Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 106
  1. #76

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



    LOL it matters because you could have both tackles...the guys that are the edge of the pocket rule, just run to opposite sidelines at the snap and the entire field would be considered "in the pocket" according to you.

    Of course that is extreme and nobody would run a play like that, but based one what you are trying to say, theoretically, the pocket would be extended from sideline to sideline.

    The pocket..."tackle box" is not meant to expand or shrink based on the play.

    Here is something that actually happens.

    At the snap, the DL does a couple stunts, the OT's actually collapse into the OG's...the pocket is still from the original tackle spot to the other.

    What if during a play, Oher is blocking and goes with his man directly behind Flacco...or is bull rushed past Joe. Does that mean that if Joe takes a single step to his left that he is outside the pocket since there is now no tackle at all on his left side?

    It all goes back to where they originally lined up...that is a defined area that stays that size no matter which way...in or out the OT's move during thier pass sets.




  2. #77

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    I hadn't rewatched it I jsut assumed the league didn't have such a moronic rule as to what the tackel box is defined as. The rule as explained above is completely exploitable and any QB coordinator combination that basically ever gives up a sack ever again should be ashamed of themselves. The tackle box can easily be shrank to a couple of yards wide, making intentional grouning and sacks a thing of the past if desired.
    No it cannot.

    At the snap, it is defined and will stay that way throughout the play.

    I actually think that is very fair as opposed to having random pockets of different sizes




  3. #78

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    Offensive lines should line up as close to possible so that a QB can make one step in either direction at any time and simply throw the bal in the stands.
    There would basically never be another sack in footbal that way, ever again.
    LOL. They do line up shoulder to shoulder for the most part. I am not sure how much extra distance can be saved by squeezing, plus you need some freedom of motion. And obviously, it is more than one step to get outside even the most squeezed O-line. It is probably 3 yards to each side, considering 2.5 jumbos with pads from center to outside shoulder of tackle.




  4. #79

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    LOL it matters because you could have both tackles...the guys that are the edge of the pocket rule, just run to opposite sidelines at the snap and the entire field would be considered "in the pocket" according to you.

    Of course that is extreme and nobody would run a play like that, but based one what you are trying to say, theoretically, the pocket would be extended from sideline to sideline.

    The pocket..."tackle box" is not meant to expand or shrink based on the play.

    Here is something that actually happens.

    At the snap, the DL does a couple stunts, the OT's actually collapse into the OG's...the pocket is still from the original tackle spot to the other.

    What if during a play, Oher is blocking and goes with his man directly behind Flacco...or is bull rushed past Joe. Does that mean that if Joe takes a single step to his left that he is outside the pocket since there is now no tackle at all on his left side?

    It all goes back to where they originally lined up...that is a defined area that stays that size no matter which way...in or out the OT's move during thier pass sets.
    You aren't making sense. there is no benefit to being the pocket as the per the rule. You would rather BE OUT of it so you can throw the ball away at will. Why would you WANT the whole field to be the pocket.
    But do what I say, and line your linemen up shoulder to shoulder at the snap and spread on the snap and the QB is never more then a single steap OUT of the box and can throw the ball way whenever he would like, even with players hanging on him.




  5. #80

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    LOL. They do line up shoulder to shoulder for the most part. I am not sure how much extra distance can be saved by squeezing, plus you need some freedom of motion. And obviously, it is more than one step to get outside even the most squeezed O-line. It is probably 3 yards to each side, considering 2.5 jumbos with pads from center to outside shoulder of tackle.
    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.




  6. #81

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    LOL. They do line up shoulder to shoulder for the most part. I am not sure how much extra distance can be saved by squeezing, plus you need some freedom of motion. And obviously, it is more than one step to get outside even the most squeezed O-line. It is probably 3 yards to each side, considering 2.5 jumbos with pads from center to outside shoulder of tackle.
    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.




  7. #82

    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.
    Except that from nearly anywhere on the field the QB could jsut throw it into the stands past the LOS, thus eliminating the desire to even rush the passer in the first place,. Asdd to that, that if you are getting touched by a defender and it doesn't have to make it back to the LOS and basically you can't fumble from a sack as long as it moves 2 inches forward when you drop it.




  8. #83

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    You aren't making sense. there is no benefit to being the pocket as the per the rule. You would rather BE OUT of it so you can throw the ball away at will. Why would you WANT the whole field to be the pocket.
    But do what I say, and line your linemen up shoulder to shoulder at the snap and spread on the snap and the QB is never more then a single steap OUT of the box and can throw the ball way whenever he would like, even with players hanging on him.
    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.




  9. #84

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    Except that from nearly anywhere on the field the QB could jsut throw it into the stands past the LOS, thus eliminating the desire to even rush the passer in the first place,. Asdd to that, that if you are getting touched by a defender and it doesn't have to make it back to the LOS and basically you can't fumble from a sack as long as it moves 2 inches forward when you drop it.
    If I'm a DC, I'll take QB's throwing incomplete passes every play if that's what they want to do.

    I'll take 0 passing yards everyday of the week.




  10. #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.




  11. #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).




  12. #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.




  13. #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.




  14. #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.




  15. #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.




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