Completely legal substitution aka the "John Harbaugh is a whiny little brat" thread.
- Thread starter CaptainLaddie
- Start date
Eh. Good on the Patriots for figuring out how to make the rules work for them, but I don't see a problem with this change. The Patriots may have been the first to do it, but others would have copied it anyway. End result would probably have been more pressure on the refs to properly inform teams, provide enough time, whatever. Most likely during the most tense, loudest times of the game. Just something else for refs to screw up and for people to complain about.
Yup, and the fans can play revisionist history and pretend the new rules were always the rules, thus the Cheatriots cheated to win yet another of their cheat-tainted titles. Fucking cheaters.drleather2001 said:
I'm sure there are going to be some unintended consequences of this - special teams formations or something like that. And if there are, you just KNOW BB is already drawing up how to exploit the new loopholes. And so next year the competition committee will be meeting to try to figure out what to do about that. Repeat ad nauseum.
EvilEmpire said:
I think this nails it. While it looks like the league is reacting to the Patriots, it truly could become a mess in the coming season as other teams try their own variations.
Plus, the Pats will find some other loophole to exploit at a key moment and piss off another team
Has there ever been a professional sports franchise that is so far ahead of its competitors and the league it plays in that they lead to the league making several rule changes over time? It's unbelievable. I get this one, to a point, but it's amazing they are able to use every advantage they can by the book, until they force the book to be changed.
My prediction is a lateral to a Tackle (someone like Solder) that looks like a screen pass. Roll the whole pocket right, pass back to Solder who acts like he has just whiffed on his block.
Exactly. Belichick is already "onto the next loophole". This one was played out anyway. Every DC in the league has probably come up with a plan to counter these substitutions, so you know Belichick would not use it next season. I can only imagine Belichick sitting in his office laughing his ass off as the rest of the league chases their tails trying to catch up with him. I also can't wait for the Ravens or the Colts to unintentionally violate this rule and have it called against them.tims4wins said:
Why would it be a mess? So what if other teams do it?
I don't see the big deal so I am curious why others think it is. If your are going to change a rule if the game you should have very good reasoning.
To me the formation dictates the eligibility. The numbers and the reporting are arbitrary and just make it easier for a quick glance by the refs.
I don't see the big deal so I am curious why others think it is. If your are going to change a rule if the game you should have very good reasoning.
To me the formation dictates the eligibility. The numbers and the reporting are arbitrary and just make it easier for a quick glance by the refs.
Almost everyone at a high level in professional football is conservative and insecure. There are lots of seven-figure jobs at risk, especially since the average owner has the patience and maturity of an 11 year old boy. This explains the reaction to the rules and the raging hard on that some in the League have against the Pats.Gambler7 said:
Bill Belichick is a modern day Pop Warner. Warner's innovations as a high school team playing against colleges is where a lot of our modern rule book came from.
M
MentalDisabldLst
Guest
I tried the Google but couldn't find a good definition of what is considered the tackle box. Everything just says it's the space between the two tackles. That is actually a pretty subjective definition right?
Does it actually mean the space between the 2nd guy away from the ball on either side of the center? So what would stop them from lining up a center, a guard, a TE off the ball next to the guard and then a RB 10 yards away from the TE on the line of scrimmage? The RB would essentially be the tackle and be the end of the tackle box to that side of the field right? The TE would still be eligible because he lined up in the backfield. I guess the spacing isn't as good because if they do try to cover the RB (playing tackle) then the defender is closer to the TE, but instead of just running a seam the TE could release towards the middle of the field and the RB stay behind the LOS but move towards the sideline.
Does it actually mean the space between the 2nd guy away from the ball on either side of the center? So what would stop them from lining up a center, a guard, a TE off the ball next to the guard and then a RB 10 yards away from the TE on the line of scrimmage? The RB would essentially be the tackle and be the end of the tackle box to that side of the field right? The TE would still be eligible because he lined up in the backfield. I guess the spacing isn't as good because if they do try to cover the RB (playing tackle) then the defender is closer to the TE, but instead of just running a seam the TE could release towards the middle of the field and the RB stay behind the LOS but move towards the sideline.
Dernells Casket n Flagon said:
Let's not go overboard. In this case, he got the idea from the immortal Detroit Lions.
You can line up your formations any way you want as long as you have the correct number of players on the line. The tackles could be on each number for God sakes. Let's just put Solder and Vollmer outside the numbers and put Gronk right behind Solder and throw a TE screen.( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
https://twitter.com/michaelfhurley/status/580797109982597120
https://twitter.com/michaelfhurley/status/580797109982597120
link to tweet
http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Owners-Pass-Ban-On-Patriots-Ineligible-Receiver-Trick/aa52588d-47ff-4b0b-9bf5-65d759694c93
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Tackle box is defined as the "area extending from tackle to tackle and from three yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team’s end line. After the ball leaves the tackle box, this area no longer exist." Rule 3, Section 35.
Tackle box is also implicated by a couple player safety rules - crown of the helmet plus a new one that prevents a running back to chop a defensive player engaged above the waist by another offensive player outside the tackle box - and the intentional grounding rule so I don't think in its the offense's best interest to expand the "tackle box."
213 rules here: http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2013%20-%20Rule%20Book.pdf
Top comment on the Deadspin post on this:
"Baltimore took this more seriously than domestic violence."
"Baltimore took this more seriously than domestic violence."
soxhop411 said:
I heard the NFL is also considering a rule jointly proposed by the Ravens and Seahawks where a playoff game automatically ends when a team builds a two-score lead in the second half of a playoff game.
The Ravens crowing about this is just sad.Stitch01 said:
That team lost the killer swagger when Ray Lewis hung them up.
RedOctober3829 said:
Next game against the Ravens....1st offensive set will be Brady and 10 linemen-numbered guys;
or a regular deployment, except that the five 50-79 guys will report as eligible and the others will report as ineligible; the ref will have to make an lengthy announcement about 10 players and there will be some legal and mystifying formation that leads to a TD.
i'd really like to see the media asking someone on the Ravens why running to the league and getting a rule changed is something to be proud of instead of a tacit admission that you got schooled.bankshot1 said:
dcmissle said:
Which makes this all the more surprising. I've never trained with a coach who brooked any excuses. How could such a successful coach and motivator think it would be good for his team to see him take excuse-making to such a overblown extent? He's basically setting up the entire organization to always blame losses on quirks of officiating or playcalling.
Marciano490 said:
Reason #89789988431 why we are fortunate to have BB coaching the NEP. Did he cry foul when Miami unleashed the Wildcat and took them to school for a game? Or when the Broncos ran the Wild Ponies (or whatever it was called)? No. He took his lumps and figured out how to stop it next time. That's how grown ups handle these situations.
This is perfect. Bill figures out the best tactics, uses them, and then they make them illegal so nobody can return the favor. He'll just move on to the next one, because there's always a next one.
This can best be summed up by the Tedy Bruschi quote after the 20-3 stomping of the Colts in the 2004 Divisional Round: "You want to change the rules? Change em. We play and we win, that's what we do."
Marciano490 said:
You have not met many Ravens' fans have you? This is their modus operandi. They follow that example from the team. To this day, no one has ever actually beaten the Ravens. It is always something else. A bad call, a trick play, something, anything. Harbaugh is not setting up the entire organization to always operate like this in the future. The entire organization operates like this already. And so does the fan base. They are the most odious organization and fan base in all of sport, including the MFY.
I cannot get over how completely BB has gotten into Harbaugh's head.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/21/john-harbaugh-ravens-are-working-on-illegal-formations/
Seems like a solid use of practice time.nattysez said:
Hopefully we hear this from an announcer this season - "Man the Ravens sure are poor at tackling but I have to give them credit, they noticed an illegal formation before the refs did."
I hope that Ernie Adams, the dark wizard of football ops, comes up with just 1 perfectly legal formation designed just for the Ravens that...
And the beauty of it is that the Pats' formation was indeed legal. Let's hope that Suggs continues to misconstrue what he sees, especially when the Ravens play the Pats.Silverdude2167 said:
Parenthetically, Ben Volin's off season of suck continues...he should have noted that "of course, Suggs got it wrong there," but that doesn't fit with the narrative of those rule bending Patriots.
Maybe we can get them penalty flags so they can just call it themselves. You would think a major part of any defense would be recognizing what formation the offense is in.Silverdude2167 said:
I don't think they were talking about the game, I think he was talking about in practice.... but I'm a buffoon so i could be wrong.TheoShmeo said:
If I am a referee, I tell John Harbaugh to STFU about what I understand. What a condescending prick.