Week 17

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,749
Neither coach wanted to play Overtime. Long season and both have a playoff game in 2 weeks.
It's at most 10 minutes and this game still had some meaning right?

Going for 2 from the 7 down by 1 point just doesn't make any sense to me if you want to win the game at all.

They played hard all game attempting to win and playing all their players... why make such a weird decision at that point?
 

speedracer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,837
Assuming the Lions had converted, I still need to see the numbers on the Cowboys driving for a go-ahead field goal with :26 and 2 timeouts versus 1
 

JOBU

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 22, 2021
8,663
It’s seems like the in booth ref changed his tune on “it’s a penalty 3 ways”. I still don’t know whats going on.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,042
AZ
ESPN is analyzing it, Seems like ref screwed up, they both went to report and ref only heard one.
Yeah, they both went over and Allen was headed toward the line of scrimmage and only recognized 70. I think Parry and Aikman had it exactly right.

The whole reporting thing is weird. Doesn’t the ref usually announce it on the mic? I have heard it at games.
 

Senator Donut

post-Domer
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
5,529
I think the issue was that Dan Skipper was trying to fake reporting to the ref to confuse Dallas. Skipper actually lines up at right tackle and is covered. Sewell shifts in as an extra tackle to Skipper’s right.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,517
It’s seems like the in booth ref changed his tune on “it’s a penalty 3 ways”. I still don’t know whats going on.
I don't think the three penalties are possible. If he reported he can be downfield. It's then just a matter of the illegal formation penalty. Hard to tell if the WR on his side was on the line or not.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,872
Springfield, VA
Here's a still. I see what Campbell was trying to do -- there are seven men on the line (six linemen plus a WR split out to the right) which means that 68 is technically a TE even though he lines up in a typical LT position. What I cdan't tell from here is where 70 is lined up. I tihnk he's in the RT position which means him and 68 can't both be eligible.

75875
 

speedracer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,837
Here's a still. I see what Campbell was trying to do -- there are seven men on the line (six linemen plus a WR split out to the right) which means that 68 is technically a TE even though he lines up in a typical LT position. What I cdan't tell from here is where 70 is lined up. I tihnk he's in the RT position which means him and 68 can't both be eligible.

View attachment 75875
Seems like 68 and 70 showed up, 68 reported and caught the ball but the ref thought only 70 reported?
 

Senator Donut

post-Domer
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
5,529
Here's a still. I see what Campbell was trying to do -- there are seven men on the line (six linemen plus a WR split out to the right) which means that 68 is technically a TE even though he lines up in a typical LT position. What I cdan't tell from here is where 70 is lined up. I tihnk he's in the RT position which means him and 68 can't both be eligible.

View attachment 75875
Yeah, I think that’s a missing part of this analysis. Skipper (70) cannot be an eligible receiver in this formation. Three linemen went to the white hat official and I think only one was trying to report as eligible. The ref doesn’t understand what’s going on and assumes 70 was reporting as he is the incoming sub.
 

JOBU

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 22, 2021
8,663
According to Campbell only 1 player can report? And 70 reported?
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,655
Campbell is pissed.

It looks like the ref got the wrong guy of the two who came up, and two came up in the first place to try to hide it as much as possible from the Cowboys.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,909
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
Campbell is saying he was told 70 reported but 68 didn’t, but that doesn’t line up with what appeared to transpire on the field. Decker (68) was there first, the ref heard something he said then walked toward the Dallas players. 70 got there as he was leaving and it didn’t look like the ref acknowledged him. I’m presuming, but the NFL’s explanation as Campbell reports doesn’t line up.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,142
Campbell really comes across as a giant baby. I cant wait to watch this moron get his ass handed to him in round 1
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
11,174
It looks like Brad Allen screwed up, but it's understandable because the Lions were trying to be extra tricky to fool the Cowboys but didn't realize that they had to put in more effort to not fool Brad Allen.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,387
It's at most 10 minutes and this game still had some meaning right?

Going for 2 from the 7 down by 1 point just doesn't make any sense to me if you want to win the game at all.

They played hard all game attempting to win and playing all their players... why make such a weird decision at that point?
Detroit is locked into the 3-seed, no? Campbell would have went for 2 from the 20 to not subject his team to another 10 min....and it worked if not for the procedural f-up.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,042
AZ
Here's a still. I see what Campbell was trying to do -- there are seven men on the line (six linemen plus a WR split out to the right) which means that 68 is technically a TE even though he lines up in a typical LT position. What I cdan't tell from here is where 70 is lined up. I tihnk he's in the RT position which means him and 68 can't both be eligible.

View attachment 75875
So if Allen thought 70 not 68 had reported, is the formation legal?
 

Investor 11

Plobbably the greatest videographer ever
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,916
San Diego
This is quite the water carrying on ESPN here covering for the ref and putting it all on the player. It sure looks like the ref looks at 68 nods his head and then goes to the cowboy line to report an eligible reciever.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,047
Hartford, CT
I think the issue was that Dan Skipper was trying to fake reporting to the ref to confuse Dallas. Skipper actually lines up at right tackle and is covered. Sewell shifts in as an extra tackle to Skipper’s right.
Yeah, this is the only take that adds up because otherwise you’d have too many eligible receivers on the field.

There was a lot of deception and movement going on with Detroit's reporting gambit there, so I don’t have complete sympathy for them. If you don’t hear your number announced then something went wrong with the eligibility determination, but Detroit plowed ahead, presumably to keep the ruse.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,368
Campbell really comes across as a giant baby. I cant wait to watch this moron get his ass handed to him in round 1
What?! He just got royally fucked by the zebras. I think he was relatively restrained. He was 10x more respectful to the media than belichick ever is
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,047
Hartford, CT
Here's a still. I see what Campbell was trying to do -- there are seven men on the line (six linemen plus a WR split out to the right) which means that 68 is technically a TE even though he lines up in a typical LT position. What I cdan't tell from here is where 70 is lined up. I tihnk he's in the RT position which means him and 68 can't both be eligible.

View attachment 75875
If you have an OL number (50-79) you aren’t an eligible receiver unless you report as eligible, so his alignment isn’t determinative.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,042
AZ
Campbell is saying he was told 70 reported but 68 didn’t, but that doesn’t line up with what appeared to transpire on the field. Decker (68) was there first, the ref heard something he said then walked toward the Dallas players. 70 got there as he was leaving and it didn’t look like the ref acknowledged him. I’m presuming, but the NFL’s explanation as Campbell reports doesn’t line up.
Look at the video above. Allen points at 70. The Lions were trying to be confusing and Allen thinks that 70 is reporting then goes to run to the line, presumably to tell the Cowboys 70 was eligible, which he is required to do.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,872
Springfield, VA
Who’s this guy on ESPN? He’s mixing up 68 and 70.

The only two explanations are that Allen f-ed up or 68 told the ref that 70 was reporting
No, it think you're the one who's mixed up. Three players approach the ref: 58, 68, and 70. It looks like 68 tried to report as eligible, but the ref was looking behind him at 70 running onto the field and apparently doesn't realize that it was 68 reporting, not 70.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,368
That guy on espn was a clown. He’s saying it’s on the player for not demonstrably chasing the ref and making sure his communication sticks. That would take away all the deception of the play as svp pointed out
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,387
Had McCarthy not thrown deep on 2nd down with the Lions only having one TO remaining we wouldn't even be having this discussion. How can one NFL coach continually f-up the clock year after year and still have a job?
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,655
Detroit is locked into the 3-seed, no? Campbell would have went for 2 from the 20 to not subject his team to another 10 min....and it worked if not for the procedural f-up.
Broadcast was saying winning out would have Detroit at least the 2 seed.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,749
Detroit is locked into the 3-seed, no? Campbell would have went for 2 from the 20 to not subject his team to another 10 min....and it worked if not for the procedural f-up.
They played all game as if they wanted to win the game.

If they didn't care about winning, play the scrubs. That would have saved their starters a lot more than up to 10 extra minutes.

But if they did care, why make such a clearly suboptimal decision at the end?
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,872
Springfield, VA
This reminds me of the Belichick tackle-eligible play (or plays?) against Baltimore however many years ago that got Jim Harbaugh ripshit. The person who is two to the left of the center (normally the LT) is actually the TE because there are three ineigilbe linemen right of the center, rather than two.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,387
That guy on espn was a clown. He’s saying it’s on the player for not demonstrably chasing the ref and making sure his communication sticks. That would take away all the deception of the play as svp pointed out
What deception? The lineman's number is announced when he reports as eligible. That's the point of the rule...so there is no deception.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,142
What?! He just got royally fucked by the zebras. I think he was relatively restrained. He was 10x more respectful to the media than belichick ever is
But with the screwing already done, he still refused to move on and go for it two more times. And then leaves the presser by explaining his anger was because he hates losing. Yet, i just watched him make back to back decisions not giving a fuck about maximizing his team's chances to win in the moment.

I am going to enjoy watching them get their pants pulled down round 1.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,042
AZ
No, it think you're the one who's mixed up. Three players approach the ref: 58, 68, and 70. It looks like 68 tried to report as eligible, but the ref was looking behind him at 70 running onto the field and apparently doesn't realize that it was 68 reporting, not 70.
Yeah. I think Allen actually points at 70. It’s hard to see but it is between 5 and 6 seconds on the video.