I was a few beers in but I'm almost positive Bill was asked this in the post-game last night and he said the 2008 game was worse.
The Game Ball: Wk. 13 at Buffalo
- Thread starter SeoulSoxFan
- Start date
It was Zo that said that on 5th quarter. I know the Bills kicker told ESPN his range going into the closed end of the stadium was no more than an extra point, which is 32 yards.
He missed from 33 yards.
In BB's press conference today he more or less admitted that they would have played it differently if they didn't have a lead. I mean we all knew that, but he did come out and say it.
Bill also said it in his press conference. He was asked towards the end.
edit- the Cassel game in Bill's mind was way worse wind.
It's going to be great when it's 45 and sunny in Foxboro and he runs the ball on every play again.
The leather Helmet game.
Also for a good punter Jake Bailey was out played yesterday.
I am convinced that the Bills were terrified of the Smith Henry combo in a bad weather game. Thats why they kept the nickel out there. (TBF I havent seen snap counts....I know Jonnu was out there alot but not sure about Henry.) either of those guys were poised to make a big play had Buffalo gone heavy.
The Smith Catch (albeit lucky) might have scared Buffalo as shitless as it made NE hesitant.
Also for a good punter Jake Bailey was out played yesterday.
I am convinced that the Bills were terrified of the Smith Henry combo in a bad weather game. Thats why they kept the nickel out there. (TBF I havent seen snap counts....I know Jonnu was out there alot but not sure about Henry.) either of those guys were poised to make a big play had Buffalo gone heavy.
The Smith Catch (albeit lucky) might have scared Buffalo as shitless as it made NE hesitant.
I'd laugh from here to next Thursday if the Bucs pulled an opening all-run drive Sunday
Colts in ‘14 redux. Jonas Gray game in November followed by LGB game in the AFCCG.
Yep, it was the sentence at the end Tim was referring to, about the Jets in 2002. The Jets game where Bill deferred in overtime was in 2015, had no wind to speak of, and the Jets drove right down the field and scored the winning touchdown.
The one that gave them half the distance to the goal, which wasn't a bad call....or the one where Allen got pushed out of bounds, and was Ben Dreith-level terrible?
I know you likely know this and are just using shorthand but wanted to note that if the Bills chose which side to defend (or to kick), the Patriots would have the choice for the second half. Pats likely choose to receive again giving them an extra possession.
Options for winning the coin toss are:
- To receive or to kick-off
- Choose side to defend (only for first half)
- Defer
If they choose to kickoff then Pats get the ball, still pick the sides for the 1st half and have first choice for second half on what they want.
If the Bills, choose which side to defend, Pats choose to receive but still have have first choice for 2nd half. (likely to choose to receive again)
The Bills move would be to receive and then the Patriots likely choose to receive in the 2nd half leaving the Bills the choice of sides for the second half.
Who was the Buffalo player who screwed up and stayed down with a 1:23 to play. That reset the Play clock to 40 and allowed the pats to run out the clock. Short of that Pats would have had to punted (with the wind...so not terrible) and defend a run back or 1 play.
Bryant, the subject of the post, was subject to the latter. It was a horrible call by the official; Allen was still carrying a live ball when he was pushed out of bounds by Bryant. By any definition, it was not a late hit out of bounds. Belichick was fuming when he saw the replay later and was shown screaming at the officials a couple of minutes later. Bryant absolutely made the right play there, and should make the same play 100 out of the next 100 times it happens.
The other personal foul was on Hightower for an obvious horse collar. That one was half the distance to the goal.
Matt Milano... the guy who had blown up most of the Patriots running game in the 4th quarter
Football Zebras even pointed out, even though the ball gets moved back to where the football was when it broke across the out of bounds once Allen steps down (meaning Allen wouldn't have gotten anything for the stretch if the ball was out of bounds short of the sticks), the ball is still live. This means that Allen could potentially fumble the ball back into the field of play and it would belong to whoever picked it up.
The play should never been called a personal foul for hitting a guy out of bounds since he's not officially out of bounds until his foot comes down.
"That's why we practice in this shit" - Bill motherfucking Belichick
View: https://twitter.com/Patriots/status/1468307951098408960
View: https://twitter.com/Patriots/status/1468307951098408960
Some great breakdowns by Baldy on his feed. Highly recommend
https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL
View: https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1468196082102452238
View: https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1468209739658055680
https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL
View: https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1468196082102452238
View: https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1468209739658055680
While Running Against the Wind is better, it should be noted that Gary Larson did "The One About..." as the index to one of his books back in the day. I believe it was Weiner Dog Art, from 1990. Not sure though.
I would try to extend a Shakespeare theme, and offer "Much Ado About Running"...but then maybe it would be "Much Ado About Passing"?
Or "A Midseason Night's Dream"
Annnyway...
Can someone explain to me why, once a punt receiver realizes he isn't going to catch the ball, he doesn't just sprint as far away as possible? I see it over and over...some guy who's not going to catch it, and the ball bounces right near him and, occasionally it hits him, like last night. It's like Harry decided not to catch the ball, but also the hang around, maybe text it later when he was drunk and lonely or something?
Just never made sense to me. The downside is devastating. The upside is...?
If the punting team touched it, Harry could pick it up and run with no risk (at least as I understand it; prepared for @CFB_Rules or someone to correct me...)
https://coachfore.org/2015/02/20/8-of-the-most-misunderstood-special-teams-rules-and-situations/
EDIT - or maybe Harry touching it first nullifies it in this case? hmmm... Anyway, that's why you sometimes see returners linger around the ball.
Last edited:
If we are going with Shakespeare, As You Like it is right there.
Blow, blow, thou winter wind,
Thou art not so unkind
As man's ingratitude;
Thy tooth is not so keen,
Because thou art not seen,
Although thy breath be rude.
Heigh-ho! sing, heigh-ho! unto the green holly:
Most friendship is feigning, most loving mere folly:
Then, heigh-ho, the holly!
This life is most jolly.
Freeze, freeze, thou bitter sky,
That does not bite so nigh
As benefits forgot:
Though thou the waters warp,
Thy sting is not so sharp
As friend remembered not.
Heigh-ho! sing . . .
Jonnu played 39 snaps yesterday but Henry only played 15.
The Bills appear to have run more base (29 snaps) than nickel (22), though maybe they should have been more base-heavy.
I don't think there was some masterstroke here; the Pats wanted to run, the Bills wanted to stop the run, both sides won some and lost some. I don't think the Bills were playing in fear of something that never happened, nor were the Patriots working to set up something they never ran.
I don’t think Carolina will beat Buffalo, but after this game anything could happen. It was that much of a nut punch loss.
Once Harry touches the ball, it is no longer considered a "first touch" by the kicking team.
Most times, returners do try to clear out to avoid having the ball go off them, as it did with Harry. Once the kicking team touches it, the receiving team cannot really lose possession it unless they take actual possession and then lose it via a fumble. A ball that bounces off the kicking team, then bounces of a receiver, and then is recovered by the kicking team is still the receiving team's ball.
I am still waiting for when this rule can come into play (Rule 9, Section 4, Article 3):
Yes, Harry touched it, so none applies. But re the above, I thought there was no risk of fumble?
Bryants comments about that penalty are straight out of the BB school of interviews.
"Need to look at it on film"
"Will try to learn from it"
"I need to be smarter on the sideline"
"They (refs) called what they called... I just left it to the officials"
No complaining, just getting back to work.
(Starts at around 1:20min)
Even in this scenario, the receiving team still retains possession and the ball is placed where the kicking team originally touched it.
The thing with Harry is, I don't think he decided not to field it. He slipped which let it bounce. I think he had a panic reaction to go after it, happens when guys slip rather than making a decision,
Then he realized his mistake and tried to stop, but the ball grazed him.
Usually guys who plan to let it bounce clear out, then come back as it slows down to see if the coverage team is sloppy and they can pick it up, but also in case it hits a gunner, because those guys often have no idea where it is, so if a bounce hits on of them, the returner has the best shot at recovering.
Then he realized his mistake and tried to stop, but the ball grazed him.
Usually guys who plan to let it bounce clear out, then come back as it slows down to see if the coverage team is sloppy and they can pick it up, but also in case it hits a gunner, because those guys often have no idea where it is, so if a bounce hits on of them, the returner has the best shot at recovering.
On the bolded, how about as experienced a punt returner as we've had, Julian Edelman, almost blowing it in the AFCCG against the Chiefs Jan. 2019. First glimpse live on TV looked like he touched the bouncing punt instead of getting away from it. The Chiefs got it and ran it in for an apparent touchdown. Replay somehow showed Edelman didn't touch it, thank God, and we win in OT.
Last edited:
That would be something. Would be fun to be sitting in a bar when that happened and shout out the rule.
I can only think of a few scenarios where this would happen. 1. Punter is in the end zone and kicking in the middle of a hurricane/tornado. 2. Punter slips as he is about to kick and somehow manages to kick the ball backwards. 3. Bad snap and the ball sails over the punter, or to the side of him. Any others?
I'm not really asking about the rules, I'm asking about the logic as a result of the rules. And to be clear, I'm not asking why he'd hang around after the ball touched him...I'm asking why he would hang around after deciding not to catch it or failing to catch it. The chances of fielding it cleanly on that type of bounce are slim, the upside is "falling on the ball" and the downside is "losing the ball"
(I Know the ball took a weird bounce, but after his first miss on the ball he should have just ran the other way, instead of making a second effort to field it, which is my recollection of the play)
The upside is "maybe I'll play for the off chance that it will basically be a loose ball like a fumble, and then the off chance that I will be able to field it cleanly, without dropping it myself, and then the off chance of subsequently advancing the ball in a meaningful way".
The downside is: you lose the ball within spitting distance of the goal line.
So again I ask: why bother? The upside is so limited, and the downside so drastic. It seems almost like saying "on non-4th down plays if you're about to go down, play messy and maybe you'll drop the ball, and you or someone else on your team might pick it up and advance the ball". Yes, that's assuming that the ball touches you/your teammate on the punt first, but still...seems monumentally stupid.
As for Rule 9.4.3: Probably was more of a thing back when the goalposts were at the front of the endzone, no?
(I Know the ball took a weird bounce, but after his first miss on the ball he should have just ran the other way, instead of making a second effort to field it, which is my recollection of the play)
So, by hanging (before contact) around there's the chance that someone on the kicking team might touch it without "downing" it, and then he might be able to jump into that mess and pick it up...
The upside is "maybe I'll play for the off chance that it will basically be a loose ball like a fumble, and then the off chance that I will be able to field it cleanly, without dropping it myself, and then the off chance of subsequently advancing the ball in a meaningful way".
The downside is: you lose the ball within spitting distance of the goal line.
So again I ask: why bother? The upside is so limited, and the downside so drastic. It seems almost like saying "on non-4th down plays if you're about to go down, play messy and maybe you'll drop the ball, and you or someone else on your team might pick it up and advance the ball". Yes, that's assuming that the ball touches you/your teammate on the punt first, but still...seems monumentally stupid.
Right...just seems like a dumb risk. I wonder how many times that sort of weird scenario has actually worked out for anyone (independent of onside, or maybe squib kicks).
As for Rule 9.4.3: Probably was more of a thing back when the goalposts were at the front of the endzone, no?
The kick hits the upright because it was touched or deflected by the receiving team behind the line of scrimmage. I'm guessing that and your 3rd scenario are the only ones we could conceivably see in our lifetimes. Seeing it on a FG try would be, shall I say, interesting; Cal Ripken's record will be broken first.
Kickoffs are different and a live ball.
As for the reasoning, I think @Cellar-Door puts it best:
Most returners stay far enough away but nearby in case the ball hits a member of either team then he has a chance to get to the ball. Occasionally guys do get too close.
I think the most likely return opportunity is when the kicking team bats at the ball to keep it from the end zone but that's obviously still very rare.
Yeah I just see it a bunch, way more often than I would expect. last night, maybe he gets a pass because the wind was things so unpredictable. But man, yknow what also makes the ball unpredictable? The ground. I've definitely seen near-turnovers and actual turnovers when I'm thinking that there's so little to be gained from being around that I don't understand why they're even within 20 yards of it.
Ah well.
sigh
If the ball had contacted Edelman, KC could only recover the "muffed" punt and not advance it beyond the spot where the ball was recovered.
Kicker is so roided out that the ball circumvents the Earth. I am going to guess that this rule was from back when the goalposts were in front of the end zone pre-1927.
Game balls to both lines