NFL 2012- Name your team!!!

[flynnibus]

I was merely pointing out that once the QB is out of the pocket and making forward progress, he is no different than any other player on the field

Simply put.. you're wrong.

Read the rule - read the interpretation I provided from the league before. A passer is treated differently from a runner regardless of the pocket. You keep bringing up the pocket and its meaningless. Second, the passer does not become a runner purely based on forward progress - this is clear in the interpretation from the league linked previously. Third, in the play in question, Flacco isn't even running forward.

So your point is based on wrong information. Information you refuse to educate yourself on. After all, it's information anyone can lookup if they cared too...

 

[captainkidd]

Simply put.. you're wrong.

Read the rule - read the interpretation I provided from the league before. A passer is treated differently from a runner regardless of the pocket. You keep bringing up the pocket and its meaningless. Second, the passer does not become a runner purely based on forward progress - this is clear in the interpretation from the league linked previously. Third, in the play in question, Flacco isn't even running forward.

So your point is based on wrong information. Information you refuse to educate yourself on. After all, it's information anyone can lookup if they cared too...

You're hilarious. From your own link:

When a quarterback retreats to pass and moves in an attempt to avoid the pass rush, even if he is moving forward in the pocket, he has roughing-the-passer protection -- until he clearly becomes a runner.

So, simply put, you're wrong. When a QB becomes a runner, he can be treated the same way any other offensive player can be treated. That's the rule. Does the referee try and protect the QB and at times call the roughing the passer penalty in this situation? Of course they do. Doesn't change the rule though. What I AM mistaken about (so it seems) is the forward progress. I thought once the QB starts moving past the line of scrimmage, he's open season. Of course, I don't understand in what situation the QB would be running and not out of the pocket, unless just running in circles.

It's like a punter. You can't run into them when they're kicking the ball away, but on the return, if they go to make a tackle, they can be blocked just like anyone else can. Same thing if it's a fake punt or fake field goal. Once you start running with the ball, you become an offensive player who is subject to the same rules every other offensive player is subject to.

A reason it has become an issue is that half the time calls are made, and half the time they are not. There seems to be great confusion on what players can get away with, but that extends beyond the QB position.

 

[flynnibus]

You're hilarious. From your own link:

When a quarterback retreats to pass and moves in an attempt to avoid the pass rush, even if he is moving forward in the pocket, he has roughing-the-passer protection -- until he clearly becomes a runner.

Yes, until he clearly becomes a runner.. which is not defined by the pocket (yet you keep bringing it up) and if you read the rest of the article..

Johnson also warns defenses that once a quarterback "clearly establishes a passing posture, he is covered by all of the special protections for passers."

When the guy is completing the pass.. how do you see him as a runner in that situation?

The passer is in the act of passing the ball while scrambling to the right and BACKWARDS - as a passer that does not make them a runner. So the clearly the part you highlighted does not apply.

 

[captainkidd]

Yes, until he clearly becomes a runner.. which is not defined by the pocket (yet you keep bringing it up) and if you read the rest of the article..



When the guy is completing the pass.. how do you see him as a runner in that situation?

The passer is in the act of passing the ball while scrambling to the right and BACKWARDS - as a passer that does not make them a runner. So the clearly the part you highlighted does not apply.

We're not talking about "completing a pass" or scrambling. At least, I'm not. Flaaco was moving forward with the ball and ran out of bounds. After he crosses the line of scrimmage, up until the point which he steps out of bounds, he is able to be tackled just like anyone else. If we were discussing "completing a pass", it'd be a moot point if he was past the line of scrimmage. I can't imagine the rule protects the passer once he passes the line of scrimmage, regardless if he arches his arm back in a throwing position. Maybe you and I have different idea of when the QB becomes a runner, but to me, once he has moved past the line of scrimmage with the football, he is now a runner.

As for the pocket, I guess I'm not following the rule on that one. I thought once the QB left the pocket, scrambling or not, he was considered a runner who is able to be tackled, or if behind the line of scrimmage, sacked.

 

[flynnibus]

We're not talking about "completing a pass" or scrambling. At least, I'm not. Flaaco was moving forward with the ball and ran out of bounds. After he crosses the line of scrimmage, up until the point which he steps out of bounds, he is able to be tackled just like anyone else

Because again (suprise) you are wrong about the situation.

He did not cross the line of scrimmage. He did not run to advance the ball. He was scrambling to his right, THREW THE BALL, and got hit. It's an incomplete pass in the box score.. because he THREW THE BALL.

The video - jump to 9:09
http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/0ap2000000135690/Super-Bowl-XLVII-Ravens-vs-49ers-highlights

You can soak in the opinion of the two hall of famers comments on the hit too.

You bring up the pocket - irrelevant to the rule
You bring up the line of scrimmage - irrelevant to the play

He wasn't a runner in the play - he was a passer completing a pass.. and got hit OUT OF BOUNDS. Not late hit after pass.. hit out of bounds. It's a double whammy.

After he crosses the line of scrimmage, up until the point which he steps out of bounds, he is able to be tackled just like anyone else. If we were discussing "completing a pass", it'd be a moot point if he was past the line of scrimmage. I can't imagine the rule protects the passer once he passes the line of scrimmage, regardless if he arches his arm back in a throwing position. Maybe you and I have different idea of when the QB becomes a runner, but to me, once he has moved past the line of scrimmage with the football, he is now a runner.

He never ran past the line of scrimmage (never got close to it because he ran 10+ yards back when scrambling). Obviously once a passer can no longer pass because they are past the line of scrimmage.. they are a runner, but again, that has nothing to do with this situation.

Even as runners, you still see the QBs protected in those situations (both helmet to helmet and late hits) more than any other player. Which IMO is stupid - they take that chance when they tuck the ball and run. But this was a passing play, not a running play regardless.

 

[captainkidd]

Because again (suprise) you are wrong about the situation.

He did not cross the line of scrimmage. He did not run to advance the ball. He was scrambling to his right, THREW THE BALL, and got hit. It's an incomplete pass in the box score.. because he THREW THE BALL.

The video - jump to 9:09
http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/0ap2000000135690/Super-Bowl-XLVII-Ravens-vs-49ers-highlights

You can soak in the opinion of the two hall of famers comments on the hit too.

You bring up the pocket - irrelevant to the rule
You bring up the line of scrimmage - irrelevant to the play

He wasn't a runner in the play - he was a passer completing a pass.. and got hit OUT OF BOUNDS. Not late hit after pass.. hit out of bounds. It's a double whammy.




He never ran past the line of scrimmage (never got close to it because he ran 10+ yards back when scrambling). Obviously once a passer can no longer pass because they are past the line of scrimmage.. they are a runner, but again, that has nothing to do with this situation.

Even as runners, you still see the QBs protected in those situations (both helmet to helmet and late hits) more than any other player. Which IMO is stupid - they take that chance when they tuck the ball and run. But this was a passing play, not a running play regardless.

What the hell play was I thinking about?

OK - I was wrong.

By the way, in your sarcastic remark insulting me, you spelled surprise wrong.

 

[flynnibus]

What the hell play was I thinking about?

I have no idea - Flacco did not rush for a single play in the game. He scrambled in the pocket (like stepping forward in the TD pass to Jones) and was sacked twice but never rushed the ball the entire game.

I hope it makes you feel better about finding a typo in post.

 

[captainkidd]

I have no idea - Flacco did not rush for a single play in the game. He scrambled in the pocket (like stepping forward in the TD pass to Jones) and was sacked twice but never rushed the ball the entire game.

I hope it makes you feel better about finding a typo in post.

No, I was just screwing with you. You know what they say - If you lose an online discussion, you can always resort to a typo. I was wrong about this one. I obviously wasn't paying close attention to the game. Must have been too bitter about the Pats not being there.

 

[flynnibus]

So what do you think happens with Welker on the open market? Wallace will be a FA too as is Jennings... kind of flooding the premium WR market.

Then guys like Cruz (Restricted) Stokley, Tate, and others filling in behind.

I expect Welker to be the top WR signing.. but I don't think Belichick will sacrifice to do it for the Pats.

 

[captainkidd]

So what do you think happens with Welker on the open market? Wallace will be a FA too as is Jennings... kind of flooding the premium WR market.

Then guys like Cruz (Restricted) Stokley, Tate, and others filling in behind.

I expect Welker to be the top WR signing.. but I don't think Belichick will sacrifice to do it for the Pats.

I hope they let Welker go. I like the guy and he's done a lot of good things for the team, but here's the way I see it - If you throw any receiver in the NFL the ball 200 times, they're bound to catch it 150 times. He's just not much of a deep threat, and with Gronk, Hernandez and Edelman, he's become expendable. Especially when you consider all the dropped passes. I'd love to see them go after Jennings. They need the deep threat, and Lloyd while talented, simply isn't there, at least not yet. And Brady's window is closing.

 

[flynnibus]

For a deep threat worthwhile - you need to be able to throw the deep ball Brady's strength is his precision, quick throw, consistency, and reads - not necessarily deep bomb arm strength. He's no push over.. but I don't think it plays to his total package.

I wouldn't think of Edelman as stepping up to be a #1 reciever. The Pats have worked because of the # of weapons.. not being one dimensional. They gotta replace Welker and I don't think an up-and-comer will fill the gap. It would be interesting if they could make a play for Jennings.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!! Celebration in B-More!

 

[PUSH]

My thoughts on the no-call: Both Crabtree and Smith (I believe it was Smith) were grabbing and tugging at each other. Smith had his arm around Crabtree that should've been a hold. Crabtree was completely pushing on Smith (mainly his helmet). The ball would've been incredibly difficult to catch while keeping both feet in bounds, too. In the end I think the outcome would've been the same no matter what.

 

[flynnibus]

In the end I think the outcome would've been the same no matter what.

It's a big swing.. defensive holding would have been half the distance to the goal and a new set of downs. Instead it was turnover on downs. If they scored, they would have gone for two, eating even more clock, leaving the ravens to kick a FG for a tie or win.

It doesn't matter if the ball was catchable or not.. defensive holding doesn't have that requirement like PI does.

But couldda, shudda,wouldah

 

[PUSH]

It's a big swing.. defensive holding would have been half the distance to the goal and a new set of downs. Instead it was turnover on downs. If they scored, they would have gone for two, eating even more clock, leaving the ravens to kick a FG for a tie or win.

It doesn't matter if the ball was catchable or not.. defensive holding doesn't have that requirement like PI does.

But couldda, shudda,wouldah

If there's two penalties though (as I thought there were), both would have been wiped out and just a replay of downs.

 

[flynnibus]

If there's two penalties though (as I thought there were), both would have been wiped out and just a replay of downs.

They never call both the receiver and defensive back on the same set of actions. Same play, yeah, but not in the same hangup. They either let it go or call out the initiating (or worst offending) guy.

Its not like fights where they often throw PF flags at both sides to prevent having to single out one better in the right..

 

[captainkidd]

For a deep threat worthwhile - you need to be able to throw the deep ball Brady's strength is his precision, quick throw, consistency, and reads - not necessarily deep bomb arm strength. He's no push over.. but I don't think it plays to his total package.

I wouldn't think of Edelman as stepping up to be a #1 reciever. The Pats have worked because of the # of weapons.. not being one dimensional. They gotta replace Welker and I don't think an up-and-comer will fill the gap. It would be interesting if they could make a play for Jennings.

There's more than just Edelman. They could move Woodhead more into a slot receiver. Vereen is more of a short outside threat, but he can catch the deep ball. Brady doesn't have the strongest arm in the league, but if they had a good deep threat, he could do damage. Look at 2007 with Moss. The problem is, they've had to move away from that game because they haven't had the deep threat in so long. I see them going after a deep threat in the draft.

Vegas odds came out already for next year. Pats are current favorites to win the SB at 7-1. Kind of silly to have odds out before draft and free agency is done, but it is what it is.

 

[captainkidd]

My thoughts on the no-call: Both Crabtree and Smith (I believe it was Smith) were grabbing and tugging at each other. Smith had his arm around Crabtree that should've been a hold. Crabtree was completely pushing on Smith (mainly his helmet). The ball would've been incredibly difficult to catch while keeping both feet in bounds, too. In the end I think the outcome would've been the same no matter what.

That's the thing - Even if the 49ers had scored, there still would have been a good 90 seconds for the Ravens to work with, and I believe they had all 3 timeouts. Granted, the 49ers had the momentum, but Flaaco was on his game and proved he can play under pressure. I think the Ravens would have come right back and scored.

 

[acishere]

Apparently the Ravens reenacted the Hangover films Monday with the Lombardi trophy standing in for Doug:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2013/02/04/ravens-lost-super-bowl-trophy/1891285/

No confirmation as to whether Ray Lewis found a tiger in his bathroom when he woke up.

 

[flynnibus]

Apparently the Ravens reenacted the Hangover films Monday with the Lombardi trophy standing in for Doug:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2013/02/04/ravens-lost-super-bowl-trophy/1891285/

No confirmation as to whether Ray Lewis found a tiger in his bathroom when he woke up.

It had been taken to the team plane... surprised that story wasn't updated.