Week 3: Packers away at Redskins

[Pokerbrat2000]

Tbh, I don’t think Payne’s sack should be a penalty. However, flagging Clay and not Payne is a wretched double standard.It’s not being wrongfully thrown... it’s just a horrible rule.

There are a whole lot of people who disagree with this.

The NFL should put together a tape of all the non-penalized sacks this year and those that are penalized. Mix them up on film and have a panel of knowledgeable people watch them and decide if they were legal or not, under the new rule....my guess is very few will be agreed upon.

TBH....I think if the Clay play doesn't happen, the league reviews that Payne sack and fines him. They won't now. But MM will be sending that one in for an explanation from the league office.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Tbh, I don’t think Payne’s sack should be a penalty. However, flagging Clay and not Payne is a wretched double standard.

You don't think it should be a penalty under the new rule or you don't agree with the new rule?

Watch it a few times. Payne has a hold of Rodgers, twists his own body for leverage, drives Rodgers into the ground, with full body weight. This is just what the "Rodgers Rule" talked about.

 

[Dantés]

There are a whole lot of people who disagree with this.

The NFL should put together a tape of all the non-penalized sacks this year and those that are penalized. Mix them up on film and have a panel of knowledgeable people watch them and decide if they were legal or not, under the new rule....my guess is very few will be agreed upon.

TBH....I think if the Clay play doesn't happen, the league reviews that Payne sack and fines him. They won't now. But MM will be sending that one in for an explanation from the league office.

Based on how the rule is written, it seems like they can justify these flags. It’s awful.

 

[Dantés]

You don't think it should be a penalty under the new rule or you don't agree with the new rule?

Watch it a few times. Payne has a hold of Rodgers, twists his own body for leverage, drives Rodgers into the ground, with full body weight. This is just what the "Rodgers Rule" talked about.

I think it should have been flagged under the rule and I think the rule itself is an abomination.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I would be in favor of simplification and eradicating replay review. However, that won’t ever happen. As it is, I guess it would be nice if they could review the roughing calls. But I suspect they would back up the flag. It’s not being wrongfully thrown... it’s just a horrible rule.

The NFL has built a game where the QB is preeminent. As with the Packer experience last season, losing them is bad for business. And I don't doubt there are some fans right here that are *****ing about the Matthews calls who were also *****ing about the Barr hit. So now we get the "Barr Rule", or "Rodgers Rule" if one prefers, and when it is stringently enforced it now "not football". It's just not close to being consistently enforced. That should improve and players will adapt, as with the defenseless receiver rule and the helmet hitting rule. There are a bazillion rules on what you can and can't do when blocking and the players have adapted to them such that most are rarely called.

As for the tedium of reviews, I don't find that to be a problem personally. The replays from the various angles keep me engaged or I fast forward through them once the definitive angle is shown and we're waiting for the call. Now, if I was sitting in the stadium, something I have not done but once since 2000, I'd think otherwise. TV timeouts by themselves are tedious sitting in the stands. Which brings us to another aspect of the game the NFL has created: it is designed for television viewing not stadium viewing. Going to the game is supposed to be a "stadium experience" which is why they are building multi-billion dollar pleasure palaces and "stadium districts" with their various distractions and entertainments (and beer!) such that following the game is kinda secondary. Once one is acclimated to these realities which are now immutable then more replays to get the thing right would be in order. The NFL would probably agree except they don't want to overrun the TV time slot.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The NFL has built a game where the QB is preeminent. As with the Packer experience last season, losing them is bad for business. And I don't doubt there are some fans right here that are *****ing about the Matthews calls who were also *****ing about the Barr hit. So now we get the "Barr Rule", or "Rodgers Rule" if one prefers, and when it is stringently enforced it now "not football". It's just not close to being consistently enforced. That should improve and players will adapt, as with the defenseless receiver rule and the helmet hitting rule. There are a bazillion rules on what you can and can't do when blocking and the players have adapted to them such that most are rarely called.

Right, but if you are going to have such a rule to protect QB's, than be consistent and fair. I have yet to see that part of it applied so far this season. Can't tell you how many hits on QB's I have seen that were worse than Matthews last 2 and they were not flagged.

As for the tedium of reviews, I don't find that to be a problem personally. The replays from the various angles keep me engaged or I fast forward through them once the definitive angle is shown and we're waiting for the call. Now, if I was sitting in the stadium, something I have not done but once since 2000, I'd think otherwise. TV timeouts by themselves are tedious sitting in the stands. Which brings us to another aspect of the game the NFL has created: it is designed for television viewing not stadium viewing. Going to the game is supposed to be a "stadium experience" which is why they are building multi-billion dollar pleasure palaces and "stadium districts" with their various distractions and entertainments (and beer!) such that following the game is kinda secondary. Once one is acclimated to these realities which are now immutable then more replays to get the thing right would be in order. The NFL would probably agree except they don't want to overrun the TV time slot.

I have been to a "few" college and pro games since replay started being used, as well as jumbo trons. They are a part of the at game fan experience too. Don't you hear all the boo's or roars in the background between plays?

F*ck the fan who is so impatient that they don't want the correct call to be made and if that takes replay and "delays" they should realize that is part of the game, if they do, they will wait patiently and cheer loudly if the call is in the favor of their team.

Some of the fans who think the game has been ruined by instant replay are also fans that **** and moan when they think a call is incorrectly made, pick a side.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Based on how the rule is written, it seems like they can justify these flags. It’s awful.

Personally, I think the NFL is looking really confused and stupid with this. Last week they call Matthews penalty "text book for teaching", yet they don't fine him? WTF. Maybe I am wrong, but don't most personal fouls also carry with them a fine if the league rules it was the correct call?

 

[HardRightEdge]

Some folks hindsight in evaluating the hindsight of others could stand some improvement.

 

[Title Town USA]

Some folks hindsight in evaluating the hindsight of others could stand some improvement.

"Take your bickering private." If you have something childish to say, please just send me a private message instead of posting and cluttering the board with this nonsense. The mods have already asked you to do this. Please be advised.

 

[HardRightEdge]

"Take your bickering private." If you have something childish to say, please just send me a private message instead of posting and cluttering the board with this nonsense.

I couldn't possibly know what you mean. No names were mentioned. Just a general observation. But thank you for that "useful" advice. LMAO

 

[Dantés]

Personally, I think the NFL is looking really confused and stupid with this. Last week they call Matthews penalty "text book for teaching", yet they don't fine him? WTF. Maybe I am wrong, but don't most personal fouls also carry with them a fine if the league rules it was the correct call?

They're doing what they always do any more-- they're trying to officiate unfortunate outcomes out of the game and when it inevitably has terrible side-effects, they're doubling down.

 

[Title Town USA]

I'm not expecting much from A. Jones.

Here's an example of pessimistic thinking. Aaron Jones had a GREAT debut.

 

[Mondio]

Some folks hindsight in evaluating the hindsight of others could stand some improvement.

So, you’re saying you’re an assman?

 

[sschind]

The NFL should put together a tape of all the non-penalized sacks this year and those that are penalized. Mix them up on film and have a panel of knowledgeable people watch them and decide if they were legal or not, under the new rule....my guess is very few will be agreed upon.

That's a great idea but the NFL will never do it. Perhaps someone in the media will do it or at the very least a fan with nothing better to do with his time.

Tbh, I don’t think Payne’s sack should be a penalty. However, flagging Clay and not Payne is a wretched double standard.

Exactly what I was thinking

I think it should have been flagged under the rule and I think the rule itself is an abomination.

very well put. I will be waiting patiently for the NFL's reason why Payne's hit was not called.

The NFL has built a game where the QB is preeminent. As with the Packer experience last season, losing them is bad for business. And I don't doubt there are some fans right here that are *****ing about the Matthews calls who were also *****ing about the Barr hit. So now we get the "Barr Rule", or "Rodgers Rule" if one prefers, and when it is stringently enforced it now "not football". It's just not close to being consistently enforced. That should improve and players will adapt, as with the defenseless receiver rule and the helmet hitting rule. There are a bazillion rules on what you can and can't do when blocking and the players have adapted to them such that most are rarely called.

For the record I do not think the Barr hit should have been illegal. Neither should either of Clay's last two or Kendrick's in the vikings game or Payne in the Redskins game. IMO all four hits were pretty much equal. it should be all or none but IMO it should be none. The problem is the many similar hits that weren't called. IMO these hits should not be penalties but under the new rule they should have been called.

As for the tedium of reviews, I don't find that to be a problem personally. The replays from the various angles keep me engaged or I fast forward through them once the definitive angle is shown and we're waiting for the call. Now, if I was sitting in the stadium, something I have not done but once since 2000, I'd think otherwise. TV timeouts by themselves are tedious sitting in the stands. Which brings us to another aspect of the game the NFL has created: it is designed for television viewing not stadium viewing. Going to the game is supposed to be a "stadium experience" which is why they are building multi-billion dollar pleasure palaces and "stadium districts" with their various distractions and entertainments (and beer!) such that following the game is kinda secondary. Once one is acclimated to these realities which are now immutable then more replays to get the thing right would be in order. The NFL would probably agree except they don't want to overrun the TV time slot.

I don't have a problem with stoppages if the correct call is made. The problem with plays like this is who has the over riding authority. One ref makes the call and the other doesn't see it that way can he over ride? Does the call go to some uber ref in the booth or in New York. Is it by majority? Who can watch the replays? Its a subjective call and in many ways I agree with the NFL, subjective calls should not be subject to replay. The biggest issue I have with replays is I thought there was initially a time limit. Did they do away with that. I mean even when they said 2 minutes you had refs under the hood for more than that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So, you’re saying you’re an assman?

You can take it anyway you like.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here's an example of pessimistic thinking. Aaron Jones had a GREAT debut.

He carried the ball 6 times for 42 yards for a 7.0 average and 1 one catch for 5 yards. That's a nice contribution but not impactful. You did not get much out of Aaron Jones.

Of course if you had quoted may entire post, where I offered my reasons, there might be some intellectual honesty in this exchange. Alas, it is not to be. It's kind of funny that about a day after I posted that McCarthy said Jones would be on a limited snap count. So you had it from the horses mouth.

It's worth noting Williams averaged 5.8 on his 5 carries. I'll share a little secret which is no secret at all. Washington was defending the pass all day, 6 guys in the box regularly, 5 at times. Gruden told Charles Davis that was the plan and he wasn't lying. It was right there in the broadcast, in word and in deed.

Jones' month long hamstring issue in camp is evidently not affecting him, on limited snaps anyway. Maybe he'll see more this coming Sunday. Then again, Buffalo is giving up only 3.6 yards per carry this year an may not be so aggressivley pass defense oriented, so there's that to consider.

 

[James from IL]

Aaron Jones was hamstrung by MM and the lack of opportunity. He was killing it every time he touched the ball. Why he only had 7 touches is beyond me.

 

[Title Town USA]

He carried the ball 6 times for 42 yards for a 7.0 average and 1 one catch for 5 yards. That's a nice contribution but not impactful. You did not get much out of Aaron Jones.

LOL @ 7 yards/carry not being "impactful." He had a great debut, very impactful every time he touched the football.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Aaron Jones was hamstrung by MM and the lack of opportunity. He was killing it every time he touched the ball. Why he only had 7 touches is beyond me.

It was the plan going in. McCarthy told you that. To repeat, Jones was out of action for a month in camp with a hammy and did not get much work in preseason. He's being eased back in.

The question that is begged is why, if the Redskins were giving away the run, McCarthy didn't run more with whoever before the score got out of hand. Of course once you dig a big hole early its catch-up time and that means you go to the Franchise.

 

[HardRightEdge]

LOL not being "impactful.

Aaron Jones was impactful. [Lets see if he notices this edit. ]

 

[Title Town USA]

Correct. Not enough touches, not enough yards to make an impact.

Impactful: having a forceful impact: producing a marked impression. 7 yards/carry checks out as impactful.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Impactful: having a forceful impact: producing a marked impression. 7 yards/carry checks out as impactful.

Maybe in Strat-o-Matic football, LOL. Do they still make that?

 

[Title Town USA]

Aaron Jones is pretty good for a "non-impactful" player. I'll take it. I suppose Rodgers wasn't impactful either since he didn't throw for 400 yards. LOL

 

[HardRightEdge]

Aaron Jones is pretty good for a "non-impactful" player. I'll take it. I suppose Rodgers wasn't impactful either since he didn't throw for 400 yards. LOL

Intellectual dishonesty: the definition can be looked up with ease.

 

[Title Town USA]

Intellectual dishonesty: the definition can be looked up with ease.

Self-Righteous can be looked up as well.