rest Edelman and give Meyers time.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
20,080
South Korea
Great read from Bill Barnwell on Brady's struggle against the Bills & how things may look better (or not) moving forward:


Here's the paragraph regarding the Bills vs. Brady (emphasis mine):

"This was one of the least productive games of Brady's career. That's not hyperbole. Using adjusted yards per attempt, which is a better-weighted version of passer rating, Brady's 2.7 AY/A was the eighth-worst start of the future Hall of Famer's career in games with 20 pass attempts or more. Maybe we shouldn't have been surprised. The six worst contests were all starts from before the Brady Awakening in 2007. The seventh-worst start was Brady's game against the Bills in Week 16 last season, when he averaged just 2.3 AY/A in a 24-12 victory."
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,566
Pittsburgh, PA
Sure, but in terms of the actual rules, Jones did nothing wrong. Allen did. It would be nice for the league to do the right thing and deliver a hefty fine to Allen for his dangerous play.

I do wonder what would have happened had Allen popped back up and Jones been laid out.
Allen was in the process of being tackled by another defender. He still kept his feet, barely, but had very limited freedom of movement and had a very large human draped on his waist. Assigning any sort of blame to him for that play seems like the height of wearing Patriots-colored glasses.
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
376
Bill using the post game scrum to track down Micah Hyde the guy that intercepted Tom so he could figure out what went wrong.

 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
20,080
South Korea
Bill using the post game scrum to track down Micah Hyde the guy that intercepted Tom so he could figure out what went wrong.

Just getting to know his 2022 starting corner (although there's an out-clause after this year, per spotrac).
 

GoDa

lurker
Sep 25, 2017
948
Allen was in the process of being tackled by another defender. He still kept his feet, barely, but had very limited freedom of movement and had a very large human draped on his waist. Assigning any sort of blame to him for that play seems like the height of wearing Patriots-colored glasses.
I don't think it's about blame - in the sense that there was some maliciousness at the core of the play. However - Allen is a big QB that was struggling and leaning/falling very close toward the 1st down marker. Jones is a smaller defender that needed to deliver a blow that would change Allen's direction (to prevent a 1st down). I really don't know what he was supposed to do. Get out of the way? He was ready to deliver a shot to the chest and Allen fell forward. If anything Allen's head hit him and Jones was knocked back.

Burfict's play stands in stark contrast.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,454
There was some talk in here about Gilmore's day. When targeted the Bills were 4 of 10 for 72 yards.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
9,095
Silver Spring, MD
From BSJ today. Interesting, it didn't feel like this watching the game:

Brady was pressured 11 times on 39 dropbacks. That’s only 28 percent which is not a high number, even for a pocket passer. Plus, Brady was not sacked and we only counted two quarterback hits. PRESSURE WAS NOT A FACTOR.
The play calling seemed to be geared toward eliminating the chance for pressure. All the misdirections and quick slants, most were unsuccessful but to me it seemed like Josh or TB or Belichick or all three did not trust the line to protect at all for “normal” pass plays.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
Allen was in the process of being tackled by another defender. He still kept his feet, barely, but had very limited freedom of movement and had a very large human draped on his waist. Assigning any sort of blame to him for that play seems like the height of wearing Patriots-colored glasses.
I mean they’re playing football. Allen was 100% still moving forward and likely would have gotten a critical first down on 3rd and long, if not for Jones stepping up to make a tackle. Allen lowered his head and planted the side of Jones’s helmet, as Jones was squaring up his shoulder to make contact. The rules, which I cited, are abundantly clear. If anyone committed a foul, it was Allen.

Other than Allen happening to be the one who was injured, what’s your argument for otherwise? Are you going to argue Allen’s forward progress was stopped? If so, I suggest you watch the replay again. He had a first without Jones.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,566
Pittsburgh, PA
Yes, he had a first without Jones. No, I'm not sure what I'd tell Jones to do differently. But I'm not arguing either of those.

Saying that it's Allen who deserves blame for aiming himself at Jones, and "deserves a fine for dangerous play", completely ignores how little control Allen had over his body positioning at that exact moment. That's what I was replying to, if you refresh your memory, and that's the assertion I'm critiquing. You spent a while trying to make a case for that, went and cited Globe articles and everything. That's the discussion I'm attempting to have here. Arguing that "he had a first without Jones' hit" is entirely besides the point, it's a look-over-there distraction to the point.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
It’s not a distraction, it’s key in the determination of whether Allen is a defenseless player, as defined by the NFL rulebook (which I cited). My initial response was to claims that Jones committed a penalty, which he did not.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,566
Pittsburgh, PA
The argument over whether Allen was defenseless is interesting, I owe you that. On the one hand, the applicable rule does indeed say "4. A runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped", and Allen was in the process of getting tackled but hadn't stopped forward progress. On the other hand, I'd argue that he fit the concept of what "defenseless" is supposed to mean, in that his control over his movement was at that moment greatly limited, and he lacked any ability to fend off or even prepare for a hit to his head.

I'm going to leave aside the rest of it, though it's enough of an edge case that @CFB_Rules 's thoughts would be interesting.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,601
Not sure where to put this, but obviously even with the offense's poor outing vs. Buffalo, there's much to be optimistic about.

1. The defense is off to an historically good start.
2. They are 4-0, at a time when they traditionally are just figuring things out in "extended training camp".
3. They have weathered the AB fiasco.
4. They should be getting guys back from injury in the next handful of weeks.
5. They have gone 4-0 in the conference, and 3-0 in the division, with two of the division games being on the road in traditionally difficult places to play.
6. Brady is on pace for 36 TD and 4 INT despite a down week this week.
7. Ben Watson is returning for week 5 to bolster there TE corps. Badly needed.
8. Their worst performance by far was still winning against a top 5 defense in a tough divisional road game...by a touchdown.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,601
And not that it matters, but I just find it funny....

KC beat 2-0-1 Detroit on the road by 4.
NE beat 3-0 Buffalo on the road by 6.

And so as a result, Sports Illustrated's MMQB vaulted KC over NE for the top spot in their power rankings.
 

Preacher

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
2,494
Henrico, VA
And not that it matters, but I just find it funny....

KC beat 2-0-1 Detroit on the road by 4.
NE beat 3-0 Buffalo on the road by 6.

And so as a result, Sports Illustrated's MMQB vaulted KC over NE for the top spot in their power rankings.
And that was a come behind win for KC. NE has yet to trail this season.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,574
538's ELO system has KC at #1, and did last week as well. The gap widened this week although their scores are still very close.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,124
Imaginationland
FO has KC as a distant 4th (the difference between the Pats and the Chiefs is about equivalent to the difference between the Chiefs and the Titans, who are 16th).

They clearly have a better offense than the Pats, and teams with great offenses are nearly always rated higher than teams with great defenses by people watching. I think it's as simple as that.

*Edit - 538's traditional ELO system does have the Pats at #1 and KC at #2. They have a QB adjusted forecast that has the Chiefs ahead.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,601
Don't bring me down with this talk of justifying KC being more highly rated.
It’s not that that I found funny.... it’s that they (SI) had the Pats #1 until this week, when the only thing that changed was that KC beat a worse team by fewer points than the Pats did over a better team.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
34,656
It’s not that that I found funny.... it’s that they (SI) had the Pats #1 until this week, when the only thing that changed was that KC beat a worse team by fewer points than the Pats did over a better team.
"Everyone Thinks We Suck - The Sequel"
 

Rudi Fingers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
1,408
Adianoeta
Koufax said:
538's ELO system has KC at #1, and did last week as well. The gap widened this week although their scores are still very close.

Don't bring me down with this talk of justifying KC being more highly rated.

It’s not that that I found funny.... it’s that they (SI) had the Pats #1 until this week, when the only thing that changed was that KC beat a worse team by fewer points than the Pats did over a better team.
I'll Roethlisberger the ELO joke, @BaseballJones
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,085
Hingham, MA
I have no idea which system is more reliable or historically accurate, but Football Outsiders / DVOA has the Pats at 32.1% to win it all vs 14.5% for KC.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I especially appreciated Bolden turning back to the line of scrimmage once Slater grabbed the ball, and finding someone to block. It always strikes me as odd when players will decide to run downfield with a returner (eg on a long KR or PR) with their heads looking at the end zone, rather than turning to make a block to make sure that guy with the ball can get there.
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
376
Didn’t Barkley engage him as a blocker? Thought he lost QB protection at that point. Wish we could have seen a replay.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
No Barkley had his back to him and KVN took a shot.
There are videos out there where it is pretty clear.
5 seconds is an extreme exaggeration but it seemed like a legit call to me.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,085
Hingham, MA
But Barkley is an eligible receiver at that point and within 5 yards of the LOS. Can't KVN legally deck him until the ball is in the air?
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,941
But Barkley is an eligible receiver at that point and within 5 yards of the LOS. Can't KVN legally deck him until the ball is in the air?
The NFL a few years ago started flagging off-ball hits and blocks on Ks, Ps, and QBs as a protective measure after they were getting lit up on interceptions or punt/kick returns.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
3,721
around the way
But Barkley is an eligible receiver at that point and within 5 yards of the LOS. Can't KVN legally deck him until the ball is in the air?
Brady is an eligible receiver in those double pass plays too usually. And if someone crushed him from behind, off the play, they'd be flagged for sure.