Couldn’t he have waited in the end zone for a few seconds, then down it? With blockers slowing down the kicking team’s fastest tacklers, there should be plenty of time. That makes it a coaching error.
I liked when he started jogging off the field and she had to jog to keep up with him while asking questions.
Interviewing virtually any football player at any point during the season is an utterly pointless endeavor anyway.
Football players are physically incapable of uttering any sentence that does not include one or more of the following: “need(s) to execute”, “stick to the/our gameplan”, “came/come away with the win”, “one week at a time”.
Brett Favre is apparently the sole exception. I think his tongue is getting loosened by all these retirements or something.
Brilliant! Ten years ago I would have come up with that on my own. I must be getting old.
When does the clock start on kickoff returns? For some reason, I think it starts when the receiver crosses the goal line (on a kick into the end zone).
Buffalo also had their hands team out there. They’re there to recover the ball in a scramble, but they’re not blockers. The best thing to do in that situation is to run the ball out and go down at (or even before) first contact.
We all are. This Sunday at Noon (UK Time) was the game of the season - Aston Villa v Birmigham City. Trouble is, noon in Birmingham is 7 a.m. in Virginia. And 7 a.m. doesn’t work for me. At least I woke up to happy news.
Presumably, but keep in mind that if he takes it out he’s somewhat more likely to cross the 20 than not to, and *much *more likely get to the 30 (or even the 40 or the 50) than to be taken down at the 10. Yes, a turnover is a possibility that should be considered, but on average McKelvin helps his team by running it out, even discounting clock drain.
Nope, the clock starts when the ball is touched.
The clock starts on the kickoff. Only after the 2 minute warning of either half does the clock start when a player (for either team) legally touches the ball.
Cite? That wasn’t the case last night; I was specifically watching the clock on McKelvin’s return – the kickoff took place with 2:06 or 2:07 remaining, and it didn’t start until the ball was caught.
No time runs off the clock if the kick returner kneels down in the endzone. I never knew the specifics of the rule, but the theory that the clock doesn’t start until the returner comes out of the end zone sounds exactly right to me.
Where’s your AFL pride?
This is my understanding as well, and it’s also applied when downing punts inside the 5. If the gunner touches the endzone he must establish himself back out of the endzone with two feet before he can down the ball. If he fails to establish both feet, it’s a touchback.
I believe that’s the play that created the rule. Omni cited the wrong rule upthread. That one states that the ball is allowed to touch the ground so long as the receiver retains clear possession throughout.
The rule that (I’m pretty sure) Shockey’s TD created was the rule that the receiver must retain possession all the way through the end of the catch if he goes to the ground. Basically, if you catch the ball in the air and fall to the ground, you must stand up after the play is blown dead with the ball still firmly in your possession, and it can never have moved around on your person indicating loss of possession. This is different than the rule Omni cited because in this case, the ball may well never touch the ground and still be ruled incomplete. For example, consider the Santonio Holmes Superbowl winning catch. If as he fell the ball bounced up off his elbow or whatever and he pulled it back in, it would have been incomplete without ever touching the ground.
That Raiders TD catch didn’t just move around; it actually lost all contact with the receivers hand, lying on the ground beneath his legs. Clear loss of possession before he stood up with the ball, ergo no touchdown.
No, the rule as it applies to the Shockey catch (I’m not aware of a popular “Shockey Rule”) as I understand it specifically requires the player to be going out of bounds. The reason Shockey’s catch would have been incomplete is that he was laying out of bounds when he bobbled the ball rendering the 2 feet moot.
The Murphy catch had elements of both, but had the ball not touched the ground even if it had shifted on his body’s impact with the ground it still would have been a catch since he was entirely in the field of play. The Bert Emanuel rule is more specific to a ball touching the ground while in play which is what this is. The Holmes catch is more similar to the Shockey catch but it too has elements of both. Shockey’s was unique in that the ball touching the ground wasn’t really a factor.
Shockey was nowhere near the sideline. He was in the center of the field about two yards into the endzone, so figure 8 yards to the back of the endzone and 20 yards to the nearest sideline. That really shouldn’t have been a catch, which is why (I think) the league instituted the rule that you have to maintain possession through going to the ground.
Here is a link to the NFL apologizing to the Seahawks for ruling the Shockey catch a TD.
EDIT: Though if the ball never touches the ground and you never go out of bounds, it’s obviously moot; by definition you get a catch. I think the key is that the act of going out of bounds or landing in the endzone ends the play. In those cases, you must maintain possession through going to the ground and standing back up with it still in your possession. The Bert Emanuel rule simply means that the ball is allowed to touch the ground during this process.
Right? Does that make sense?
I know that scorekeepers generally don’t wind the clock if the ball is caught in the end zone and the returner is obviously going to take a knee. OTOH, if the returner caught it and then started running around the endzone, I’m virtually certain that the clock would run. I’d have to see a definitive cite before I believed otherwise.
I’m not 100% certain that we’re referring to the same play (though we probably are), but I don’t think that the play I’m referencing led to a rule change. I remember watching the game, waiting on the replay, and thinking there was no way the TD would stand because I knew that the rule was you had to maintain possession throughout. When the review came back in Shockey’s favor, I assumed that the rule didn’t apply if the ball isn’t caught while the player is en route to the turf. If this is the play I’m thinking of, then it was just (per Ellis’ cite) a bad call by the ref, and I was right to initially believe it wasn’t a TD.
Note that the Shockey catch was four years ago. How long has it been a rule that you have to maintain possession through going to the ground and getting back up?
Is there an attempt to crack down on tackles who cheat on passing downs by setting a bit deeper behind the line of scrimmage? I think I saw at least 4 illegal formation penalties that stemmed from a tackle setting too deeply.
I was wondering about that too. I’ve never seen more than one offensive lineman get flagged for lining up off the ball in a week. There were at least 5 in the games I watched (Bucs-Cowboys, Skins-Giants, Packers-Bears, Pats-Bills).
I was rewatching some of the interceptions that Cutler threw in the Sunday Night game and my initial impression was that he was trying too hard to force some things but in most cases it was a matter of his receivers being terrible. Most of the picks and near picks were the result of a receiver making an improper adjustment, not reacting well to a broken play, not cutting well in their route, and in one case giving up on it. Cutler wasn’t as bad as I thought, but he looks like he’s running around with D2 college receivers in terms of their football smarts.
At least two were the result of the receiver making the proper adjustment and Cutler assuming he wouldn’t (such as the one where the rookie [Fox something?] saw Cutler scrambling right and also took off to the right, as he’s supposed to). One was the result of Cutler rolling right and trying to heave the ball all the way back across the field, and probably would have been intercepted regardless of the adjustment.
Got a chance to review the game tape of the Browns/Vikings game. Quinn is terrible. I don’t know what they’ve done to the kid, but hopefully that was a massively off game, because he has progressively gotten worse with every action he’s seen on the field. The offensive playcalling was… unconventional but stupid. I’m at least happy to see something non-vanilla being attempted but man was it a bad game plan.
The defense was actually really impressive. I know it doesn’t sound like it with AP getting 180 yards on the ground, but almost all of those yards came off the defense getting no rest and coming off the field, resting for 3 (real time) minutes, them coming back on. 65 of those yards came on one run where the game was getting out of reach and players were trying to strip the ball rather than tackle him. Before the Quinn back to back turnovers kept them on the field all day, they kept AP to a very impressive 2-2.5 yards per carry or so, and came up with lots of sacks. If the offense can have some reasonable TOP, I think a remarkable improvement is possible this year.
Eric Wright is becoming an elite corner. You don’t hear about good players on bad teams unless they’re in a position where they can rack up stuff like impressive sack totals, but he’s among the best corners in the league. He’s always had a great ability to blanket his man, but in years past he didn’t play the ball enough - he’s corrected that flaw and he’s a really impressive corner. He owned the shit out of Reggie Wayne last year and hasn’t looked back.