The Nation's Tears: Volume II

Status
Not open for further replies.

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
12,011
South Boston
I was just watching highlights of the final drive of the game and to me it seems like the refs may have missed a chop block on the James White swing screen to the ATL 15. Looks like Andrews and Mason clearly go high low on an ATL defender. Maybe it's legal if the blockers are downfield? Some rules expert here can probably shed some light.

Its been discussed... Like 6 or 7 posts up from yours
 

CFB_Rules

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2016
620
Isn't that a fumble because the pass went backwards?
Seems like that same action would have been an incomplete pass if the ball had traveled downfield at all.
Watch it again, Cam throws it from the Panther-21 and it lands at about the Panther-33.

It's a fumble because the hand never moved forward before releasing the ball, but the defender / Cam's follow-through propelled it downfield after it became a fumble.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
32,058
AZ
I was just watching highlights of the final drive of the game and to me it seems like the refs may have missed a chop block on the James White swing screen to the ATL 15. Looks like Andrews and Mason clearly go high low on an ATL defender. Maybe it's legal if the blockers are downfield? Some rules expert here can probably shed some light.

For what it's worth, that wasn't a pass. The Brinson article gets that wrong as well. That was a lateral. It was immediately called that way. And it's why White didn't get credited for a 15th reception.

The rule seems to me to distinguish between running and passing plays and to be much more narrow on the former. It seems to envision only backfield chops and LOS chops. Maybe you can have a downfield chop on a running play. Not sure. But the rule for running plays also doesn't mention reverse chops or simultaneous chops like it does for passing plays. It looks to me like the low hit on a running play must come after the high hit. That looks pretty close.

Certainly looks close to the kind of play that the rules are concerned about, and the rule is not well written and I'm no expert, but the fact that was a running play might matter.
 

CFB_Rules

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2016
620
For what it's worth, that wasn't a pass. The Brinson article gets that wrong as well. That was a lateral. It was immediately called that way. And it's why White didn't get credited for a 15th reception.

The rule seems to me to distinguish between running and passing plays and to be much more narrow on the former. It seems to envision only backfield chops and LOS chops. Maybe you can have a downfield chop on a running play. Not sure. But the rule for running plays also doesn't mention reverse chops or simultaneous chops like it does for passing plays. It looks to me like the low hit on a running play must come after the high hit. That looks pretty close.

Certainly looks close to the kind of play that the rules are concerned about, and the rule is not well written and I'm no expert, but the fact that was a running play might matter.
The statistician in the booth may have ruled it a backwards pass after video review, but the officials on the field ruled it forward. You can see the line judge punch towards the line of scrimmage (forwards), which is the standard mechanic for ruling on direction of a pass.

For the purposes of whether the block was illegal, it doesn't matter. The NFL changed the rule this year to make all chop blocks illegal under all circumstances, which had not been the case in the past. You may be thinking of cut blocks, which can be legal under some circumstances and illegal in others.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
delicious tears and all, but its a little frustrating to me that when the Patriots win a big game, the coverage is almost always about how the other team blew it, or bad calls.

I don't remember any articles detailing potential missed calls when the Broncos beat the Panthers, etc. I guess its all part of the fundamental disbelief that most fans/writers/etc have that the Patriots can consistently be this good.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
7,616
Needham, MA
delicious tears and all, but its a little frustrating to me that when the Patriots win a big game, the coverage is almost always about how the other team blew it, or bad calls.

I don't remember any articles detailing potential missed calls when the Broncos beat the Panthers, etc. I guess its all part of the fundamental disbelief that most fans/writers/etc have that the Patriots can consistently be this good.
Yeah, there have been about seventy billion articles written since Sunday about how awesome the Pats and BB and TB are. There are also a bunch about how the Falcons blew the game, because the Falcons blew the game. There's been maybe 1 or 2 articles I have seen about blown calls.

I think you are trying a little to hard to be aggrieved here.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
11,885
Silver Spring, MD
Especially since the Broncos trounced the Panthers six ways to Sunday and the game didn't hinge on a few key plays.

EDIT: responding to hoodie: I don't remember any articles detailing potential missed calls when the Broncos beat the Panthers, etc.
 
Last edited:

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
54,012
San Andreas Fault
Yeah, there have been about seventy billion articles written since Sunday about how awesome the Pats and BB and TB are. There are also a bunch about how the Falcons blew the game, because the Falcons blew the game. There's been maybe 1 or 2 articles I have seen about blown calls.

I think you are trying a little to hard to be aggrieved here.
Not to mention NFL Network flooding their time slots into the weekend and into next week with Patriots based content, like Brady 6, Do Your Job, a Football Life Belichick, Top 10 Patriots, SB Classics 36, 38, 39, 49, 51 and a couple of unwatchable ones, America's Game on each Pats winning SB season since #36. It goes on and on, baby, in a Scott Zolak voice.
 

Import78

Member
SoSH Member
May 29, 2007
1,728
West Lebanon, NH
But he isn't going over the center - that's the rule they were falsely penalized for. He is leaping through the center/guard gap. Could the guards get a hand up and trip him?
He wasn't going over the center, but I believe the guard did reach up and touch him as he was hurdling the line. The guard certainly tried to. I can't find the replay from the game, but I recall there was an angle that showed the guard reaching up and touching McClellin as he went over. That's what I initially thought the flag was for.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,617
delicious tears and all, but its a little frustrating to me that when the Patriots win a big game, the coverage is almost always about how the other team blew it, or bad calls.

I don't remember any articles detailing potential missed calls when the Broncos beat the Panthers, etc. I guess its all part of the fundamental disbelief that most fans/writers/etc have that the Patriots can consistently be this good.
To the extent that this is true, I think it's due to the fact that fans (and a lot of the media) tend to look at the game from the perspective that the team they are rooting for has the control. We talk about the Red Sox bullpen coughing up a lead, for example, not that the Rangers or whoever made a good comeback.

And in a situation where most of the country is rooting for whatever team is playing the Patriots, there is a tendency to ask that team WTF did you do to not win? So people became invested in rooting for the Seahawks or the Falcons as if they were their team and then question the play calling because they are angry at these teams for letting them down.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,408
He wasn't going over the center, but I believe the guard did reach up and touch him as he was hurdling the line. The guard certainly tried to. I can't find the replay from the game, but I recall there was an angle that showed the guard reaching up and touching McClellin as he went over. That's what I initially thought the flag was for.
Just re-watched the play on NFL Game Pass (well worth the $$, by the way). Here's exactly how the referee announced the penalty:

"Number 58, defense, he was on the line of scrimmage at the time the ball was snapped. Five yard penalty. Retry."

Buck had mentioned that maybe McClellin mistimed his leap, and official's announcement could possibly be interpreted that way. But what I think the official was saying was that because he was on the line of scrimmage, and lined up over center, that's a penalty.

Which set Belichick off, totally bonkers, because McClellin was NOT lined up over center, and thus if that was the actual ruling, it was a completely erroneous ruling. The ruling was NOT that he touched a lineman going over the top. On the official play by play sheet (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201702050atl.htm), you see him penalized for "illegal formation", which suggests that the call was in fact for McClellin being lined up over center.

Buck then said that the call was indeed illegal formation against the defense. Pereira said he didn't like the call because McClellin wasn't lined up directly over the center, and therefore it shouldn't have been a penalty.

Belichick yelled at the side judge, saying, "That's bulls***. He's not on the center he's on the fu**ing guard!"

As usual, Belichick was correct. The Pats got screwed a point in this game.

All's well that ends well, but that singular point could have ended up being huge.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
51,000
New York City
delicious tears and all, but its a little frustrating to me that when the Patriots win a big game, the coverage is almost always about how the other team blew it, or bad calls.

I don't remember any articles detailing potential missed calls when the Broncos beat the Panthers, etc. I guess its all part of the fundamental disbelief that most fans/writers/etc have that the Patriots can consistently be this good.
Well, the Falcons did blow it, in the midst of the Patriots furiously doing everything perfect in coming back.
 

Import78

Member
SoSH Member
May 29, 2007
1,728
West Lebanon, NH
Just re-watched the play on NFL Game Pass (well worth the $$, by the way). Here's exactly how the referee announced the penalty:

"Number 58, defense, he was on the line of scrimmage at the time the ball was snapped. Five yard penalty. Retry."

Buck had mentioned that maybe McClellin mistimed his leap, and official's announcement could possibly be interpreted that way. But what I think the official was saying was that because he was on the line of scrimmage, and lined up over center, that's a penalty.

Which set Belichick off, totally bonkers, because McClellin was NOT lined up over center, and thus if that was the actual ruling, it was a completely erroneous ruling. The ruling was NOT that he touched a lineman going over the top. On the official play by play sheet (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201702050atl.htm), you see him penalized for "illegal formation", which suggests that the call was in fact for McClellin being lined up over center.

Buck then said that the call was indeed illegal formation against the defense. Pereira said he didn't like the call because McClellin wasn't lined up directly over the center, and therefore it shouldn't have been a penalty.

Belichick yelled at the side judge, saying, "That's bulls***. He's not on the center he's on the fu**ing guard!"

As usual, Belichick was correct. The Pats got screwed a point in this game.

All's well that ends well, but that singular point could have ended up being huge.
Agreed that the call made was blown, he was clearly lined up over the guard.

I think the refs also missed that the guard touched him as he was crossing over the line. The guard quickly stood up and tried to touch McClellin as he was jumping the line (I saw a replay where it looked like he got him, but I can't find it). That is a different penalty, and was a strategy being discussed earlier in the thread as a way to prevent the jump-the-line-block.

I suppose they could have also bagged him for being lined up in the neutral zone if his timing was off, but I don't think there was a clear replay of that. I remember waiting for the view from the sideline, but I don't think it came.

My initial though was that he was flagged for touching a line man, then I thought maybe he was in the neutral zone at the time of the snap. I thought one or both of those happened and could have been called. I was a little put out that they blew the call, but not overly so since I think the refs missed at least one other penalty on the play.
 

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
6,175
Florida/Montana
Agreed that the call made was blown, he was clearly lined up over the guard.

I think the refs also missed that the guard touched him as he was crossing over the line. The guard quickly stood up and tried to touch McClellin as he was jumping the line (I saw a replay where it looked like he got him, but I can't find it). That is a different penalty, and was a strategy being discussed earlier in the thread as a way to prevent the jump-the-line-block.

I suppose they could have also bagged him for being lined up in the neutral zone if his timing was off, but I don't think there was a clear replay of that. I remember waiting for the view from the sideline, but I don't think it came.

My initial though was that he was flagged for touching a line man, then I thought maybe he was in the neutral zone at the time of the snap. I thought one or both of those happened and could have been called. I was a little put out that they blew the call, but not overly so since I think the refs missed at least one other penalty on the play.
Bottom line as I previously pointed out is that it's a scoring play and they should make it reviewable.
 

Dogman

Yukon Cornelius
Dope
Mar 19, 2004
13,978
Missoula, MT
Just about all friends out this way who are Packers, Seahawks, Cardinals, Bears, Lions, Vikings, 49ers and Bronco fans are calling him the GOAT.

A few dissenters here and there but it's over. Brady is the GOAT.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
7,846

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,781
La Mancha.
Best sound byte from the Sound FX was, on the ATL sideline:
Sanu: "He aint never met nothin' like this."
Gabriel: "It's TOM BRADY, tho."
Sanu: "I know I know, I.. I'm never comfortable, we 'bout to put up 40-sumptin on their ass..."
Gabriel: "Got to."
Sanu: "...but I'm sayin', they aint never seen anything like this."
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
54,012
San Andreas Fault
Brady could have probably played OT on the teams Baugh was a part of.
Baugh was a tough SOB. He played DB as well as QB and even led the league in interceptions one year. Tom isn't doing that. Baugh also punted for the Redskins, leading the league five times. Baugh in a fight probably wins. Happy we have Tom of course though.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
25,401
Saskatoon Canada
The Baugh argument was pretty special. Brady has, what, 2 inches and 40lbs on him but is a delicate snowflake in comparison? People's steadfast belief in how tough people *used* to be is always hilarious.
They were tougher. They played for less money, had worse equipment and were abused by the owners. My grandfather was 8 inches shorer 90 pounds lighter, but he was tougher, he had to be. at 12 years old his family put him on the train with 12 horses and twenty head of cattle from Ontario to Saskatchewan, roughly Michigan to Montana distance. When he got there he drove the horses and cows to his family's new ranch using only hand drawn map sent in a letter, because his father,in the days letters were the fastest way to send a message miscalculated the day the train would arrive. Generally, in the western world, life gets easier each generation, and sports are no generation. If you are going to simply teleport Baugh to the future teleport Brady back see ho willing he is play both ways and get his hands stepped on after each knockdown.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
32,058
AZ
Agreed that the call made was blown, he was clearly lined up over the guard.

I think the refs also missed that the guard touched him as he was crossing over the line. The guard quickly stood up and tried to touch McClellin as he was jumping the line (I saw a replay where it looked like he got him, but I can't find it). That is a different penalty, and was a strategy being discussed earlier in the thread as a way to prevent the jump-the-line-block.

I suppose they could have also bagged him for being lined up in the neutral zone if his timing was off, but I don't think there was a clear replay of that. I remember waiting for the view from the sideline, but I don't think it came.

My initial though was that he was flagged for touching a line man, then I thought maybe he was in the neutral zone at the time of the snap. I thought one or both of those happened and could have been called. I was a little put out that they blew the call, but not overly so since I think the refs missed at least one other penalty on the play.
It looks really close and I don't think it's obvious at all. He doesn't jump directly over the guard. He kind of jumps right over the gap. The rule is that his entire body must be outside the center's shoulder pads. Since he jumps a bit at an angle, he lands essentially behind the center when he hits the ground and I think the replay makes it hard to say his entire body was outside the center. It's really close.

Whether he was within a yard of the LOS on the snap though is almost impossible to tell because it's hard to judge depth.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
Jul 18, 2005
28,403
Alexandria, VA
Baugh was a tough SOB. He played DB as well as QB and even led the league in interceptions one year. Tom isn't doing that. Baugh also punted for the Redskins, leading the league five times. Baugh in a fight probably wins. Happy we have Tom of course though.
The year he led the league in picks as a DB, he also led in punting yards (total and per-punt) and passing yards (1943).

In 1945, he completed over 70% of his passes--that's still good for 5th best all time, and for the era is insane (nobody else in the top 100 predates 1975, and only about 5 predate 1990).
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
As another point simply touching the guy is not enough to get the landing version of the line jumping penalty.

At least not consistently.


Ask the Cardinals as they saw it called once when Collins touched a guy, and not another time when chancellor or another touched a guy.
 

Grimace-HS

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 8, 2012
841

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,585
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Baugh was a tough SOB. He played DB as well as QB and even led the league in interceptions one year. Tom isn't doing that. Baugh also punted for the Redskins, leading the league five times. Baugh in a fight probably wins. Happy we have Tom of course though.
Not disputing that, just saying that there's a world of difference in the athletic standards for both periods.
 

Stu Nahan

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2003
5,503
Best sound byte from the Sound FX was, on the ATL sideline:
Sanu: "He aint never met nothin' like this."
Gabriel: "It's TOM BRADY, tho."
Sanu: "I know I know, I.. I'm never comfortable, we 'bout to put up 40-sumptin on their ass..."
Gabriel: "Got to."
Sanu: "...but I'm sayin', they aint never seen anything like this."
Sanu sure talked a lot for a guy who had a whole two catches in the game. It was almost like the constant chatter on the ATL sideline was the Falcons trying to convince themselves that they had the game in hand.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,781
La Mancha.
Sanu sure talked a lot for a guy who had a whole two catches in the game. It was almost like the constant chatter on the ATL sideline was the Falcons trying to convince themselves that they had the game in hand.
Indeed. On the other hand, to Gabriel's credit he sounded like he knew exactly what TB12 was capable of.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
13,779
Richmond, VA
Watch it again, Cam throws it from the Panther-21 and it lands at about the Panther-33.

It's a fumble because the hand never moved forward before releasing the ball, but the defender / Cam's follow-through propelled it downfield after it became a fumble.
Sorry I was watching the play before it, which was still showing the replay of an earlier play at 3:50 (which wasn't called a fumble, apparently).

In the play you mention, the ball initially goes almost nowhere because there was no forward momentum on the arm. Then Cam's arm releases and he punches the ball forward. So barring the additional contact, the ball would have gone nowhere.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,408
That missed point meant that the Pats had to go for 2 at the end rather than have Gost kick for 1. Had Gost had to kick that PAT, my sphincter would've gotten an ulcer.
Ha, this may be the most true post in the entire thread. Because I was feeling exactly the same way.

Still, a Ghost PAT has a much higher success rate than a 2-point conversion.

But yeah...that would have been nerve-wracking, to say the least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.