The offense must run through Jones and Dillon

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm looking for information on how it went in the USFL.

Still can't find a lot of information on how the experment worked in the USFL, maybe we will find out in March if the UFL is using it. I did find these 2 articles which explains the automated process. Players are complaining about it. Not the process but some are saying the added weight is changing the ball.

USFL's approach to first down measurements looks cool

The USFL is reviewing first downs via a chip in the ball, and the technology seems like a really cool innovation.

awfulannouncing.com

"Pi**ed is an understatement" - USFL players unhappy about chip technology used in footballs

We know that human beings, in general, don't like the idea of being tracked by larger governing bodies. It's something that's been ingrained in our society for the past few decades.

www.sportskeeda.com

 

[OldSchool101]

I am not referring to the QB sneak play, I can see how that was very hard to mark. What I am referring to is the play before the sneak. I wish I had a clip to share with you, but I have watched it over and over and over.....on YouTubeTV. Once Jones is down, the side judge is doing his usual "foot down, running in with his hand up to spot the ball, his spot is a half yard short of the first down, you can see it clearly as he is running in. Then the Umpire (Mike Morton) comes from BEHIND the play, like from midfield, grabs the ball and marks it a FULL YARD short of the first down, 1/2 yard short of the side judges spot. With the Packers hustling to get a play in fast, nobody seems to notice. Had the ball been spotted correctly after Jone's run, Love's sneak picks up a first down on his 4th down QB sneak.



From my understanding, the ref, spotting where a high punt travels out of bounds can consult with the booth for a more accurate spot.

Chris Simms statement at the 1:35 mark (video below) sums up my feelings on the matter to a T. I'm looking for information on how it went in the USFL. But I like how the USFL is trying to modernize some of the football rules.

Innovative USFL Rules Continue To Be A Catalyst For The Evolution Of Football

After successful first season that set the standard for others to follow, USFL adds more rules to give fans more action while increasing fairness USFL moves kickoff to 20-yard line to increase returns and maintain player safety, changes rule involving fumbles from field of play into and out of...

usflnewshub.com

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

On Mic Referee named Bill: “Alexa? Did Dillon make the first down?? “

(Over Stadium Intercom)
Alexa: “Hmmm Hi Bill. Let me check on that.. …(2 sec pass) the results are in within 99.993104532% accuracy I’ve got the answer”

But first let me speak with Bill? Billy Boy.. (in a sultry Alexa Voice that draws fan suspense) Do you have a piece of paper handy?? Let’s do a litmus test .. matter of fact let’s go your old aZa way and run 3 experiments Bill to see if your paper fits between the improperly spotted ball and improperly spotted Marker.
Alexa: “Everybody in the Stands.. let’s take a 20 break.. Bill doesn’t have his paper folded properly. Thanks Bill you OL Fardt!”

Alexa: “FIRST DOWN ………… PACKERS!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

On Mic Referee: “Alexa? Did Dillon make the first down?? “

(Over Stadium Intercom)
Alexa: “Hmmm Hi Bill. Let me check on that.. …(2 sec pass) the results are in within 99.993104532% accuracy I’ve got the answer”

But first let me speak with Bill? Billy Boy.. Do you have a piece of paper handy?? Let’s do a litmus test .. matter of fact let’s go your old aZa way and run 3 experiments Bill to see if your paper fits between the improperly spotted ball and improperly spotted Marker.
Alexa: “Everybody in the Stands.. let’s take a 20 break.. Bill doesn’t have his paper folded properly. Thanks Bill you OL Fardt!”

"Missed it by an Alexa C.H."

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I am not referring to the QB sneak play, I can see how that was very hard to mark. What I am referring to is the play before the sneak. I wish I had a clip to share with you, but I have watched it over and over and over.....on YouTubeTV. Once Jones is down, the side judge is doing his usual "foot down, running in with his hand up to spot the ball, his spot is a half yard short of the first down, you can see it clearly as he is running in. Then the Umpire (Mike Morton) comes from BEHIND the play, like from midfield, grabs the ball and marks it a FULL YARD short of the first down, 1/2 yard short of the side judges spot. With the Packers hustling to get a play in fast, nobody seems to notice. Had the ball been spotted correctly after Jone's run, Love's sneak picks up a first down on his 4th down QB sneak.



From my understanding, the ref, spotting where a high punt travels out of bounds can consult with the booth for a more accurate spot.

Chris Simms statement at the 1:35 mark (video below) sums up my feelings on the matter to a T. I'm looking for information on how it went in the USFL. But I like how the USFL is trying to modernize some of the football rules.

Innovative USFL Rules Continue To Be A Catalyst For The Evolution Of Football

After successful first season that set the standard for others to follow, USFL adds more rules to give fans more action while increasing fairness USFL moves kickoff to 20-yard line to increase returns and maintain player safety, changes rule involving fumbles from field of play into and out of...

usflnewshub.com

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Thx for the clarification. I remember that sequence now. Love was close but not convincing. If the Jones spot is right, Love gets the first. Thx.

 

[OldSchool101]

"Missed it by an Alexa C.H."

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Alexa: “Bill? you lie. You’re adding on the inches again”

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

In the process of watching this in its entirety, but so far it is very interesting. Basically the history of the broadcasting of football and how technology has shaped what we see today. This will take some of you old farts back.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Thirteen Below]

Good point on GPS, although I think it's gotten more accurate, but not by much.

I can remember working with utility companies and city engineers to use GPS for approximating gas and electric transmission and distribution infrastructure. Cities also used GPS for road placement. But that was the 90s and GPS was only reliable within one hundred feet or so. There was still a lot of "eyeballing".

Yeah it is down to inches now, but that's the complaint with ball placement usually - off by inches, certainly no more than 12-24".

The acccuracy of GPS depends a lot on whether an object is stationary, and (if it's moving) how fast it's going. I've read that there are GPS applications that are actually accurate to a distance of 2 millimeters, but it has to be a stationary object and it takes hours to lock in the precise measurement. From what I've seen, I don't think there's any GPS device that can localize a rapidly moving football any more precisely than 2 or 3 feet.

I'd sure like to think that someday it will be possible to develop a GPS system that can track a moving football in a pile of bodies to within an inch or less, but I just don't see it in the real near future.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Back to RB's.

Curious to know what people think of former Badger RB Braelon Allen. If he is still available late in round 3, would you be happy if the Packers used their #91 pick on him? For me he is kind of a cross between Dillon and Jones.

I just read a couple of scouting reports on him the other day, and I'm intrigued by the guy. His nickname is "Man Child"; he was recruited by the Badgers as a linebacker. 6'2", 245, 4.40 forty, 6.91 3-cone, but a 4.6 20-yard shuttle... avergaed 6.8 runs per carry as a freshman, tied for 1st in the country.

Powerful enough to move the pile when running between the guards, explosive enough to bust tackles, fast enough to go the distance anytime once he punches through the line. Compares closely to Jonathan Taylor.

Positives included -

- decisive, good vision. sees his hole and hits it, no wasted time
- explodes out of the backfield, his 10 yard split time is just 1.49 seconds
- freakish physical frame; very powerful and difficult to bring down; just wreaks havoc on defensive backs. very difficult to bring down solo, and churns his legs powerfully through contact
- excellent balance, surprisingly graceful and flexible for someone that size
- reliable hands, good checkdown option

Negatives included -

- poor route runner, outside of basic checkdowns. can catch, but not a threat to get open
- poor pass protection
- poor agility; doesn't make many people miss. relies instead on making them pay for hitting him.
- not very quick coming off the ball, start and stop in the backfield is slow, which gives the D-line more time to sniff out the play and kill it before it develops
- has no "second gear", won't break away from many pursuers. His top end is good, but once he hits it, that's it
- very stiff hips, limiting his ability to cut and dance away from a hit

He's raw in a few key areas, but the thing is, he just turned 20 2 weeks ago. He will start his rookie season in the NFL as a 20 year old kid, quite likely the youngest player in the league. What I like about that is that an NFL program might coach him up to a whole nother level, plus, he has almost no wear and tear on his body.

If Green Bay likes him, I wouldn't mind seeing him in the 3rd. Maybe even our first 3rd. As punishing a runner as he is, he's pretty one-dimensional. But I think he might make a great replacememnt for AJ (sorry, AJ, I do love you), and I can't stop picturing him wearing a Packer jersey and hammering the Niner D-line in the divisional round.

 

[Poppa San]

I just read a couple of scouting reports on him the other day, and I'm intrigued by the guy. His nickname is "Man Child"; he was recruited by the Badgers as a linebacker. 6'2", 245, 4.40 forty, 6.91 3-cone, but a 4.6 20-yard shuttle... avergaed 6.8 runs per carry as a freshman, tied for 1st in the country.

Powerful enough to move the pile when running between the guards, explosive enough to bust tackles, fast enough to go the distance anytime once he punches through the line. Compares closely to Jonathan Taylor.

Positives included -

- decisive, good vision. sees his hole and hits it, no wasted time
- explodes out of the backfield, his 10 yard split time is just 1.49 seconds
- freakish physical frame; very powerful and difficult to bring down; just wreaks havoc on defensive backs. very difficult to bring down solo, and churns his legs powerfully through contact
- excellent balance, surprisingly graceful and flexible for someone that size
- reliable hands, good checkdown option

Negatives included -

- poor route runner, outside of basic checkdowns. can catch, but not a threat to get open
- poor pass protection
- poor agility; doesn't make many people miss. relies instead on making them pay for hitting him.
- not very quick coming off the ball, start and stop in the backfield is slow, which gives the D-line more time to sniff out the play and kill it before it develops
- has no "second gear", won't break away from many pursuers. His top end is good, but once he hits it, that's it
- very stiff hips, limiting his ability to cut and dance away from a hit

He's raw in a few key areas, but the thing is, he just turned 20 2 weeks ago. He will start his rookie season in the NFL as a 20 year old kid, quite likely the youngest player in the league. What I like about that is that an NFL program might coach him up to a whole nother level, plus, he has almost no wear and tear on his body.

If Green Bay likes him, I wouldn't mind seeing him in the 3rd. Maybe even our first 3rd. As punishing a runner as he is, he's pretty one-dimensional. But I think he might make a great replacememnt for AJ (sorry, AJ, I do love you), and I can't stop picturing him wearing a Packer jersey and hammering the Niner D-line in the divisional round.

If you are going to copy and past articles, you need to quote box them and cite the source, especially if they are behind a paywall. And even then only some of it is allowed under the "fair use" doctrine.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The acccuracy of GPS depends a lot on whether an object is stationary, and (if it's moving) how fast it's going. I've read that there are GPS applications that are actually accurate to a distance of 2 millimeters, but it has to be a stationary object and it takes hours to lock in the precise measurement. From what I've seen, I don't think there's any GPS device that can localize a rapidly moving football any more precisely than 2 or 3 feet.

I'd sure like to think that someday it will be possible to develop a GPS system that can track a moving football in a pile of bodies to within an inch or less, but I just don't see it in the real near future.

Thanks for that info. I didn't know these things about GPS. And yeah, if it doesn't interfere with the game, this technology can be useful.

 

[Heyjoe4]

If you are going to copy and past articles, you need to quote box them and cite the source, especially if they are behind a paywall. And even then only some of it is allowed under the "fair use" doctrine.

I think that means just about everyone who posts here is in trouble.

 

[Voyageur]

If you are going to copy and past articles, you need to quote box them and cite the source, especially if they are behind a paywall. And even then only some of it is allowed under the "fair use" doctrine.

Would putting a personal perspective on it, and using the linking feature we have be acceptable? With the link, the only articles that would actually open for viewing would be those that aren't behind paywalls I believe. It would also act as citing too I'd think.

 

[Thirteen Below]

If you are going to copy and past articles, you need to quote box them and cite the source, especially if they are behind a paywall. And even then only some of it is allowed under the "fair use" doctrine.

That's not copy and paste. It's a summary of about 4 articles I read, and I wrote it all myself.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Would putting a personal perspective on it, and using the linking feature we have be acceptable? With the link, the only articles that would actually open for viewing would be those that aren't behind paywalls I believe. It would also act as citing too I'd think.

Yeah and aside from staying on the legal side of these things, accompanying articles are always kinda nice to have. People can look at em or not. When someone renders an opinion, which is always, it would be good to see some support. Certainly doesn't have to be al the time. I will usually read these when people take a little time and post a link.

Poker is particularly good at this. Aside from his hilarious photo archive, he uses a lot of reference links in his comments.

And while linking something behind a paywall wouldn't be right, I'm pretty sure they will only open to subscribers. But it's just common sense not to link to something behind a paywall.

 

[Heyjoe4]

That's not copy and paste. It's a summary of about 4 articles I read, and I wrote it all myself.

FWIW that was my take on your comment. I didn't see anything obviously cut and pasted. We can form our opinions from a number of sources and come up with our own conclusions. Those aren't proprietary, they're opinions.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Poker is particularly good at this. Aside from his hilarious photo archive, he uses a lot of reference links in his comments.

Thanks for the shoutout. I try to site links that I either quoted from or feel will give people a lot more/better information than I can provide in what otherwise would be a super long post. Some people only want to read the "headlines".

 

[Heyjoe4]

Thanks for the shoutout. I try to site links that I either quoted from or feel will give people a lot more/better information than I can provide in what otherwise would be a super long post. Some people only want to read the "headlines".

You're welcome. Yeah now that Poppa brought it up, you frequently post links relevant to the topic. A nice touch.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He will start his rookie season in the NFL as a 20 year old kid, quite likely the youngest player in the league.

Most definitely his youth and low mileage is a big plus. Also, this kid is bright, articulate and eager to learn. As you mentioned he was recruited as a S/LB and when The Badgers coaching staff saw just how good of a RB he could be, he quickly stepped into the role and blew up the Big Ten. He has a ton of untapped potential in my opinion. Blocking and receiving is not something he was asked to do a whole lot of at Wisconsin, so while scouts will grade him negatively on both, give him time and coaching. While he doesn't have top end speed, neither does Aaron Jones or a lot of successful RB's in the NFL. Honestly, I will trade top end speed for a guy that can punish defenders and pickup those extra yards after contact.

My guess is this. Allen is going to go through the interview process and turn a lot of heads. As will he do at the combine. GM's will look at the success that a guy like Jonathan Taylor has had in Indy and it might push Allen up into the 2nd round.

Some nice info and an interview with him, in this article:

Wisconsin's Braelon Allen took a distinctive journey to become an RB | FOX Sports

Braelon Allen joins Matt Leinart to discuss his unique recruiting process and how he’s developed his talents in Wisconsin.

www.foxsports.com

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You're welcome. Yeah now that Poppa brought it up, you frequently post links relevant to the topic. A nice touch.

Google is my friend and worst enemy.

Sometimes I wonder what we all did for information before the internet. Rely on local newspapers, the radio, the library and water cooler conversations, I guess. Seems like a lot of work, especially when I can sit on the crapper and get caught up on all things Packers, while taking care of business.

 

[Poppa San]

Would putting a personal perspective on it, and using the linking feature we have be acceptable? With the link, the only articles that would actually open for viewing would be those that aren't behind paywalls I believe. It would also act as citing too I'd think.

This is a good summary of what the rules state.

That's not copy and paste. It's a summary of about 4 articles I read, and I wrote it all myself.

Usually I only see highlighted phrases and bulleted points from cut & paste out of articles. It read as a "Packers Wire" type article with your spin in the last statement or two.

And while linking something behind a paywall wouldn't be right, I'm pretty sure they will only open to subscribers. But it's just common sense not to link to something behind a paywall.

I have subscriptions that give 2-3 free articles a month. I forget that when I link to some of their stuff myself because I don't see it.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Google is my friend and worst enemy.

Sometimes I wonder what we all did for information before the internet. Rely on local newspapers, the radio, the library and water cooler conversations, I guess. Seems like a lot of work, especially when I can sit on the crapper and get caught up on all things Packers, while taking care of business.

I remember in the 80s, I used to carry a small notebook and a pen in my shirt pocket, and whenever something came up that I was curious about, I'd make a note of it. And then I went to the library a couple of times a week after work and looked all those things up.

God, it feels like I'm talking about horse and carriage days! Lol!

I'm 66, and my wife is 45. We grew up in two totally different worlds. She was programming computers at age 6, in school and at home on one of the original Macintoshes. One of her degrees is in computer science. She can't even begin to relate to the stories I tell her about what I did in school; it's like my grandfather telling me about riding his horse to school.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Usually I only see highlighted phrases and bulleted points from cut & paste out of articles. It read as a "Packers Wire" type article with your spin in the last statement or two.

Yeah, that's totally understandable. I had a hunch that was it.

Sorry about that.... I was a reporter for many years, and still do a lot of free lance stuff, and it's just the way I write. I've tried so many times to teach myself a more casual writing style for social media, and I just can't do it. Can't make myself change that style.

I wish i could, because it honestly makes me feel uncomfortable. Sorry for the confusion!

 

[gopkrs]

I just read a couple of scouting reports on him the other day, and I'm intrigued by the guy. His nickname is "Man Child"; he was recruited by the Badgers as a linebacker. 6'2", 245, 4.40 forty, 6.91 3-cone, but a 4.6 20-yard shuttle... avergaed 6.8 runs per carry as a freshman, tied for 1st in the country.

Powerful enough to move the pile when running between the guards, explosive enough to bust tackles, fast enough to go the distance anytime once he punches through the line. Compares closely to Jonathan Taylor.

Positives included -

- decisive, good vision. sees his hole and hits it, no wasted time
- explodes out of the backfield, his 10 yard split time is just 1.49 seconds
- freakish physical frame; very powerful and difficult to bring down; just wreaks havoc on defensive backs. very difficult to bring down solo, and churns his legs powerfully through contact
- excellent balance, surprisingly graceful and flexible for someone that size
- reliable hands, good checkdown option

Negatives included -

- poor route runner, outside of basic checkdowns. can catch, but not a threat to get open
- poor pass protection
- poor agility; doesn't make many people miss. relies instead on making them pay for hitting him.
- not very quick coming off the ball, start and stop in the backfield is slow, which gives the D-line more time to sniff out the play and kill it before it develops
- has no "second gear", won't break away from many pursuers. His top end is good, but once he hits it, that's it
- very stiff hips, limiting his ability to cut and dance away from a hit

He's raw in a few key areas, but the thing is, he just turned 20 2 weeks ago. He will start his rookie season in the NFL as a 20 year old kid, quite likely the youngest player in the league. What I like about that is that an NFL program might coach him up to a whole nother level, plus, he has almost no wear and tear on his body.

If Green Bay likes him, I wouldn't mind seeing him in the 3rd. Maybe even our first 3rd. As punishing a runner as he is, he's pretty one-dimensional. But I think he might make a great replacememnt for AJ (sorry, AJ, I do love you), and I can't stop picturing him wearing a Packer jersey and hammering the Niner D-line in the divisional round.

I watched Braelan Allen play a couple of games and was thinking about past Badger RBs while doing so. And with the admittedly little I saw of him; I did not get the impression that he would translate into a NFL RB. I don't pretend to know this guy. But I was hoping for a more elusive RB. If he comes out and plays like Jonathon Taylor...but that seems a reach. jmo

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm 66, and my wife is 45.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Heyjoe4]

This is a good summary of what the rules state.

Usually I only see highlighted phrases and bulleted points from cut & paste out of articles. It read as a "Packers Wire" type article with your spin in the last statement or two.

I have subscriptions that give 2-3 free articles a month. I forget that when I link to some of their stuff myself because I don't see it.

Yeah that's correct for some subscriptions. I have a digital subscription to the NYTs and can share 5 or 10 articles a month.

Raises an interesting question - am I only allowed to share with another person? I use it that way. Would be a bit ingenuous to include it in an email with 50 addressees, or even on here with a while lot of people. And if I shared it with 50 people, would there be a control in place to cut off access at 10 and then limit me for that month? Dunno.

Better to stay safe and stick to stuff in the public domain. I think 13 Below is right that a general opinion can be formed and published without attribution. But yeah, stick to public stuff as Poker does.