2012 NFL Season

[Dan]

#26 - Jacksonville - Mario Manningham, WR

I wish

[TCO]

Some great lines in this thread, my favourite though

Aaron Rodgers won't do the trick I think. He's gonna be like the Jay Cutlers and the Alex Smiths of the world trying to fill in for great QBs

[Slogger]

I still stand by my facebook post that it looks like a cat yawning.

[GhostMachine]

Sadly, the logo change isn't going to be accompanied by the hiring of George `The Animal' Steele as their new head coach, or Asian Mist being used during the coin toss.

[Kane's Mullet Slacker]

I still stand by my facebook post that it looks like a cat yawning.

Which is an appropriate reaction to watching a Jacksonville Jaguars game.

[Cactus Drags]

It's one of the rules thats always confused me to be honest as a 'casual' fan, how much can you grab a receiver? It just feels weird that in the middle of the park defensive and offensive lines just batter into each other, but with a receiver you can have holding and pass interference. Full contact or no contact are easy enough, whereas that no call was just confusing to me.

Basically, you can't make contact with a receiver that impedes his attempt to make the catch. Stuff like tripping, arm tugging, holding, jersey tugging, obstructing his route. Goes both ways too, all defensive players are eligible receivers. Once contact is made with the ball in any way shape or form, he's fair game. Basically. I'm pretty sure Goodell's trying to legislate all contact against offensive players out of the game.

[Lint]

So is it time for an offseason thread?

[gunnar hendershow]

I suppose we can do that. Players are going to start getting cut with greater frequency from here on out.

[Colly]

It's one of the rules thats always confused me to be honest as a 'casual' fan, how much can you grab a receiver? It just feels weird that in the middle of the park defensive and offensive lines just batter into each other, but with a receiver you can have holding and pass interference. Full contact or no contact are easy enough, whereas that no call was just confusing to me.

Basically, you can't make contact with a receiver that impedes his attempt to make the catch. Stuff like tripping, arm tugging, holding, jersey tugging, obstructing his route. Goes both ways too, all defensive players are eligible receivers. Once contact is made with the ball in any way shape or form, he's fair game. Basically. I'm pretty sure Goodell's trying to legislate all contact against offensive players out of the game.

Surely any contact on the receiver from the point the quarterback throws (or indeed shapes to throw as the receiver is already gone) is impeding them though? It feels such a grey area, again from someone who watches three or four games a season at best.

[Cactus Drags]

It's one of the rules thats always confused me to be honest as a 'casual' fan, how much can you grab a receiver? It just feels weird that in the middle of the park defensive and offensive lines just batter into each other, but with a receiver you can have holding and pass interference. Full contact or no contact are easy enough, whereas that no call was just confusing to me.

Basically, you can't make contact with a receiver that impedes his attempt to make the catch. Stuff like tripping, arm tugging, holding, jersey tugging, obstructing his route. Goes both ways too, all defensive players are eligible receivers. Once contact is made with the ball in any way shape or form, he's fair game. Basically. I'm pretty sure Goodell's trying to legislate all contact against offensive players out of the game.

Surely any contact on the receiver from the point the quarterback throws (or indeed shapes to throw as the receiver is already gone) is impeding them though? It feels such a grey area, again from someone who watches three or four games a season at best.

The NFL rulebook is a goddamned minefield of unnecessary legal-speech and lengthy, strained definitions of stuff. But the interference calls come into play when the ball is deemed catchable, i.e. when it's reasonable to assume the ball is close enough to the receiver for a catch to be made. There's the illegal contact penalty for obstructing a receiver when he's running downfield (there's a 5-yard window from the line of scrimmage in which it's legal to contact a receiver).

Having to write it out now, it does seem pretty complex, but the more games you watch, the better a handle you'll get it on it. My rule of thumb is generally that the opposite of what Phil Simms says is the correct call.

[Colly]

Nah, I think I get it. It's a rule I'd almost like brought into soccer (that felt dirty) to wipe out the 'kick the ball twenty yards down the field then run into a defender and fall over' nonsense, but its so difficult to judge if they'd get the ball, especially with 3 officials and no challenges.

In which case, that should have been called on Sunday...

[gunnar hendershow]

Another rule of thumb is that if the ball lands out of bounds the judgment will be to treat the ball as not being catchable. Again this is a tough judgment to make since sometimes the ball will barely land out of bounds, but more often than not they won't call an interference penalty on the play since the receiver would not have caught it anyway.

The play in the Super Bowl in question had one of two judgments leading to the non-call. 1) The ball landed out of bounds; or 2) Crabtree had his arm pushing on Smith's helmet. It becomes a chicken or the egg question when both players are pushing on one another. In the end you'll rarely see the referees award a 1st & goal at the 1 yard line unless the ball is clearly catchable and the receiver was forcefully held back. If holding was called on Smith there would be a pretty significant controversy as well since, as noted, Crabtree was pushing on him though it admittedly came after Smith had wrapped him up. A moral of the story here is if you want to hold a WR or interfere you need to make sure your eyes are turned towards the ball and that you are selling any contact they make on you. Then there's the chance no flag will be thrown.

Also, Bernard Pollard rebroke 6 ribs on the first play of the Super Bowl (the pass to Vernon Davis that was called back). He missed only one play from then on out. What a badass.

[Your Mom]

:lmao: Joe Flacco was going to run out on the field and tackle Ted Ginn if he had broken past the D on that kickoff at the end.

[gunnar hendershow]

:lmao: Joe Flacco was going to run out on the field and tackle Ted Ginn if he had broken past the D on that kickoff at the end.

I think the penalty for that would have resulted in them doing a re-kick.

[Your Mom]

Yeah thats what they were talking about on ESPN. What would have happened if he did? Apparently it happened at some way old College game and they gave them the TD.

Can you imagine though? People say teams like the Patriots are cheaters but imagine if he had done that and the Ravens won? No one would accept that as a real win.

[gunnar hendershow]

Yeah I read some details on it.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/21663826/joe-flacco-told-sideline-ravens-to-tackle-ted-ginn-if-he-broke-return

I highly doubt anyone would have gone out there, by the time they had mentally processed everything it would have likely been too late but man oh man what an ending that would have been.

The whole thing is hilarious, because Flacco is so deadpan and awkward about nearly everything. Yet once and awhile he'll come through with a gem of a soundbite because he evidently lacks any sort of verbal filter. We'll reach a point in his career where "Flaccoisms" is not just a Twitter account but one of the most followed.

[Plubby]

"The whole thing is hilarious"

If the roles were reversed Baltimore fans would be ropeable.

[gunnar hendershow]

If roles were reversed it wouldn't be Joe saying it. That's the only part that makes this funny. It would be reprehensible if someone actually went ahead and did listened to him, or if he went out there himself, but just like Donovan McNabb you're not sure whether the guy has a remarkably dry sense of humor or zero social tact.