Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789 LastLast
Results 85 to 96 of 106
  1. #85

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!



    The bottom line is that this rule has been into effect for what...15-18 years?

    It has never been thought of as stupid until now of course.




  2. #86

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    With the distance from defender to QB shrinking like that, there actually would be a ton more sacks.

    No OC wants to shorten the distance between his QB and defender.
    I agree, the tighter you are, the closer the DE is, plus it is obviously no advantage to barely shorten how far you have to move laterally in order to throw it away considering you still would have to move towards the outside pressure and more importantly an incomplete pass doesn't help. If one wants to simply say that the rule gives some incentive to rolling out (because of how easy you can ditch the ball when you are about to be sacked) then I agree, and it does, but it still makes your QB from towards the outside pressure (the flank of your line which is exposed).




  3. #87

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    BTW, here is the confusing thing I saw regarding the rules (pocket vs. tackle-position/box):

    http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/definitions

    Pocket Area: Applies from a point two yards outside of either offensive tackle and includes the tight end if he drops off the line of scrimmage to pass protect. Pocket extends longitudinally behind the line back to offensive team’s own end line.
    According to that definition Vick would be pretty close to being inside the pocket, though still not clearly inside.




  4. #88

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    I just said that it's extreme and nobody would do it.

    It's pure theoretical.

    But based on your assumptions, it could happen...whether it makes sense to run a play like that or not.

    You are obviously pissed that we lost like that so I don't think your mind is actually being opened to see the logic in the rule...there is plenty of it.

    You want a defined space for this rule. If you start moving it based on where lineman wind up while getting mandhandled by defenders, you are making grounding even more of a judgement call than it is.

    As for the shoulder to shoulder thing...sure I guess if OC's want to just throw the ball away on every play, sure it may help some.

    But it would also get your QB destroyed so the shoulder to shoulder thing makes no sense.
    Yes I am pissed, that despite the fact that Philly looked like one of the worst teams in the league, the Refs allowed their DB's to RAPE our WR's all game, and then called a ticky tack OPI on JOnes on our winning touchdown. To compound that, they allow Vick to do what, apparently follows the rules as written, but couldn't have possibly been a more perfect representation of the SPIRIT of the grounding rule. He basically DROPPED the ball right before hitting the ground and it's an incomplete pass? that's ridiculous. The rule is worded poorly, fact.




  5. #89

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    I agree, the tighter you are, the closer the DE is, plus it is obviously no advantage to barely shorten how far you have to move laterally in order to throw it away considering you still would have to move towards the outside pressure and more importantly an incomplete pass doesn't help. If one wants to simply say that the rule gives some incentive to rolling out (because of how easy you can ditch the ball when you are about to be sacked) then I agree, and it does, but it still makes your QB from towards the outside pressure (the flank of your line which is exposed).
    It also cuts off half the field.

    These OC's aren't stupid...if they felt there was a competitve advantage to just rolling QB's out for the sole purpose of being able to throw the ball away, they obviously don't have much confidence in their QB's to complete passes or their OL to protect.

    Have some people not seen how the league has been trying to protect QB's to an absurd degree? That rule was put in long ago to give QB's some protection...instead of having to take a hit or grounding call, it gave them an out. And the NFL tried to take as much of the judgement out of calling it by giving the refs a defined, set area to work with at the snap as opposed to having to keep track of where linemen windup over the course of a play.




  6. #90

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    BTW, here is the confusing thing I saw regarding the rules (pocket vs. tackle-position/box):

    http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/definitions



    According to that definition Vick would be pretty close to being inside the pocket, though still not clearly inside.
    If Celek had stayed in to block it's a sure grounding then, but since he went on an inconsequential route it's not.

    So yes, if you rollout, and drop the ball on your way to the ground it's an incomplete pass, good rule.




  7. #91

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    Yes I am pissed, that despite the fact that Philly looked like one of the worst teams in the league, the Refs allowed their DB's to RAPE our WR's all game, and then called a ticky tack OPI on JOnes on our winning touchdown. To compound that, they allow Vick to do what, apparently follows the rules as written, but couldn't have possibly been a more perfect representation of the SPIRIT of the grounding rule. He basically DROPPED the ball right before hitting the ground and it's an incomplete pass? that's ridiculous. The rule is worded poorly, fact.
    I'm pissed too, but come on...the league has been going with the literal interpretation for ever because it takes judgmental opinions out of the equation.

    That's why I brought up the tuck rule...EVERYBODY knew that was a fumble....everybody. But the league goes with the literal interpretation...that's what they instruct their refs to do.




  8. #92

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    YOu are trying to say 5 men are 18 feet wide, shoulder to shoulder? Try half that, even 300 poounders. How they are currently lined up they can probably squeeze entire people into each hole. Thus they DOUBLE the width of the pocket, when being in the pocket is a HUGELY negative thing.
    LOL. "Half that." Nonsense. Measure your own width shoulder to shoulder. Mine is 24 inches without pads and I am 5'11", about 170 lbs. 300 lbs plus huge shoulder pads is easily approaching 36 inches per person. Plus elbow room to get down (few inches between each guy).

    Also there are small advantages to being in the pocket, regarding roughing the passer rules.
    Last edited by Haloti92; 09-18-2012 at 07:41 PM.




  9. #93

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    FWIW, I see how some people may have had that initial opinion of grounding, but taking into account what happened Sunday, I can name 10-15 things that piss me off WAY more than a potential missed grounding call.




  10. #94

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    It also cuts off half the field.

    These OC's aren't stupid...if they felt there was a competitve advantage to just rolling QB's out for the sole purpose of being able to throw the ball away, they obviously don't have much confidence in their QB's to complete passes or their OL to protect.

    Have some people not seen how the league has been trying to protect QB's to an absurd degree? That rule was put in long ago to give QB's some protection...instead of having to take a hit or grounding call, it gave them an out. And the NFL tried to take as much of the judgement out of calling it by giving the refs a defined, set area to work with at the snap as opposed to having to keep track of where linemen windup over the course of a play.
    The way it is, they might as well just say that QB's are immune to fumbles and sacks. Just eliminate the whole pocket verbage, take all the guesswork out and say if the ball leaves a QB's hands and hits the ground it's incomplete. Because when you the brain out of the referee you end up with ridiculous crap like this. Dude dropped the ball because he was in the process of getting pounded into the turf and he gets the ball at the previous spot for some completely insane reason.




  11. #95

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    I'm pissed too, but come on...the league has been going with the literal interpretation for ever because it takes judgmental opinions out of the equation.

    That's why I brought up the tuck rule...EVERYBODY knew that was a fumble....everybody. But the league goes with the literal interpretation...that's what they instruct their refs to do.
    Don't get me started on the tuck rule... that's one pof the most ridiculous calls in all of pro-sports history. It was a CLEAR gimme to the Pats... I'm one of the conspiracy theorists that think someone in the league offices must have made that call. Complete and utter lunacy.




  12. #96

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    FWIW, I see how some people may have had that initial opinion of grounding, but taking into account what happened Sunday, I can name 10-15 things that piss me off WAY more than a potential missed grounding call.
    Agreed, there are plenty of worse things about that game, the primary to me was the complete inequality in the way PIs and defensive holding was called. Reminds me COMPLETELY of the Colts Pats playoff game where the Refs allowed the Pats to interfere with basically every receiver on basically every snap of the game.

    BUt don't forget, this play turned out to be the gamewinner. And by the SPIRIT of the rule was EXACTLY why tere is such a thing as grouding. He intentionally threw the ball in the ground to avoid a sack. PERIOD, it's what he did, what he tried to do and I don't need to be in his head to know that, it is plain and obvious as the night is dark.
    Last edited by jonboy79; 09-18-2012 at 04:39 PM.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland