Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   Tampa Bay knocks down Eli Manning as he takes a knee on the last play. Cheap shot or "clean, hard football until they tell us the game's over?"   (espn.go.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Greg Schiano, Eli Manning, Tampa Bay, Giants, Tom Coughlin, David Diehl, franchise quarterback, Rutgers  
•       •       •

3530 clicks; posted to Sports » on 17 Sep 2012 at 8:43 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



447 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-17 08:18:01 AM  
In the NFL, it's a cheap shot. The games over, man, deal.
 
2012-09-17 08:38:11 AM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-17 08:49:16 AM  
It's a cheap shot.

/hate the Giants
 
2012-09-17 08:50:54 AM  
I'm gonna go with "Media fodder with a 2 week lifespan".
 
2012-09-17 08:52:00 AM  
Cheap shot.

/Packers fan
 
2012-09-17 08:52:26 AM  
Cheap shot. The "WE'S KEEPS ON FIGHTIN" thing just makes him sound like a douche. He wasn't fighting for anything. You lost, let the guy take his knee and move on.

Plus there's millions of dollars worth of product on the field. Breaking accepted convention like that can lead to an injury.
 
2012-09-17 08:53:31 AM  
If you want to see a clear cut cheap shot from yesterday, check out D'Qwell Jackson, of the Cleveland Browns' act.

/should be suspended
 
2012-09-17 08:57:21 AM  
miracle at the meadowlands anybody?
 
2012-09-17 09:00:17 AM  
Depends on the score. Down by seven or less? Bring the house. You're always one careless turnover away from a chance to win (or a chance to agonizingly choke if you're the Patriots). Down by more than a score. Sit back and take your loss like a man.
 
2012-09-17 09:01:10 AM  
The next time that the Giants and Bucs are playing, and the Giants are going to knee it to ice the game, they should fake knee it and throw a TD.
 
2012-09-17 09:02:06 AM  
Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy
 
2012-09-17 09:02:21 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: The "WE'S KEEPS ON FIGHTIN" thing just makes him sound like a douche.


It's easy to say "we fight until they tell us game over" when it's not your health on the line. That's the worst part -- it's just as likely that one of his guys would have broke something trying to jump over the line.

Makes you wonder about Eric LeGrand.
 
2012-09-17 09:06:07 AM  

stevie1der: Depends on the score. Down by seven or less? Bring the house. You're always one careless turnover away from a chance to win (or a chance to agonizingly choke if you're the Patriots). Down by more than a score. Sit back and take your loss like a man.


This. Not a fan of "play until the whistle unless the other team just wants to end the game with a win." Like the QB-center exchange never gets fumbled.

Since the linked video shows nothing about the play...did he kneel it right away, at least? I really hate when QBs are kneeling but they stand around and wait to kneel (even when kneeling right away would still end the game).
 
2012-09-17 09:13:07 AM  

IAmRight: Since the linked video shows nothing about the play...did he kneel it right away, at least? I really hate when QBs are kneeling but they stand around and wait to kneel (even when kneeling right away would still end the game).


Going from memory, he kneeled once he got the ball. The hit came after he had gotten to the ground and wasn't at all in a way of trying to recover a bad snap. Yes, game was within a score. Hell no, not playing hard and til the whistle and more like playing like s whiny loser.

/also pack fan who thought it was cheap
 
2012-09-17 09:15:36 AM  

www.fanlistings.org
Never stop, never stop fighting till the fight is done.

 
2012-09-17 09:19:33 AM  
As long as there is a scenario where the Bucs could have eeked out a win, then it's game on. If there was no hope, then it's a cheap shot.
 
2012-09-17 09:19:40 AM  

basemetal: In the NFL, it's a cheap shot. The games over, man, deal.


If the game is over why are they still keeping time. Don't like playing to the end, or a full contact sport, play golf.
 
2012-09-17 09:21:47 AM  
So we don't actually get to see the play, just hear some semi literate troglodytes whining about it. Thanks for that.
 
2012-09-17 09:22:45 AM  
And of course the former players on ESPN this morning are trying to defend Schiano's decision. Just admit that the Bucs were trying to get under the Giants skin. It may have worked, but it's still a dick move.
 
2012-09-17 09:23:32 AM  
if this was Tampa taking a knee and the giants rushed like that and say Freeman got hurt you think he would have been giving the same speech about playing hard until the final whistle? No he would would be calling the Giants out for a cheap shot. I have been watching football for a long long time and i cant recall ever seeing that in the NFL.
 
2012-09-17 09:25:45 AM  
Maybe put in the third stringer QB in for the kneel down?
 
2012-09-17 09:25:47 AM  
 
2012-09-17 09:27:29 AM  

thecpt: Found it


Thanks!

Now quit crying NY fans. That was absolutely nothing.
 
2012-09-17 09:27:43 AM  
Who knows what can happen in the last seconds of a game?

Miracle at the Meadowlands
 
2012-09-17 09:28:39 AM  

Crewmannumber6: So we don't actually get to see the play, just hear some semi literate troglodytes whining about it. Thanks for that.


The video of the play in question is in the link, you just have to sit through a commercial, a pause, players giving their opinions, a pause, and then finally the play.
 
2012-09-17 09:28:55 AM  

AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?


on the QB taking a knee? are you high?
 
2012-09-17 09:29:02 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy


And everyone knows Eli is a whiny pussy. Fark him.
 
2012-09-17 09:31:11 AM  

bgddy24601: [www.fanlistings.org image 262x365]
Never stop, never stop fighting till the fight is done.


You're nothing but a lot of talk and a badge!
 
2012-09-17 09:31:50 AM  

ManateeGag: AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?

on the QB taking a knee? are you high?


The burst by the line is to interupt the center qb exchange. You've never seen that happen with Eli? Tampa should have hired Joe Nash as a special defensive consultant if they wanted to go that route though.
 
2012-09-17 09:32:00 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy


and if JPP or Tuck did that to your QB, you'd be crying like a little biatch.
 
2012-09-17 09:33:26 AM  

thecpt: Found it


Um, he didn't look like he'd taken the knee - looked like they tried to get a push to cause a fumble on the exchange and Eli fell down and went boom. Wouldn't even be talked about if it weren't Eli and the Giants.

Besides, as I said earlier, no one should have to give an excuse for trying to hit Eli Manning. They should be required to give them for missing.
 
2012-09-17 09:34:43 AM  
They were down by 7 and were attempting to cause a fumble. He pulled the same thing at the college level. The NYG are just farking crying because they weren't man enough to play a full 60 minutes instead of 59 and change. This is football.
 
2012-09-17 09:35:41 AM  

ManateeGag: and if JPP or Tuck did that to your QB, you'd be crying like a little biatch.


Since they're defensive ends and no defensive end touched him (in fact, I don't think any Buc did - they just pushed the linemen into Manning), the other person would probably have more of a point than the Giants do.
 
2012-09-17 09:39:24 AM  
Kind of bush-league, but having read the comments before watching the play, I was expecting much worse.
 
2012-09-17 09:39:45 AM  

ManateeGag: and if JPP or Tuck did that to your QB, you'd be crying like a little biatch.


This is easily the best point. Five seconds left and its a long enough season. I don't want to see my quarterback roll his ankle on this pointless play.
 
2012-09-17 09:40:02 AM  
biatch move is biatch move.

/there is apparently no video of it on the internet btw
 
2012-09-17 09:40:08 AM  

Waldo Pepper: so why not in football.


because it puts a target on your players, especially the QB. if TB gets played extra hard one week by a team who needs the win to stay alive, the coach better not start crying if his QB gets hurt because of a percieved "cheap shot"
 
2012-09-17 09:40:14 AM  

basemetal: In the NFL, it's a cheap shot. The games over, man, deal.


It was a 1 score game. If it's possible for him to fumble and return it for a TD, then I'm going to give it a go.

These are grown men getting paid well to play a physical game. I'd rather hear less whining.

Hell, looking at the video, that's the weakest knockdown I've ever seen in football. Eli is lucky he didn't get a grass stain.

/Not a Bucs or Giants fan
 
2012-09-17 09:42:25 AM  

ManateeGag: Waldo Pepper: so why not in football.

because it puts a target on your players, especially the QB. if TB gets played extra hard one week by a team who needs the win to stay alive, the coach better not start crying if his QB gets hurt because of a percieved "cheap shot"


And that is why you have your backup take victory formation...
 
2012-09-17 09:43:26 AM  
What do you know! Eli Manning really DOES drive a Toyota.
 
2012-09-17 09:44:04 AM  

Waldo Pepper: ogie666: if this was Tampa taking a knee and the giants rushed like that and say Freeman got hurt you think he would have been giving the same speech about playing hard until the final whistle? No he would would be calling the Giants out for a cheap shot. I have been watching football for a long long time and i cant recall ever seeing that in the NFL.

it has been done a few times if I recall correctly.

The Giants are just upset and fanning the "cheap shot flames" because had it worked it would be known as Miracle in the Meadowlands II.


Had there been 1 second left and the Giants had to kickoff following a score would they blame Tampa for trying playing hard and trying to run back the kickoff instead of taking a knee and ending the game knowing the odds of returning the kick for a score are slim.

baseball players play hard until the last out
, basketball plays until the final second if there is any chance of winning/tying the game same in hockey/soccer so why not in football.


Not a Sox fan I see. If he was kneeling before he got hit, and the guy had time to stop it's dirty. If not, then it's a clean hit.

/Sox fan
//Can we get the real refs back yet?
 
2012-09-17 09:44:15 AM  

cettin: And that is why you have your backup take victory formation...


Well the argument there is that your starter is best at taking the snap, but I thought most teams had the shotgun super victory wildcat formation with a hands team guy for plays like that.
 
2012-09-17 09:45:28 AM  
If you are gonna just take a knee then why play the play at all? If you are going to run a play prepare to get hit. Did the official throw a late hit flag? No? Then STFU.
 
2012-09-17 09:45:53 AM  
I think it has to do with the replacement refs. Schiano was probably betting on the refs not being as quick to blow the whistle, giving his guys a bit more time to make something happen.
 
2012-09-17 09:46:28 AM  

The Muthaship: If you want to see a clear cut cheap shot from yesterday, check out D'Qwell Jackson, of the Cleveland Browns' act.

/should be suspended


hey, you got a link for that?

/cheap shot, coughlin was right to be pissed.
 
2012-09-17 09:47:05 AM  

Sargun: They were down by 7 and were attempting to cause a fumble. He pulled the same thing at the college level. The NYG are just farking crying because they weren't man enough to play a full 60 minutes instead of 59 and change. This is football.


Man enough to come back and win the game, though. It is football, a football game won by the Giants (in pretty spectacular fashion), so I'm not sure questioning their manhood is really an effective tactic.

I don't blame the Bucs for trying this, they were a fumbled exchange away from having a chance to win. The Giants should have just run a play, even if it was just Eli taking the snap and running back before kneeling.

Now if Tampa was down by more than a TD, i.e. a fumbled snap would do them no good, it's a pretty cheap play. Here though it is just a violation of etiquette and unwritten rules, which really makes for media fodder more than anything else.
 
2012-09-17 09:47:26 AM  

ManateeGag: Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy

and if JPP or Tuck did that to your QB, you'd be crying like a little biatch.


ManateeGag: Waldo Pepper: so why not in football.

because it puts a target on your players, especially the QB. if TB gets played extra hard one week by a team who needs the win to stay alive, the coach better not start crying if his QB gets hurt because of a percieved "cheap shot"


Your "arguments" involve a hell of a lot of conjecture. Want to try again?
 
2012-09-17 09:47:27 AM  

Tickle Mittens: basemetal: In the NFL, it's a cheap shot. The games over, man, deal.

If the game is over why are they still keeping time. Don't like playing to the end, or a full contact sport, play golf.


Basically this.
 
2012-09-17 09:48:21 AM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: Found it

Thanks!

Now quit crying NY fans. That was absolutely nothing.


THIS - If it's a one score game, this should happen every time. During a blowout, it's dirty, but pushing an O-line (especially one not expecting a surge) into the QB could absolutely cause a fumble.

Expected far worse
 
2012-09-17 09:49:00 AM  
What was wrong with that hit? There were 5 seconds left, and the Bucs actually knocked back the line and made contact with Eli. While he's falling backward the way he did, maybe the ball pops loose and they jump on it. Seems like a smart play when the other team isn't expecting it.
 
2012-09-17 09:49:41 AM  
It's bush league, and it's stupid. Does Schiano want to be able to run Victory at any point in his coaching career? If so, he needs to stop that shiat.

If I was one of his players, I'd pull him aside and explain that I didn't want a target like that on my back (or knees, or ankles). Especially since, y'know, I'm going to have to play the Saints at least twice every year.
 
2012-09-17 09:51:00 AM  

Gwildar: Seems like a smart play when the other team isn't expecting it.


And the other team should always expect it.

Then again, I watch a lot of all football and expect this. I never really thought it was a difference between the NFL and other levels until this. Now I wonder about all the other times and how many of them were among the different levels.
 
2012-09-17 09:51:18 AM  

stir22: hey, you got a link for that?


Can't find one.
 
2012-09-17 09:51:58 AM  
BTW, this is why a lot of QBs do take two steps back after the snap before kneeling.
 
2012-09-17 09:52:57 AM  
Schiano said it was a play he'd run before at Rutgers...

Wait, just stop for a second. What the f*ck has the world come to when "plays run at Rutgers" are being replicated in the NFL for any goddamn reason?
 
2012-09-17 09:53:38 AM  
Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.
 
2012-09-17 09:53:52 AM  

Killer Cars: What the f*ck has the world come to when "plays run at Rutgers" are being replicated in the NFL for any goddamn reason?


Well, the first football game WAS played there.
 
2012-09-17 09:54:21 AM  
you know crap plays like that only give other teams the reason to go knock your QB down now. thus maybe getting your QB hurt. ever think of that coach?
 
2012-09-17 09:54:41 AM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: Found it

Thanks!

Now quit crying NY fans. That was absolutely nothing.


/non-crying Giants fan
//overblown story
 
2012-09-17 09:55:15 AM  
NOT a cheap shot. No Bucs player even hits Manning, they just push the line back into him. He fell over, which is a good way to fumble. Crazier things have happened on the last play of football games.

The victory formation doesn't force the other side to give up.
 
2012-09-17 09:55:24 AM  

haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.


Of course, then everyone would be criticizing him for whining, because "if you want them to stop, play defense." This is Twitter Fark, everyone just b*tches about injustices they make up.
 
2012-09-17 09:56:34 AM  

Freakin Rican: you know crap plays like that only give other teams the reason to go knock your QB down now. thus maybe getting your QB hurt. ever think of that coach?


Damn, because no one ever tries to hit the QB in any other game! That's really going to throw a monkey wrench into the game planning!
 
2012-09-17 09:59:31 AM  
I'm gonna go with, if football players are really as tough as they claim to be, why don't they stop being little nancy babies and deal with it.

/answer: They're really pansies in disguise
 
2012-09-17 10:00:16 AM  

haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.


THIS.
 
2012-09-17 10:00:22 AM  

Sargun: They were down by 7 and were attempting to cause a fumble. He pulled the same thing at the college level. The NYG are just farking crying because they weren't man enough to play a full 60 minutes instead of 59 and change. This is football.


This, I was expecting the Giants to be up by 9 or more the way people are talking about this... the game is over when there is no time on the clock.
 
2012-09-17 10:01:52 AM  

IAmRight: Freakin Rican: you know crap plays like that only give other teams the reason to go knock your QB down now. thus maybe getting your QB hurt. ever think of that coach?

Damn, because no one ever tries to hit the QB in any other game! That's really going to throw a monkey wrench into the game planning!


lmao.
of course they do. what i meant was like purposely looking to hit his QB now. just to prove a point.

damn monkeys and their wrenches
 
2012-09-17 10:01:59 AM  
Coughlin should be more butt-hurt that his offensive line didn't stand its ground. Had they actually blocked(like they're getting paid to do) they might actually have stopped the rush *gasp*

Every play counts, taking a knee usually costs you 2 yards of rushing on the end statistic, who's to say you can't cause a fumble?
 
2012-09-17 10:02:19 AM  

InfamousBLT: answer: They're really pansies in disguise


I don't know if they are pansies. I mean, I wouldn't want to tangle with them. I think they are just children. Children who can bench press a sedan, but still children.
 
2012-09-17 10:02:40 AM  
No way this was a cheap shot, the game was not over. Coughlin looked like an old "get off my lawn" man.
 
2012-09-17 10:03:15 AM  

Jim from Saint Paul: haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.

THIS.


My guess: They would relish the opportuniy for a turnover?
 
2012-09-17 10:03:28 AM  
A "cheap shot" was Golden Tate peeling off the play to uppercut Sean Lee with his helmet.

This is the Giants being little pansy biatches.
 
2012-09-17 10:05:57 AM  

IAmRight: Well, the first football game WAS played there.


imageshack.us

Point taken, good chap.
 
2012-09-17 10:06:10 AM  
What I always hate about stuff like this is that this is one of the craziest Giants wins I can remember, just an insanely good 4th quarter (even by Eli standards) after an equally shiatty 1st half, but this is all we're hearing about. It's like that Pats-Panthers Super Bowl which was a great game, but all anybody ever talked about was a split-second of Janet boob.

/I also missed most of yesterday's game due to work
//ran to a TV for the last 2 minutes though
 
2012-09-17 10:06:11 AM  

haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.


How is that a good point? The Giants would have been giving the Bucs a chance to force a turnover if they'd pulled that.
 
2012-09-17 10:08:21 AM  
Play until the end of the game - and a 7 point game with time left isn't over.
 
2012-09-17 10:09:50 AM  

Treygreen13: A "cheap shot" was Golden Tate peeling off the play to uppercut Sean Lee with his helmet.


Right, because peeling off the play = blocking the guy closest to the player with the ball. Here's a still. Shoulder hits chest - because of momentum, Lee's facemask hits Tate's helmet, but that was a great block.

/no excuse for the horrible call on "late hit" for the Cowboys, which just made the block stand out more.
//you guys would've been crying if he cut his knees out, too - so what do you want him to do? Oh, he should let himself get run over by a guy 4 inches taller and 40 lbs heavier than he is! And he should let the guy potentially get a tackle short of the first down marker so they can give the ball back to Dallas!
 
2012-09-17 10:10:25 AM  

Arkanaut: It's easy to say "we fight until they tell us game over" when it's not your health on the line. That's the worst part -- it's just as likely that one of his guys would have broke something trying to jump over the line.


Nice fallacy.

Look, you're playing football, you've already accepted and assumed the risks of injury. The game, for which these people are paid very handsomely, has a clock. The clock says when the game is over. The game was not over. Period. Afraid of injury? Don't play the game.
 
2012-09-17 10:11:32 AM  
It's good that the Bucs defense decided that they wanted to fight for the absolute final second, since the previous 14:59 of the 4th quarter had resulted in about 300 yards and 24 points for the Giants. But hey, Schiano's team fought to the bitter end!
 
2012-09-17 10:12:25 AM  

cettin: My guess: They would relish the opportuniy for a turnover?


Ha. Good luck! Eli Manning never turns the ball over!
 
2012-09-17 10:13:37 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: It's good that the Bucs defense decided that they wanted to fight for the absolute final second, since the previous 14:59 of the 4th quarter had resulted in about 300 yards and 24 points for the Giants. But hey, Schiano's team fought to the bitter end!


Hey, there were 5 seconds left!

But touche on the whole laying down for the whole quarter comment.
 
2012-09-17 10:16:41 AM  
With a one-score difference, I don't see a problem trying to create a fumble; if Eli drops it, they could conceivably run it back and tie the game. With a higher point difference, I would say it's cheap.
 
2012-09-17 10:19:30 AM  

cettin: Jim from Saint Paul: haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.

THIS.

My guess: They would relish the opportuniy for a turnover?


The Giants lose the game while taking a knee?? pfft....
 
2012-09-17 10:24:36 AM  
I love when a team attempts to show a little sportsmanship, and a bunch of f*cksticks on the internet call them pansies for it.
 
2012-09-17 10:29:02 AM  

kwame: I love when a team attempts to show a little sportsmanship, and a bunch of f*cksticks on the internet call them pansies for it.


It's sportsmanship to complain that the other team tried to disrupt your final snap?
 
2012-09-17 10:29:27 AM  
Know what? I'm glad that there's finally a coach in the NFL that doesn't give up on games before they're completely out of it. I'm sick of seeing teams down by two scores with 4 minutes to go in the game punting on 4th and 3. What, you think that 4 minutes is enough time to make a stop, get the ball back, score, get an onside kick, and score again? No, you're just giving up on the game.

The reason that there is a victory formation isn't because it's some magical signal to the other team that it's time to stop playing the game -- it's the formation where your team is least likely to give up the ball because you expect that the other team is going to continue to play the game. There's a reason they have two guys staring at the exchange and another guy 10 yards back. They expect the other team to try to disrupt the play and force a fumble.
 
2012-09-17 10:31:43 AM  

bhcompy: Arkanaut: It's easy to say "we fight until they tell us game over" when it's not your health on the line. That's the worst part -- it's just as likely that one of his guys would have broke something trying to jump over the line.

Nice fallacy.

Look, you're playing football, you've already accepted and assumed the risks of injury. The game, for which these people are paid very handsomely, has a clock. The clock says when the game is over. The game was not over. Period. Afraid of injury? Don't play the game.


I'm trying to say, it's a maneuver with an elevated risk of injury. The league has banned certain tactics because of the high potential for injury, and ex-players have sued the league for inadequate safety measures. Would it be that big of a stretch to say that risking life and limb is against the spirit of the game, if not the specific rules?

/I suppose I did insinuate an ad hominem there, but you assume that risk when you come to Fark.
 
2012-09-17 10:33:15 AM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: A "cheap shot" was Golden Tate peeling off the play to uppercut Sean Lee with his helmet.

Right, because peeling off the play = blocking the guy closest to the player with the ball. Here's a still. Shoulder hits chest - because of momentum, Lee's facemask hits Tate's helmet, but that was a great block.

/no excuse for the horrible call on "late hit" for the Cowboys, which just made the block stand out more.
//you guys would've been crying if he cut his knees out, too - so what do you want him to do? Oh, he should let himself get run over by a guy 4 inches taller and 40 lbs heavier than he is! And he should let the guy potentially get a tackle short of the first down marker so they can give the ball back to Dallas!


Checked the video. That was a good block, not the least bit dirty. Lee needs to pay attention to the world around him, not just the runner.
 
2012-09-17 10:33:55 AM  

rcantley: How is that a good point? The Giants would have been giving the Bucs a chance to force a turnover if they'd pulled that.


And if the Giants score and Victor Cruz salsas, is "they gave us a chance" really what Schiano would be talking about in his postgame presser? My guess is he'd be fuming, but I suppose it's possible he'd still talk about "fighting till the end" and say his team needed to do it.
 
2012-09-17 10:34:19 AM  

Arkanaut: I'm trying to say, it's a maneuver with an elevated risk of injury. The league has banned certain tactics because of the high potential for injury, and ex-players have sued the league for inadequate safety measures. Would it be that big of a stretch to say that risking life and limb is against the spirit of the game, if not the specific rules?


Holy hell, the risk of an injury on that play even with that rush is about 1/100th of any given play. And if you lost your life or limb on that play, then you didn't belong in the game in the first place. You belong back in the hospital.
 
2012-09-17 10:35:26 AM  

meanmutton: Know what? I'm glad that there's finally a coach in the NFL that doesn't give up on games before they're completely out of it. I'm sick of seeing teams down by two scores with 4 minutes to go in the game punting on 4th and 3. What, you think that 4 minutes is enough time to make a stop, get the ball back, score, get an onside kick, and score again? No, you're just giving up on the game.

The reason that there is a victory formation isn't because it's some magical signal to the other team that it's time to stop playing the game -- it's the formation where your team is least likely to give up the ball because you expect that the other team is going to continue to play the game. There's a reason they have two guys staring at the exchange and another guy 10 yards back. They expect the other team to try to disrupt the play and force a fumble.


i kind of agree. although it may be an unexpected, borderline cheap shot, fark it. it's football.

what if he fumbled. fark it, even you're down 5 touchdowns. have some pride and play to the end. I know people are nervous about unnecessary injuries. and that's sad. but still, if you don't play hard, your lack of injury is immaterial.
 
2012-09-17 10:37:53 AM  

DingleberryMoose: Checked the video. That was a good block, not the least bit dirty. Lee needs to pay attention to the world around him, not just the runner.


That is in fact legally hitting through a defender. However, there are really weird crack block rules implemented this year. I had no clue line backers were calling for safety, especially from receivers.
 
2012-09-17 10:38:21 AM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: A "cheap shot" was Golden Tate peeling off the play to uppercut Sean Lee with his helmet.

Right, because peeling off the play = blocking the guy closest to the player with the ball. Here's a still. Shoulder hits chest - because of momentum, Lee's facemask hits Tate's helmet, but that was a great block.


Here's a .gif.

You sure you want to go with "he wasn't leading with his helmet"? It's a solid hit, but he was leading with his hat.
 
2012-09-17 10:38:24 AM  
The hit by Tate was clean and hard. If you call that, then you stop anybody from hitting anybody, basically. Tate wasn't headhunting or hitting a guy from behind, he was making a football play.
 
2012-09-17 10:39:27 AM  

haplo53: rcantley: How is that a good point? The Giants would have been giving the Bucs a chance to force a turnover if they'd pulled that.

And if the Giants score and Victor Cruz salsas, is "they gave us a chance" really what Schiano would be talking about in his postgame presser? My guess is he'd be fuming, but I suppose it's possible he'd still talk about "fighting till the end" and say his team needed to do it.


So the Giants could score at any time, and in return they expect the other team to stop once they say the game is over? Good point...
 
2012-09-17 10:42:49 AM  
The Golden Tate hit might or might not have warranted a penalty -- it seemed to me that the top of his helmet might have brushed Lee's chin, which by the letter of the rules would be illegal -- but it's absolutely asinine (and a symptom of being a bad loser) to say that it was "dirty." Lee had to have his head checked on the sideline -- a function of the way his head hit the ground, which officially falls into the category of "shiat happens, especially when you got laid out by a wide receiver." And then he went back into the game and played like a pro. He got over it quickly, which his fans seem incapable of doing.
 
2012-09-17 10:49:41 AM  
Quote of the day:

"That's part of the deal. He can celebrate all he wants. I bet you if we went head-to-head and square up he probably won't be celebrating as much. It's part of the deal and part of football, and hits like that happen."

- Sean Lee

Amen, Sean. Tell it to your fans.
 
2012-09-17 10:56:01 AM  

Super Chronic: "That's part of the deal. He can celebrate all he wants. I bet you if we went head-to-head and square up he probably won't be celebrating as much. It's part of the deal and part of football, and hits like that happen."


If you were paying attention to where you were going, you would've actually gone head-to-head and been able to take him down pretty easily, Sean. You are a LOT bigger than he is. Maybe now you'll look.
 
2012-09-17 10:56:06 AM  
As a bucs fan who wanted to throw my beer at the TV toward the end of that game, even I thought it was a cheap shot.
 
2012-09-17 10:56:16 AM  

Gonz: You sure you want to go with "he wasn't leading with his helmet"? It's a solid hit, but he was leading with his hat.


I disagree. The helmet was in front of Lee's chest, but the shoulder pad hits first. It's a clean hit.
 
2012-09-17 10:57:45 AM  

IAmRight: Super Chronic: "That's part of the deal. He can celebrate all he wants. I bet you if we went head-to-head and square up he probably won't be celebrating as much. It's part of the deal and part of football, and hits like that happen."

If you were paying attention to where you were going, you would've actually gone head-to-head and been able to take him down pretty easily, Sean. You are a LOT bigger than he is. Maybe now you'll look.


All I'm saying is, he handled it with a lot more dignity than his fans did.
 
2012-09-17 10:58:01 AM  

protectyourlimbs: So the Giants could score at any time, and in return they expect the other team to stop once they say the game is over? Good point...


Don't think I've spoken to that. Really, it doesn't have to be this game - I just wonder if Schiano will still talk this talk if and when anybody ends up running the score up on him. Maybe he will, in which case, credit to him.
 
2012-09-17 10:59:24 AM  

The Muthaship: If you want to see a clear cut cheap shot from yesterday, check out D'Qwell Jackson, of the Cleveland Browns' act.

/should be suspended


The one he wasn't penalized for on the field?
 
2012-09-17 10:59:40 AM  

Super Chronic: The Golden Tate hit might or might not have warranted a penalty -- it seemed to me that the top of his helmet might have brushed Lee's chin, which by the letter of the rules would be illegal -- but it's absolutely asinine (and a symptom of being a bad loser) to say that it was "dirty." Lee had to have his head checked on the sideline -- a function of the way his head hit the ground, which officially falls into the category of "shiat happens, especially when you got laid out by a wide receiver." And then he went back into the game and played like a pro. He got over it quickly, which his fans seem incapable of doing.


There's lots of gifs of this now from both sides of the line, and I was at the game. There was no classic "crack" one would get from a helmet to helmet shot that snapped a head like that. And one can see that from careful examination that if there was any helmet to helmet contact it was extremely minor. Tate plants his shoulder and left forearm in the top of Lee's chest and just blasts him into the sky. Lee's head doesn't snap immediately to his right from the contact with Tate's helmet, it lags because it's still attached to his shoulders and the laws of dynamics demand that it follow. No doubt, he still ended up a little bit scrambled though.
 
2012-09-17 11:01:12 AM  

Super Chronic: IAmRight: Super Chronic: "That's part of the deal. He can celebrate all he wants. I bet you if we went head-to-head and square up he probably won't be celebrating as much. It's part of the deal and part of football, and hits like that happen."

If you were paying attention to where you were going, you would've actually gone head-to-head and been able to take him down pretty easily, Sean. You are a LOT bigger than he is. Maybe now you'll look.

All I'm saying is, he handled it with a lot more dignity than his fans did.


It sounded a lot like, "I got whacked pretty good, but I'm not gonna be a puss about it." More class than his team's owner, that's for sure.
 
2012-09-17 11:02:24 AM  

Arkanaut: it's just as likely that one of his guys would have broke something trying to jump over the line.

Makes you wonder about Eric LeGrand.


Eric LeGrand broke his neck on a freak play where he kept his head down on a kick-off. That hit happened at the fastest speed possible because both players were going full-steam. Two COMPLETELY different things, and don't bring LeGrand up again. If you had any idea how much Schiano and Pernetti have done to help that young man, you wouldn't have to "wonder" at all.
 
2012-09-17 11:03:19 AM  

IAmRight: It's sportsmanship to complain that the other team tried to disrupt your final snap?


I'm starting to pick up a pattern with you on the main page, but I'll play along and suggest you watch the responses of the players after the game. I don't see a lot of complaining from them. The coach has every right to speak up for them. But continue doing whatever it takes to entertain you.
 
2012-09-17 11:04:24 AM  

thecpt: Found it


After watching the video, that was an absolutely legit play. They were down by 7, and they were almost able to steamroll Manning into fumbling.
 
2012-09-17 11:06:55 AM  

haplo53: protectyourlimbs: So the Giants could score at any time, and in return they expect the other team to stop once they say the game is over? Good point...

Don't think I've spoken to that. Really, it doesn't have to be this game - I just wonder if Schiano will still talk this talk if and when anybody ends up running the score up on him. Maybe he will, in which case, credit to him.


I dont think anyone will feel bad for him if they do, I just dont see this as cheap in anyway. After I watched I didnt see any intent to injure anyone, just looked like they were trying to catch them off-guard to recover a fumble... they achieved only half of that and Giants players, coaches and some fans seem to gloss over the fact they were only up by 7 points

if they were up say 9 or more I would agree it was cheap, instead they are mad cause they weren't ready...
 
2012-09-17 11:07:57 AM  
While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.
 
2012-09-17 11:08:25 AM  

AdamK: miracle at


That was an attempted hand-off to the fullback, Larry Csonka, who was trying to gain yardage. The hand-off was botched, and the ball hit the turf. Not the same thing as a kneel down.
 
2012-09-17 11:09:40 AM  

kwame: I'm starting to pick up a pattern with you on the main page, but I'll play along and suggest you watch the responses of the players after the game. I don't see a lot of complaining from them.


They're mostly not (though you can see they really want to say something), but the story is about them exhibiting sportsmanship. Kneeling down isn't really much of a gesture of sportsmanship, it's a gesture of "let's not give them a chance to possibly win the game," especially with the game within one score.

kwame: The coach has every right to speak up for them.


Right, and Schwartz had every right to be mad at Harbaugh after the handshake last year. But the way they handled their being upset was pathetic. Did you actually watch the video? Tampa Bay didn't do anything except try to get a push to disrupt the snap. That play is why many QBs take two steps back, then kneel.
 
2012-09-17 11:10:51 AM  

Tommy Moo: While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.


At your own 10, you probably do have more to lose than to gain. It really depends on field position and score.
 
2012-09-17 11:10:55 AM  
Golic said it best on Mike and Mike this morning. If you're going to kneel down the final play, and you see everyone across from you in full 4-point stances breathing like brahmas, then you better be prepared for what's about to come at you.
 
2012-09-17 11:11:40 AM  
I'm fine with it. Last I checked, if there is time on the clock the game is not over?

Manning's BS line of we were trying to be kind or whatever is a crock of shiat. They were up one score, not three.

Had they been up more than one score, I would call cheap shot...but in a close game I'm fine with it. Just because no one really does that doesn't mean it is not well within the rules.

Do you all think that New Orleans onside kicking to open the 2nd half of thSuper Bowl was a cheap shot too?
 
2012-09-17 11:11:42 AM  

Tommy Moo: While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.


An attempted long pass would likely take place from the shotgun formation, leaving open the chance for a bad snap and a free TD for the defense that way.

In truth, nobody wants to be the coach who didn't kneel down at their own 20 with 3 seconds left in the first half, because the opportunity for disaster outweighs the opportunity for something great to happen - at least in their own minds.
 
2012-09-17 11:12:50 AM  

Tommy Moo: While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.


Don't forget the injury factor. Injuries can happen on any play, but the risk-reward tradeoff is better when there's more than a minuscule possibility of something good happening.
 
2012-09-17 11:14:38 AM  
Legal, but a total chump move. It's like the guy at our gym who plays basketball. He's huge, so he gets picked first. He can't defend worth a shiat, so he basically resorts to screaming in the shooter's face EVERY TIME they go for a shot. Legal, but a total chump move.

Still, the sound echoing throughout the gym every few minutes is amusing.
 
2012-09-17 11:14:53 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: Tommy Moo: While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.

An attempted long pass would likely take place from the shotgun formation, leaving open the chance for a bad snap and a free TD for the defense that way.

In truth, nobody wants to be the coach who didn't kneel down at their own 20 with 3 seconds left in the first half, because the opportunity repercussions for disaster outweighs the opportunity for something great to happen - at least in their own minds.


FTFY. Lots of NFL head coaches seem more concerned with avoiding sports talk radio criticism than winning.
 
2012-09-17 11:14:53 AM  

Tommy Moo: While we're on the subject (sort of): why does every team in the NFL kneel down at the end of the half? It seems like they could benefit from hiring some actuaries. They always use the excuse that an interception might get returned for a touchdown, but you're at least five times as likely to score one yourself, or get a defensive penalty that could set up a field goal. This has always been the most absolutely senseless thing in football. I don't care if there is 1 second left and you are standing on your own ten yard line. Heave it. You have nothing to lose.


The answer to your question can be solved by googling "pitch it to tashard choice" don't focus so much on the play as the media consequences. But if one is up and imposing their will on their opponants, and the odds of something good are low, take the near certain but less great outcome of taking the momentum and attendant emotional high into the half time to make all the adjustments the team can make in 12 minutes.

But if a team is behind, unless they're struggling, they'll almost always do what you advise.
 
2012-09-17 11:16:11 AM  
A one score game? Not cheap in the least. Have at it.

I was always of the opinion that a kneel down should be an unsportsmanlike penalty on its face. You play to win till the clock shows 0. Candy-asses.
 
2012-09-17 11:16:23 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: In truth, nobody wants to be the coach who didn't kneel down at their own 20 with 3 seconds left in the first half, because the opportunity for disaster outweighs the opportunity for something great to happen - at least in their own minds.


Plus the defense will be back, so you're going to have to get a pretty decent length pass AND the WR is going to have to break a tackle or two and run another 30+ yards for a TD. Since you have no time left to kick a FG (in most cases), it's a lot of risk (injury, sack/fumble, bad snap, deflected pass INT, regular INT) for an exceedingly unlikely reward.

I guess, basically, it'd be like spending $500,000 on lottery tickets.
 
2012-09-17 11:17:42 AM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Legal, but a total chump move. It's like the guy at our gym who plays basketball. He's huge, so he gets picked first. He can't defend worth a shiat, so he basically resorts to screaming in the shooter's face EVERY TIME they go for a shot. Legal, but a total chump move.

Still, the sound echoing throughout the gym every few minutes is amusing.


That pretty much hits it on the head. technically legal, but you're a dick if you do it.
 
2012-09-17 11:19:14 AM  

xaks: A one score game? Not cheap in the least. Have at it.

I was always of the opinion that a kneel down should be an unsportsmanlike penalty on its face. You play to win till the clock shows 0. Candy-asses.


Another example of the Arena league having superior rules - if it's inside the last minute of the game, the clock only keeps moving if you gain yardage (if you're ahead). Kneeling would just stop the clock.

/though with five seconds left they'd either QB sneak the half-yard or they'd just have Eli drop back and heave the ball into the stands, which would take five seconds before it came down, then the game would be over
 
2012-09-17 11:20:34 AM  
This was cheezy, but I was more annoyed by KC who was down by 3 scores with a minute to go calling timeouts. Give it up. You lost. Don't punish everyone else because your team played horrible.
 
2012-09-17 11:24:43 AM  

downtownkid: The one he wasn't penalized for on the field?


Yep. They were all busy with that horrible encroachment that they had already flagged on the same play, I guess. Launched crown of the helmet first into the chin of a defenseless player.
 
2012-09-17 11:25:10 AM  
Basically, I think what annoys me is that this stupid-ass "story" is on the main page of ESPN.com and has been all morning.

MOAR STORIES ABOUT HOW THE NFC WEST SHAT ALL OVER YOUR PREDICTIONS PLEASE

fonebone77: This was cheezy, but I was more annoyed by KC who was down by 3 scores with a minute to go calling timeouts. Give it up. You lost. Don't punish everyone else because your team played horrible.


This annoys me way more than the Bucs' play. I know they tell you that you can't take 'em with you, but I tell you what...just take 'em. After the game, during the press conference, you can use 'em and not talk to the media.

/holy sh*t that's a great idea to prevent it from happening!
 
2012-09-17 11:28:14 AM  

ManateeGag: Waldo Pepper: so why not in football.

because it puts a target on your players, especially the QB. if TB gets played extra hard one week by a team who needs the win to stay alive, the coach better not start crying if his QB gets hurt because of a percieved "cheap shot"


And until/unless Schiano does cry like this, you have no right to judge his actions based on your prediction of his reaction. This is the same as the Warren Sapp hit on Chad Clifton a few years back. If you're on a football field with a helmet on, you might get hit. Be ready. As others have said (and I don't entirely agree with), that's why girls don't play the game.
 
2012-09-17 11:30:16 AM  

The Muthaship: downtownkid: The one he wasn't penalized for on the field?

Yep. They were all busy with that horrible encroachment that they had already flagged on the same play, I guess. Launched crown of the helmet first into the chin of a defenseless player.



You are incorrect. It looked bad at first, but the replay clearly showed Jackson leading with his shoulder. Whether or not the player was defenseless is open to discussion but he didn't lead with his helmet.
 
2012-09-17 11:32:18 AM  

downtownkid: Whether or not the player was defenseless is open to discussion but he didn't lead with his helmet.


He launched upward, helmet to face mask. It was sickening.
 
2012-09-17 11:32:24 AM  

downtownkid: The Muthaship: downtownkid: The one he wasn't penalized for on the field?

Yep. They were all busy with that horrible encroachment that they had already flagged on the same play, I guess. Launched crown of the helmet first into the chin of a defenseless player.


You are incorrect. It looked bad at first, but the replay clearly showed Jackson leading with his shoulder. Whether or not the player was defenseless is open to discussion but he didn't lead with his helmet.


And if you don't believe me, ask Mike Pereira: Link
 
2012-09-17 11:32:46 AM  

Jim from Saint Paul: haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.

THIS.


And until/unless you hear him biatch about it, you can't assume he would. If you don't want it to happen, play defense. That said, your comparison is not entirely accurate. The Giants didn't need a score, so it could be considered unsportsmanlike by some (not me) to go get one. But the Bucs DID need a score, so they're the ones who had to press.
 
2012-09-17 11:32:56 AM  
cheap shot with unnecessary risk of injury. Pretty pathetic really.
 
2012-09-17 11:33:28 AM  
Wow, didn't expect so many people to think it was a cheap shot.  The game wasn't over.  Tampa was down by 7.  Yes, I'd expect them to do whatever they could to cause a fumble.  What if they did, and then threw a hail mary for a touchdown?
 
If they were down by more than 8 (the most they could score in a few seconds), then yes, its a cheap shot.
 
2012-09-17 11:34:32 AM  
Late to the thread...I didn't see the game, but heard some about this on the Mike and Mike show this morning, and saw the clip linked earlier in the thread.

Two teams trying to win in a one-score game, I say it's football. NY decides to go for the win with a kneel-down, Tampa goes for the win and lines up to play defense. When there's time on the clock, you don't assume the game's over if you're up or down by one score. If NY's down by 7 with 5 seconds left, you know damn well they're throwing up the long bomb.

I wonder how the narrative would change if it happened in the NFC Championship instead of week 2?
 
2012-09-17 11:35:27 AM  

Your Average Witty Fark User: Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy

And everyone knows Eli is a whiny pussy. Fark him.


Is this is a joke post? Eli is the most unflappable, non-whiny, non-emotional-at-all QB in the game.
 
2012-09-17 11:35:39 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: It's good that the Bucs defense decided that they wanted to fight for the absolute final second, since the previous 14:59 of the 4th quarter had resulted in about 300 yards and 24 points for the Giants. But hey, Schiano's team fought to the bitter end!


I put that on the Bucs offense for not sustaining drives. The D was gassed as hell. With two exceptions:
1. Somebody should be shot for putting 940-year-old Ronde Barber in man coverage on Victor Cruz.
2. If there had been regular refs, the Giants would have gained another 500 yards just on holding/pass interference calls on Aqib Talib. That was shameless mugging on each and every play.

// Bucs fan
 
2012-09-17 11:36:18 AM  
I'm a Giants fan, but I'm sorry, if the Bucs had a chance to knock that ball loose, they had to take it. This whole nonsense of finishing the game by running time out is stupid.
 
2012-09-17 11:37:15 AM  
Oh goody, another FARK ITG thread where a bunch of knuckleheads who have never fastened a chin strap get to weigh in on something they know completely nothing about.
 
2012-09-17 11:38:41 AM  

The Muthaship: He launched upward, helmet to face mask. It was sickening.


It honestly looked like shoulder. If it was helmet, the head would have slung back immediately. And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing. The same hit could have happened to a running back 20 yards after the line of scrimmage.
 
2012-09-17 11:40:12 AM  

thecpt: And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing.


Ok, if you don't understand the rule, we can be done.
 
2012-09-17 11:40:48 AM  
I heard that Eli could be out 2-4 weeks with a dislodged tampon, so it seems as if it was pretty serious.
 
2012-09-17 11:41:51 AM  
Man there are a lot of weird defenses of the Bucs in this thread. I've watched football for a long time and never seen anyone pull this in an NFL game. So please stop pretending that this is some kind of common occurrence.

Now maybe you guys legitimately want to end the practice of plays ending on knees. Okay, But don't act like playing till the last second is actually what happens. Most games end on a team taking a knee (or otherwise a FG or hail mary play...). Because of that, the players don't really play that last play and are not physically ready/expecting any play and thus there IS a real risk to injury.

It isn't so much that Eli was going to get hit by a bucs player, per se, but that the whole offensive line was at risk.

Again, if you want to change the entire way NFL games are ended, whatever, But don't pretend this wasn't unusual.
 
2012-09-17 11:44:40 AM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing.

Ok, if you don't understand the rule, we can be done.


For a line backer (or is he a db?)? Are we talking about the same play?
 
2012-09-17 11:45:42 AM  

Bill Frist: Man there are a lot of weird defenses of the Bucs in this thread. I've watched football for a long time and never seen anyone pull this in an NFL game. So please stop pretending that this is some kind of common occurrence.


I've seen it happen a lot, though I admit that I watch a lot of football of all levels, so it's possible that it's just done everywhere but the NFL (since it's not like I bothered to note what league it happened in, since, as I said, it's fairly common).

Bill Frist: It isn't so much that Eli was going to get hit by a bucs player, per se, but that the whole offensive line was at risk.


Not any more so than they would be on every other play of the game.
 
2012-09-17 11:48:00 AM  

IAmRight: Not any more so than they would be on every other play of the game.


You don't think players not expecting contact--and this goes for any sport or non-sport--are more likely to be injured in a contact situation? Your body does different thigns when its expecting something than when it isn't.
 
2012-09-17 11:49:58 AM  

Bill Frist: IAmRight: Not any more so than they would be on every other play of the game.

You don't think players not expecting contact--and this goes for any sport or non-sport--are more likely to be injured in a contact situation? Your body does different thigns when its expecting something than when it isn't.


Not to mention the fact that having the entire defensive unit diving at the offensive line's knees isn't really an effective ploy against a team that's actually trying to advance the ball.
 
2012-09-17 11:52:01 AM  

haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.


I don't see how conjecture like that is a good point. The only good point is that there was time on the clock, it was a close game, and the Giants could have run a play where it was impossible to hit Manning. They didn't, and he took a slow fall because of it. My three year-old daughter has harder falls than that on a daily basis, so a bunch of grown men in pads need to get the sand out of their vaginas.
 
2012-09-17 11:52:59 AM  
Golden Tate, the new Hines Ward, won't do shiat unless you aren't looking
 
2012-09-17 11:54:26 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: Bill Frist: IAmRight: Not any more so than they would be on every other play of the game.

You don't think players not expecting contact--and this goes for any sport or non-sport--are more likely to be injured in a contact situation? Your body does different thigns when its expecting something than when it isn't.

Not to mention the fact that having the entire defensive unit diving at the offensive line's knees isn't really an effective ploy against a team that's actually trying to advance the ball.



It's very simple: 999 times out of a thousand the defensive team gracefully accepts the gesture and walks off the field. The chances of them actually recovering the ball AND having time to advance it are virtually nonexistent.

The chance of an unsuspecting player being injured when someone dives at his knees is pretty high. There is a reason it is customary to walk off the field when the opponent takes the victory formation. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the game, or trolling like IAmRight likes to.
 
2012-09-17 11:55:36 AM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing.

Ok, if you don't understand the rule, we can be done.


So you know better than Mike Pereira?
 
2012-09-17 11:55:54 AM  

skrame: so a bunch of grown men in pads need to get the sand out of their vaginas.


This attitude is so bizarre. Do you people even watch football? Football players sustain almost endless injuries, have short careers, and are often crippled for life from their injuries. You really want to complain about how they are sissy girls with sand in their vaginas? Really?
 
2012-09-17 11:59:47 AM  

downtownkid: The Muthaship: thecpt: And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing.

Ok, if you don't understand the rule, we can be done.

So you know better than Mike Pereira?


Speaking of Mike Pereira

i.imgur.com

Sorry Hines Ward Jr. fans
 
2012-09-17 12:02:26 PM  
7 points down and if you get a fumble you can tie the game?


Yeah bring the house and tackle the football.
 
2012-09-17 12:05:26 PM  

falcon176: Speaking of Mike Pereira

[i.imgur.com image 532x320]

Sorry Hines Ward Jr. fans


Not really worried about the opinion of a retired clown who claimed that the officiating in Super Bowl XL was good.
 
2012-09-17 12:05:43 PM  
Two things:

1) Justin Tuck would have ripped someone's head off on the next play if the Bucs successfully got the ball back.

2) The fact that the Bucs players were remorseful about doing that BS says enough.

If all the players on the field had such a reaction, it was probably a dick move. It was, however, predictable, if you see everyone on defense all tense and ready to go on what should be an easy play

Ultimately, the Giants won, so I don't give a fark..
 
2012-09-17 12:12:53 PM  
Just saw the clip and my opinion of it boils down to "desperate play by desperate team".

/still a dick move, IMO
 
2012-09-17 12:15:00 PM  

falcon176: Golden Tate, the new Hines Ward, won't do shiat unless you aren't looking


Now that's horseshiat. He had a 'cheap' shot or two but he wasn't known as the best blocking WR for a decade for nothing. Dud was making a block - a real one, not your average WR horseshiat - on every play he wasn't the primary.
 
2012-09-17 12:15:16 PM  

snake_beater: Just saw the clip and my opinion of it boils down to "desperate play by desperate team".


Basically it's this. Is it annoying? Yeah. Should you privately think less of them? Sure. Should it be a national story, front page of ESPN for any length of time? F*ck no.

But overblowing the littlest of slights is what gets everyone on the internet off, so we'll have to pretend this is a huge issue.
 
2012-09-17 12:16:35 PM  
Also, if Golden Tate wants to be the new Hines Ward, I'll take it. Much better than being "the new overrated Notre Dame player who fails to do anything in the NFL," which he seemed content to be for a while.
 
2012-09-17 12:16:56 PM  
Nothing even remotely wrong with the "push" by the defense.
Grow the fark up
 
2012-09-17 12:18:16 PM  

JohnBigBootay: falcon176: Golden Tate, the new Hines Ward, won't do shiat unless you aren't looking

Now that's horseshiat. He had a 'cheap' shot or two but he wasn't known as the best blocking WR for a decade for nothing. Dud was making a block - a real one, not your average WR horseshiat - on every play he wasn't the primary.



Eh, you say potato, I say po-tah-to. You say he had "a cheap shot or two", the other players vote him the dirtiest player in the league: Link

Same thing, right?
 
2012-09-17 12:19:11 PM  

skrame: I don't see how conjecture like that is a good point.


Yes it's conjecture but it's not really that hard to envision him getting pissed off at a Giants team (or any team) that shows him up playing by his rules. And as I've said, if it ever happens and he sticks to what he said yesterday, good on him.
 
2012-09-17 12:21:14 PM  
Easy solution - kneel downs in the pocket stops the clock or ban kneel downs altogether. With the first option at least a team can run the clock down every other play fairly easily. Change the rule or quit biatching anytime anyone does something unconventional but within the rules.
 
2012-09-17 12:21:30 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: haplo53: Somebody on ESPN actually made a good point - wonder if Schiano would sing the same tune if the Giants had tried to (run up the) score on that last play. That would be "fighting until the end" too.

THIS.


They were up by seven and on their own 25 yard line. I think the Bucs had good reason to try to force a fumble. Giants trying to score would not be "running up the score"
 
2012-09-17 12:21:43 PM  

IAmRight: Should it be a national story, front page of ESPN for any length of time? F*ck no.


haha, come on. I don't care about this story that much but ESPN is a sports site and its football seasons. their "national stories" on the "front page" are always going to be some random shiat about football. This isn't like a hard hitting news site...
 
2012-09-17 12:22:56 PM  

Vanquish: The next time that the Giants and Bucs are playing, and the Giants are going to knee it to ice the game, they should fake knee it and throw a TD.


I can recall a Bengals/Oilers where the Bengals were up by 34....and proceeded to onside kick.

I can see this happening the next time the Bucs line up for the kickoff.

/They won 61-0
//Sam Wyche was the coach
///Glanville was the Oilers coach
////Both sides hated each other
 
2012-09-17 12:24:47 PM  

Bill Frist: haha, come on. I don't care about this story that much but ESPN is a sports site and its football seasons. their "national stories" on the "front page" are always going to be some random shiat about football.


Yeah, but you know, there were a dozen games played yesterday. The Cardinals DID just sh*t all over the No. 1 team in their power rankings. I suppose that might be kind of embarrassing for them and they're loathe to acknowledge teams beating their darlings, but it still happened.

Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.
 
2012-09-17 12:24:57 PM  

UNC_Samurai: And of course the former players on ESPN this morning are trying to defend Schiano's decision. Just admit that the Bucs were trying to get under the Giants skin. It may have worked, but it's still a dick move.


Uh, not just that: Do you really want the Giants to get all pissed off now and have a chip on their shoulder next game?

/So yeah Carolina
//Blame Schiano if the Giants stomp a mudhole on ya this Thu.
 
2012-09-17 12:26:01 PM  

IAmRight: Bill Frist: haha, come on. I don't care about this story that much but ESPN is a sports site and its football seasons. their "national stories" on the "front page" are always going to be some random shiat about football.

Yeah, but you know, there were a dozen games played yesterday. The Cardinals DID just sh*t all over the No. 1 team in their power rankings. I suppose that might be kind of embarrassing for them and they're loathe to acknowledge teams beating their darlings, but it still happened.

Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.


I don't really think random sports teams winning random regular season games should be "national news" to begin with.

But I certainly agree that Eli's crazy game and massive comeback is more of a story than the Bucs being sore losers.
 
2012-09-17 12:27:56 PM  

IAmRight: thecpt: Found it

Um, he didn't look like he'd taken the knee - looked like they tried to get a push to cause a fumble on the exchange and Eli fell down and went boom. Wouldn't even be talked about if it weren't Eli and the Giants.

Besides, as I said earlier, no one should have to give an excuse for trying to hit Eli Manning. They should be required to give them for missing.


I like how all these jabronis keep biatching about how "Giants are whiners"....if someone had gotten hurt on that play, they would turn around and label the Bucs as "dirty."

So...don't complain when someone goes full boar on your favorite player next time. Just remember how you complained about the Giants being whiners.
 
2012-09-17 12:29:22 PM  

IAmRight: Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.


49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.
 
2012-09-17 12:30:09 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: It's good that the Bucs defense decided that they wanted to fight for the absolute final second, since the previous 14:59 of the 4th quarter had resulted in about 300 yards and 24 points for the Giants. But hey, Schiano's team fought to the bitter end!


This.
 
2012-09-17 12:31:47 PM  

Bill Frist: But I certainly agree that Eli's crazy game and massive comeback is more of a story than the Bucs being sore losers.


Oh, sure, the No. 1 team losing to a team that most people considered among the NFL's worst after preseason, in their home stadium, a place where they'd never lost a home opener isn't a story. But the Giants beating a mediocre team by a TD at home is!

I agree that the Giants' comeback is a bigger story than "playingoutthegamegate" or whatever retarded -gate they're giving this...but Cards/Pats is way bigger and had a crazier ending. Lots of exciting games with upsets and great finishes, and we're talking about a kneel-down play.
 
2012-09-17 12:32:02 PM  
I'm calling cheap shot because I'm willing to bet that if this happens to the bucs later in the season, they'll be screaming bloody murder.

Sure there's still time left on the clock and maybe a slight chance of forcing a fumble, but the victory stance is a well established part of the game. If Tampa wants to fark with it, fine, but they'd better not whine if another team does it to them.
 
2012-09-17 12:32:24 PM  

Bill Frist: Your Average Witty Fark User: Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy

And everyone knows Eli is a whiny pussy. Fark him.

Is this is a joke post? Eli is the most unflappable, non-whiny, non-emotional-at-all QB in the game.


Yeah this. If you're an opposing team down up less than 7 late in the 4th...you better pray that Eli doesn't have the ball last.
 
2012-09-17 12:33:20 PM  

thecpt: 49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.


Pretty much every NFC West team aside from maybe St. Louis (they're the only team I haven't seen play) does. They all win with defense and a "good enough" offense (though I'd actually upgrade San Francisco's offense based on what I've seen out of them so far...we'll see when they come up against a good defense).
 
2012-09-17 12:33:41 PM  

downtownkid: Eh, you say potato,


No, I didn't say potato. I said he was the best blocking WR for a decade. That's true and I doubt you'll find many NFL players who disagree. Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.
 
2012-09-17 12:34:16 PM  
Would you rather the Giants called a running play, and just dance around the field until the time ran out? or maybe cut block the whole entire Defensive line?

It was a cheap shot. The "Victory formation" is used in collage football to.
 
2012-09-17 12:36:43 PM  

kkinnison: It was a cheap shot. The "Victory formation" is used in collage football to.


And people try to cause fumbles in college football, too. Again, there's a reason that many QBs take two steps back, then kneel.
 
2012-09-17 12:36:56 PM  

thecpt: Found it


Now that I've seen it I can say it was a dick move. Millions of dollars of product on the field, breaking convention leads to cheap injuries, etc.

I never root for injuries, since they can happen to anyone during normal play. But if someone gets hurt playing my favorite team, I cheer--as long as it wasn't a cheap shot. Or career-ending. Just something simple like a thigh bruise or broken nose is best.

/Packers fan.
//Hate the Giants.
 
2012-09-17 12:37:37 PM  

IAmRight: Oh, sure, the No. 1 team losing to a team that most people considered among the NFL's worst after preseason, in their home stadium, a place where they'd never lost a home opener isn't a story. But the Giants beating a mediocre team by a TD at home is!


I... don't know what whiney point you are trying to make. I didn't say the Giants victory was a bigger "story" (what a dumb way to look at sports anyway...) than anything else except the knee-gate. Although I don't really care about who the "number 1 team" in power rankings is after ONE WEEK. I mean come on. THe Giants are still defending Super Bowl champions last I checked, which is more meaningful than whatever dumb rankings come out a mere one week into the season.

/personally think Green Bay will be the number 1 team this year in the regular season, not the Pats.
 
2012-09-17 12:38:03 PM  

thecpt: IAmRight: Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.

49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.


Those were last year. So only 3.87 more years to go, excluding possible superbowls.
 
2012-09-17 12:38:29 PM  

thecpt: IAmRight: Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.

49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.


Can I be one of the few that still isn't convinced by the 49ers? Great defense? Absolutely. But as you see with the Giants, even "great" defenses can lay an egg. The Saints were a classic "play with a lead" D and that's why Alex Smith took advantage of them in that playoff game. I wanna see Alex Smith play against a D like the Ravens have: Can he make "the throw" that'll have a Defense say "Oh, we're screwed now."

Joe Flacco can, but can Alex?
 
2012-09-17 12:40:01 PM  

JohnBigBootay: downtownkid: Eh, you say potato,

No, I didn't say potato. I said he was the best blocking WR for a decade. That's true and I doubt you'll find many NFL players who disagree. Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.


You also said he had "a cheap shot or two". There's a reason we use quotation marks, you know. Amazing how one or two cheap shots was enough to get him voted dirtiest player in the league, by the other players.
 
2012-09-17 12:43:18 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.


Ha? Hines Ward isn't going to be in the Hall anytime in the near or distant future as long as Tim Brown, Cris Carter, and Andre Reed aren't, and they've been eligible(varying based on retirement) for 5+ years.
 
2012-09-17 12:45:59 PM  
Always amusing when people try to argue unsportsmanlike conduct in a game where wasting time to prohibit the other team from playing is the primary strategy.

Football is based on unsportsmanlike actions. It is the opposite of competition. It is good to see a team try to break that mold.
 
2012-09-17 12:47:00 PM  

Rwa2play: But as you see with the Giants, even "great" defenses can lay an egg.


The Giants aren't a great defense until the playoffs, usually.

Bill Frist: I... don't know what whiney point you are trying to make. I didn't say the Giants victory was a bigger "story" (what a dumb way to look at sports anyway...) than anything else except the knee-gate.


You said you don't care about the other one, but that the Giants' story was bigger than "knee-gate." Which implies that the Giants' story is bigger than the Cardinals' win.

/listening to Jaworski saying Coughlin owes Schiano an apology for that BS
 
2012-09-17 12:48:48 PM  

Rwa2play: Can he make "the throw" that'll have a Defense say "Oh, we're screwed now.


He made a couple of really good ones last night that of all people vernon davis blew. But you're right. I want to see him play two scores down and see what happens. Their offense is purely ball control with minimal risk.
 
2012-09-17 12:49:25 PM  

thecpt: IAmRight: Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.

49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.


The 49'ers played the AFC North last year. They play the East this year.
 
2012-09-17 12:50:08 PM  

Sargun: They were down by 7 and were attempting to cause a fumble. He pulled the same thing at the college level. The NYG are just farking crying because they weren't man enough to play a full 60 minutes instead of 59 and change. This is football.


Did you know the average football game only lasts 5-10 minutes? Football is barely a sport. It is more about wasting time than actually playing.
 
2012-09-17 12:50:37 PM  

bhcompy: JohnBigBootay: Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.

Ha? Hines Ward isn't going to be in the Hall anytime in the near or distant future as long as Tim Brown, Cris Carter, and Andre Reed aren't, and they've been eligible(varying based on retirement) for 5+ years.


I'm not saying it's right, but rings matter and Peter King votes. That last one in particular is very VERY wrong.
 
2012-09-17 12:50:42 PM  

IAmRight: You said you don't care about the other one, but that the Giants' story was bigger than "knee-gate." Which implies that the Giants' story is bigger than the Cardinals' win.


No, I didn't say that at all. Direct quote:

I don't really think random sports teams winning random regular season games should be "national news" to begin with.

My point is that arguing over what should be "national news" is just a silly argument to have. Its week 2 of a sports seasons, not global uprisings, wars, or anything else that should actually be news.

My comment was not meant to imply any specific teams, but rather that all this stuff--Giants, Pats, Bucs, Lions, whoever--is mostly fun nonsense not stuff that should be real "national news."
 
2012-09-17 12:50:57 PM  
Wow, someone is desperately trying to troll someone.
 
2012-09-17 12:51:15 PM  

thecpt: ManateeGag: and if JPP or Tuck did that to your QB, you'd be crying like a little biatch.

This is easily the best point. Five seconds left and its a long enough season. I don't want to see my quarterback roll his ankle on this pointless play.


Perhaps the QB should actually play then rather than running out the clock like an dishonorable coward.
 
2012-09-17 12:51:52 PM  

mainstreet62: Wow, someone is desperately trying to troll some anyone.



FTFM
 
2012-09-17 12:52:20 PM  
If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?
 
2012-09-17 12:53:32 PM  

Bullseyed: Did you know the average football game only lasts 5-10 minutes? Football is barely a sport. It is more about wasting time than actually playing.


I think you are confusing football with baseball (I think the average game has like 5 minutes in which the game is actually playing) or soccer, in which everyone jogs around doing nothing, but then there is like 2 minutes of accumulated actual important moments.
 
2012-09-17 12:53:34 PM  

Bill Frist: My point is that arguing over what should be "national news" is just a silly argument to have. Its week 2 of a sports seasons, not global uprisings, wars, or anything else that should actually be news.


It's front page of ESPN (well, was at the time). It's sports - it should not be the biggest sports story of the day. And the Cards/Pats game does deserve to be the front of ESPN at least for a few hours.

/now there's a CFB story out with the polls, so "knee-gate" is only the NFL front page on their site.
 
2012-09-17 12:53:46 PM  

IAmRight: listening to Jaworski saying Coughlin owes Schiano an apology for that BS


A former Eagles QB taking the anti-Giants side of a manufactured argument with Merrill "Choda Boy" Hoge? Now I've heard EVERYTHING.
 
2012-09-17 12:54:11 PM  

Rwa2play: thecpt: IAmRight: Oh, and the NFC West is sh*tting on the rest of the league right now.

49ers look like an AFC North team. I can't wait for one of those matchups.

Can I be one of the few that still isn't convinced by the 49ers? Great defense? Absolutely. But as you see with the Giants, even "great" defenses can lay an egg. The Saints were a classic "play with a lead" D and that's why Alex Smith took advantage of them in that playoff game. I wanna see Alex Smith play against a D like the Ravens have: Can he make "the throw" that'll have a Defense say "Oh, we're screwed now."

Joe Flacco can, but can Alex?


But it's Flacco's defense saying it about Joe too.

It's not like they left that New Orleans game then went out the next week and got blown away in the NFC Title game. Heck, they win that game too if not for Ginn being injured and the back up punt regurner having trouble hanging onto the ball.

I doubted them until the playoffs last year. They are the best team in the NFL currently and the offense seems a bit improved from last year.
 
2012-09-17 12:56:44 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: A former Eagles QB taking the anti-Giants side of a manufactured argument with Merrill "Choda Boy" Hoge? Now I've heard EVERYTHING.


Oh, but we should pretend that the other side isn't biased.

Mainly because the actual reaction to this "story" should be: "That's not even a f*cking story, go kill yourself for trying to make this into an issue." But controversy = clicks and comments, so hey, let's manufacture some controversy!
 
2012-09-17 12:57:30 PM  
Bucs could've tied or won the game on the last play. That's a legitimate possibility. The only way the Bucs play would be unsportsmanlike is if they were down by 9 or more points.
 
2012-09-17 12:57:56 PM  

Tickle Mittens: bhcompy: JohnBigBootay: Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.

Ha? Hines Ward isn't going to be in the Hall anytime in the near or distant future as long as Tim Brown, Cris Carter, and Andre Reed aren't, and they've been eligible(varying based on retirement) for 5+ years.

I'm not saying it's right, but rings matter and Peter King votes. That last one in particular is very VERY wrong.


And it won't make a bit of difference. HoF voters may be stupid, but they're not that stupid. There is no way in hell that Ward makes it in to the hall before any of them. Tony Gonzalez will be in the hall before Ward.
 
2012-09-17 01:00:45 PM  

haplo53: skrame: I don't see how conjecture like that is a good point.

Yes it's conjecture but it's not really that hard to envision him getting pissed off at a Giants team (or any team) that shows him up playing by his rules. And as I've said, if it ever happens and he sticks to what he said yesterday, good on him.


I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game
 
2012-09-17 01:00:47 PM  

Bill Frist: Your Average Witty Fark User: Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy

And everyone knows Eli is a whiny pussy. Fark him.

Is this is a joke post? Eli is the most unflappable, non-whiny, non-emotional-at-all QB in the game.


This reminds me. RG III had better grow up, and fast. When he's winning, he is all cheery and happy, but when the Rams were dominating in the second half, he got a wee bit on the whiny side, biatching to the refs on almost every single play. He ran for a few yard gain at one point in time and then complained to the refs that he got hit too hard. He'll lose the team if he does that, and I think that played a small role in the Skins 4th quarter. Their attitude was completely different.
 
2012-09-17 01:01:03 PM  

bhcompy: Tickle Mittens:
I'm not saying it's right, but rings matter and Peter King votes. That last one in particular is very VERY wrong.

And it won't make a bit of difference. HoF voters may be stupid, but they're not that stupid. There is no way in hell that Ward makes it in to the hall before any of them. Tony Gonzalez will be in the hall before Ward.


I'd like you to be right. But it's hard to be optimistic about the insight of HoF electors after reading MMQB. It's very very hard.
 
2012-09-17 01:01:15 PM  

Bullseyed: Perhaps the QB should actually play then rather than running out the clock like an dishonorable coward.


He actually played for 500+ yards passing. Kneeling is part of the game. I think you're trolling or very bad at english. or both.
 
2012-09-17 01:03:09 PM  

Tickle Mittens: bhcompy: Tickle Mittens:
I'm not saying it's right, but rings matter and Peter King votes. That last one in particular is very VERY wrong.

And it won't make a bit of difference. HoF voters may be stupid, but they're not that stupid. There is no way in hell that Ward makes it in to the hall before any of them. Tony Gonzalez will be in the hall before Ward.

I'd like you to be right. But it's hard to be optimistic about the insight of HoF electors after reading MMQB. It's very very hard.


I think they'll see the light, particularly when Raider fans threaten death to the heathens that want to put Ward in before Brown(who is by all rights the second best receiver of all time)
 
2012-09-17 01:03:19 PM  

falcon176: downtownkid: The Muthaship: thecpt: And he looks defenseless but thats his own doing.

Ok, if you don't understand the rule, we can be done.

So you know better than Mike Pereira?

Speaking of Mike Pereira

[i.imgur.com image 532x320]

Sorry Hines Ward Jr. fans


Good thing Tate didn't do anything remotely close to leading with his helmet, then. I don't know which play Pereira was referring to, but it can't be Tate, because Tate led with his shoulder. The ONLY possible objection is the grazing of the chin/facemask with his own helmet. And, as noted above, although it might have been a penalty for that reason, anyone who calls it "dirty" is a blithering idiot. Sean Lee has more class than many of his fans.
 
2012-09-17 01:03:31 PM  

thecpt: Found it


Thanks. I have no problem with that.

Down by 7, one score can tie. A fumble could be returned for a touchdown or provide one shot at the end zone from a decent range. And with the other team not expecting it your odds of success increase.

It wasn't a late hit, there was a push on the snap and Manning wasn't prepared and got knocked back when the offensive line was shoved into his face.
 
2012-09-17 01:09:08 PM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: The hit by Tate was clean and hard. If you call that, then you stop anybody from hitting anybody, basically. Tate wasn't headhunting or hitting a guy from behind, he was making a football play.


THIS

Lee was going after the QB, Tate threw a great (physical and clean) block. I'm glad Lee isn't hurt but this is contact football.
 
2012-09-17 01:10:24 PM  

meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game


I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.
 
2012-09-17 01:12:17 PM  

dywed88: thecpt: Found it

Thanks. I have no problem with that.

Down by 7, one score can tie. A fumble could be returned for a touchdown or provide one shot at the end zone from a decent range. And with the other team not expecting it your odds of success increase.

It wasn't a late hit, there was a push on the snap and Manning wasn't prepared and got knocked back when the offensive line was shoved into his face.


Thats the part that I find weird though that he didn't get away. I immediately thought someone grabbed his foot upon the snap, which I have a problem with. That can lead to twisted ankles and sprained knees so ultimately I think its dirty.
 
2012-09-17 01:15:30 PM  

litespeed74: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: The hit by Tate was clean and hard. If you call that, then you stop anybody from hitting anybody, basically. Tate wasn't headhunting or hitting a guy from behind, he was making a football play.

THIS

Lee was going after the QB, Tate threw a great (physical and clean) block. I'm glad Lee isn't hurt but this is contact football.


So, I read about what Periera said and then watched the video for the first time. I had no idea a defender pursuing the ball could be viewed as "defenseless," but that seems to be the crux of Periera's argument. It makes no sense, because Lee was actively running down to make the tackle. Tate came at him from a good angle, drove him with the shoulder, and popped under his facemask with the tip of his helmet (which seemed to happen because of Lee's recoil from the shoulder hit). It was hard, but I don't see what was wrong with the hit.
 
2012-09-17 01:16:50 PM  
So at what point did the "kneel-down" play get drawn up with the Offensive Line not blocking anybody?

Seriously, just because they're not trying to advance the ball doesn't mean their job isn't still to keep the other team on the other side of the line of scrimmage. Coughlin and Manning should be yelling at THEM instead.
 
2012-09-17 01:21:51 PM  

cefm: So at what point did the "kneel-down" play get drawn up with the Offensive Line not blocking anybody?

Seriously, just because they're not trying to advance the ball doesn't mean their job isn't still to keep the other team on the other side of the line of scrimmage. Coughlin and Manning should be yelling at THEM instead.


This.

There wouldn't even be a problem here if the offensive line would've actually put a hand on someone.
 
2012-09-17 01:23:40 PM  
If they were up by more than 8, it's a cheap shot. But if you can tie the game up with a fumble, why not try to get one? People complaining about this drives me nuts. The Giants could see (EVERYONE could see) that TB was lining up to do that. The Giants' O-line should have been prepared for it. If they had caused the fumble and ran it back for a td, today we'd all be calling Schiano a genius. Coughlin gets mad because "someone could have gotten hurt"...you mean, like every other play of the game? Get over it. And if Schiano does it to other teams, then by all means, they should do it to his team. But I'm not going to fault him for not giving up.
 
2012-09-17 01:24:30 PM  

Bill Frist: IAmRight: Not any more so than they would be on every other play of the game.

You don't think players not expecting contact--and this goes for any sport or non-sport--are more likely to be injured in a contact situation? Your body does different thigns when its expecting something than when it isn't.


If you are in pads on a football field and you hear a whistle, you should expect to get hit. Always. Every time. Period. If you're not, you're not doing your job.
 
2012-09-17 01:26:53 PM  

mainstreet62: Two things:

1) Justin Tuck would have ripped someone's head off on the next play if the Bucs successfully got the ball back.


There wouldn't have been one. With only 5 seconds left, their only hope was a scoop and score.
 
2012-09-17 01:28:56 PM  

Bill Frist: Man there are a lot of weird defenses of the Bucs in this thread. I've watched football for a long time and never seen anyone pull this in an NFL game. So please stop pretending that this is some kind of common occurrence.


Who cares if it is common. people haven't even claimed it is common in the NFL. Was it unethical when the Cikings introduced the wildcat offence? After all it was something not done in the NFL.

It should be more common. When you are one play away from a tie, you play the game. Otherwise they should just make a rule, if the offence has enough downs to run out the clock, the game is over.

As for an increased risk of injury because the offence isn't expecting the defence to play, that is their fault. You are on the field, lined up for a play and so is the other team. Expect a play. And this is an issue that only arises once, you can bet your ass that if the same situation arises in Dallas (and probably every other game in the league) next week the O-line will be ready.
 
2012-09-17 01:29:23 PM  

But I certainly agree that Eli's crazy game and massive comeback is more of a story than the Bucs being sore losers.


The Bucs aren't the ones crying to the media. They handled their business on the field.
 
2012-09-17 01:29:27 PM  

bhcompy: And it won't make a bit of difference. HoF voters may be stupid, but they're not that stupid.


Steve Tasker and Jerry Kramer would like a word with you.
 
2012-09-17 01:32:24 PM  
I'm just happy that Eli salvaged what was beginning to look like an awful fantasy day.

/but yeah, cheap shot
 
2012-09-17 01:33:01 PM  

Rwa2play: Bill Frist: Your Average Witty Fark User: Lost Thought 00: Kneel from the shotgun formation or come prepared to play balls out for all 60 minutes, pussy boy

And everyone knows Eli is a whiny pussy. Fark him.

Is this is a joke post? Eli is the most unflappable, non-whiny, non-emotional-at-all QB in the game.

Yeah this. If you're an opposing team down up less than 7 late in the 4th...you better pray that Eli doesn't have the ball last.


Eli was a whiny biatch before he every took the field in the NFL.
www.blogcdn.com
 
2012-09-17 01:34:37 PM  

fickenchucker: thecpt: Found it

Now that I've seen it I can say it was a dick move. Millions of dollars of product on the field, breaking convention leads to cheap injuries, etc.

I never root for injuries, since they can happen to anyone during normal play. But if someone gets hurt playing my favorite team, I cheer--as long as it wasn't a cheap shot. Or career-ending. Just something simple like a thigh bruise or broken nose is best.

/Packers fan.
//Hate the Giants.


Cry, cry. "Millions of dollars on the field..." The Bucs defense gets paid, too. They're at just as much risk every time they make contact with another player. If they don't like that, they're welcome to take up figure skating.
 
2012-09-17 01:34:42 PM  

bhcompy: Tickle Mittens: bhcompy: JohnBigBootay: Let's revisit this after his hall of fame vote in a few years.

Ha? Hines Ward isn't going to be in the Hall anytime in the near or distant future as long as Tim Brown, Cris Carter, and Andre Reed aren't, and they've been eligible(varying based on retirement) for 5+ years.

I'm not saying it's right, but rings matter and Peter King votes. That last one in particular is very VERY wrong.

And it won't make a bit of difference. HoF voters may be stupid, but they're not that stupid. There is no way in hell that Ward makes it in to the hall before any of them. Tony Gonzalez will be in the hall before Ward.


a) rings do matter and Ward has two of them and a Super Bowl MVP.
b) Well, Tony Gonzalez is a first-ballot HoFer, so that's only saying something because Ward probably isn't?
 
2012-09-17 01:36:59 PM  

turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?


turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?


The same reason they don't fake punt on every punt attempt. You do what makes sense strategically at that point in the game.
 
2012-09-17 01:39:59 PM  
Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link
 
2012-09-17 01:40:43 PM  

haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.


How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.
 
2012-09-17 01:43:42 PM  

Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link


Because he hit him with his shoulder?
 
2012-09-17 01:43:47 PM  

dywed88: Who cares if it is common. people haven't even claimed it is common in the NFL


Disagree, there are a ton of posts in here to the effect of "you always play jto the end of the whistle! That's how it works!" blah blah.
 
2012-09-17 01:45:59 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link

Because he hit him with his shoulder?


Maybe after he drove his hat up into his facemask, but of course that was before he crawled around celebrating the cheap shot while the play was still going.
 
2012-09-17 01:46:01 PM  

Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link


Well, if you look at the stills you can see where he hits him. You'd be crying if he went low (normally what receivers do, though it carries a large risk of a knee-to-head collision), and you're crying now that he went into it standing up. He wasn't even upright. I just want to know what you expect Tate to do there in order to block a guy that is much larger than he is and running toward him at full speed.
 
2012-09-17 01:47:14 PM  
By my quick count, including kickoffs, punts and extra points, there were 164 other plays in that game. Because of the risk of injury, should players have been taking it easy on those plays, as well?

/or is that just the New Orleans Saints?
 
2012-09-17 01:47:15 PM  

Treygreen13: but of course that was before he crawled around celebrating the cheap shot while the play was still going.


If you knocked down someone on a block that awesome, you'd celebrate too. It's not like he knew he was hurt (and he ultimately wasn't, after being taken off for precautionary purposes because it looked more vicious than it was).
 
2012-09-17 01:47:58 PM  

Bill Frist: dywed88: Who cares if it is common. people haven't even claimed it is common in the NFL

Disagree, there are a ton of posts in here to the effect of "you always play jto the end of the whistle! That's how it works!" blah blah.


The onside kick isn't common. The fake punt isn't common. Hell, the quick kick isn't common. That doesn't make them unsportsmanlike.
 
2012-09-17 01:49:02 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link

Well, if you look at the stills you can see where he hits him. You'd be crying if he went low (normally what receivers do, though it carries a large risk of a knee-to-head collision), and you're crying now that he went into it standing up. He wasn't even upright. I just want to know what you expect Tate to do there in order to block a guy that is much larger than he is and running toward him at full speed.


He could block the way everyone else blocked on that play, instead of leading with the crown of his helmet. I wouldn't be crying about him going low (receivers do it all the time) but when you're doing something for the sole purpose of trying to make the highlight reel on a player who can't even see you, you're not operating in the realm of "well what is he supposed to do?"
 
2012-09-17 01:51:03 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: but of course that was before he crawled around celebrating the cheap shot while the play was still going.

If you knocked down someone on a block that awesome, you'd celebrate too. It's not like he knew he was hurt (and he ultimately wasn't, after being taken off for precautionary purposes because it looked more vicious than it was).


Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Anyway, the reason I'm so butthurt about it is because watching the game we got about 5 minutes of shots of Sean Lee laying on the ground and instant-replay after instant-replay of the head shot and then the refs come back with a penalty on Dallas. It really magnified it, which you pointed out in your reply to me at the beginning.
 
2012-09-17 01:52:18 PM  

Treygreen13: IAmRight: Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link

Well, if you look at the stills you can see where he hits him. You'd be crying if he went low (normally what receivers do, though it carries a large risk of a knee-to-head collision), and you're crying now that he went into it standing up. He wasn't even upright. I just want to know what you expect Tate to do there in order to block a guy that is much larger than he is and running toward him at full speed.

He could block the way everyone else blocked on that play, instead of leading with the crown of his helmet. I wouldn't be crying about him going low (receivers do it all the time) but when you're doing something for the sole purpose of trying to make the highlight reel on a player who can't even see you, you're not operating in the realm of "well what is he supposed to do?"


But he hit him with his shoulder first. The helmet was incidental and the force was more from Lee's body recoiling from the shoulder hit. It wasn't a spear and he didn't lead with his helmet. The contact was incidental. And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.
 
2012-09-17 01:57:44 PM  

Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.


Helmet was incidental. Sorry Tate isn't big enough that his shoulders don't create enough separation.

whizbangthedirtfarmer: And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.


Well, apparently they did institute a new rule this year about defensive players being considered "defenseless" on plays like that this year. So I could understand it being a penalty, even if it's sissy horsesh*t and basically encourages knee shots on unsuspecting players instead, which puts the blocker at more risk of incurring a concussion.

/ultimately didn't matter, Dallas had zero chance of winning the game; Lee is just fine
 
2012-09-17 01:57:50 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Treygreen13: IAmRight: Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link

Well, if you look at the stills you can see where he hits him. You'd be crying if he went low (normally what receivers do, though it carries a large risk of a knee-to-head collision), and you're crying now that he went into it standing up. He wasn't even upright. I just want to know what you expect Tate to do there in order to block a guy that is much larger than he is and running toward him at full speed.

He could block the way everyone else blocked on that play, instead of leading with the crown of his helmet. I wouldn't be crying about him going low (receivers do it all the time) but when you're doing something for the sole purpose of trying to make the highlight reel on a player who can't even see you, you're not operating in the realm of "well what is he supposed to do?"

But he hit him with his shoulder first. The helmet was incidental and the force was more from Lee's body recoiling from the shoulder hit. It wasn't a spear and he didn't lead with his helmet. The contact was incidental. And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.


Well we're just going to have to disagree. I saw it in real time and I see it now and there's no way I can look at it and say that he was trying to make a block on the play. He was trying to put a big pop on someone and led with his helmet against a defenseless guy. It was cheap. He could have blocked in a myriad of other ways than launching his hat at him. I don't see a shoulder contact in that gif, and if it really was just a nice shoulder pop then why was Sean Lee (who is extremely tough) laying on the ground injured and getting a concussion test?

Anyway, if Pereira says he was defenseless and all the broadcasters denounce it, I'm inclined to agree. More so than with you two, one of which is a Seahawks fan.
 
2012-09-17 01:58:08 PM  

Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link


Wow. That's the first time I saw that. Shoulder block my ass.
 
2012-09-17 01:59:16 PM  

Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Anyway, the reason I'm so butthurt about it is because watching the game we got about 5 minutes of shots of Sean Lee laying on the ground and instant-replay after instant-replay of the head shot and then the refs come back with a penalty on Dallas. It really magnified it, which you pointed out in your reply to me at the beginning.


As a fellow Cowboy fan, I gotta tell ya, I had no issue with either the non-call on Sean Lee or the late hit call. Both were borderline and could have gone either way, and when my team gets outplayed on every down for 60 minutes, I tend not to focus on stuff like that. I was a little perturbed by the pointless celebration, but as a Cowboys fan, I really have no room to talk.

What I found hilarious, though, was how they showed the Sean Lee replay no less than four times from three different angles. It would appear the "softer, gentler NFL" still loves their big hits.
 
2012-09-17 02:00:06 PM  

Slow To Return: By my quick count, including kickoffs, punts and extra points, there were 164 other plays in that game. Because of the risk of injury, should players have been taking it easy on those plays, as well?

/or is that just the New Orleans Saints?


What you are missing here is that because the players aren't expecting contact--due to a longstanding unwritten rule that basically all teams play by--they are at a great risk of injury when players suddenly dive at their knees.
 
2012-09-17 02:01:10 PM  

IAmRight: a) rings do matter and Ward has two of them and a Super Bowl MVP.


Hines is a fringer on numbers. And it's a crime Cris Carter isn't in. But if you look at it from a baseball - sabermetric standpoint and consider blocking at all.... and hell yes we should consider blocking, I mean it's football isn't it? He's one of the best blocking receivers ever. What's weird to me is how receivers suck at blocking so bad that it's really not even part of the conversation anymore.

The numbers thing is gonna be a problem for receivers. You leave out some greats if you just go down the yardage lists. And playing the position effectively is about a bit more than just pure yards.
 
2012-09-17 02:01:54 PM  

Treygreen13: I don't see a shoulder contact in that gif, and if it really was just a nice shoulder pop then why was Sean Lee (who is extremely tough) laying on the ground injured and getting a concussion test?


Because there's other parts of the body that are near the shoulder and even if you hit with the shoulder first, you still get hit with the head? Obviously the helmet did make contact after the initial impact, as will happen when a guy is running, then gets hit in the chest (head keeps going forward while the body stops). Then there's a head there just past the shoulder, so his head goes back. Looks a lot more violent. And if someone gets hit like that, then yeah, they're going to visit the sideline. He missed what, three plays? Four? He was back on the field in the same drive. It's not like he was crippled.
 
2012-09-17 02:01:59 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Helmet was incidental. Sorry Tate isn't big enough that his shoulders don't create enough separation.


I'm far more willing to listen to the "incidental" thing and maybe he thought he got him with his shoulder and was amped about the play, and was crawling around celebrating the play because he was excited. But I'm not buying the "all shoulder and he was just blocking normally" thing. He was hunting for a big hit.

IAmRight: /ultimately didn't matter, Dallas had zero chance of winning the game; Lee is just fine


You're right about that. Dallas just got straight-up beat. Witten and Bryant getting stone-handed really killed the drives, which kept the defense out there until it just got worn down and run over by Lynch. Plus, while the Seahawks couldn't get Romo down on the turf, he spent every play running for his life and they couldn't get even a semblance of enough time for full routes to develop.
 
2012-09-17 02:02:54 PM  
Just to rub some salt in the wound, Manning had more passing yards the second half than Tampa Bay's QB had all game.
 
2012-09-17 02:03:54 PM  

Slow To Return: Both were borderline and could have gone either way, and when my team gets outplayed on every down for 60 minutes, I tend not to focus on stuff like that.


The late hit call was total horsesh*t, as a Seahawks fan.
 
2012-09-17 02:03:56 PM  

Treygreen13: whizbangthedirtfarmer: Treygreen13: IAmRight: Treygreen13: Sorry, got called up in a meeting. I know it's kinda been discussed to death already, but IAmRight I don't know how you look at this gif and say that he was attempting a legal shoulder block.
Link

Well, if you look at the stills you can see where he hits him. You'd be crying if he went low (normally what receivers do, though it carries a large risk of a knee-to-head collision), and you're crying now that he went into it standing up. He wasn't even upright. I just want to know what you expect Tate to do there in order to block a guy that is much larger than he is and running toward him at full speed.

He could block the way everyone else blocked on that play, instead of leading with the crown of his helmet. I wouldn't be crying about him going low (receivers do it all the time) but when you're doing something for the sole purpose of trying to make the highlight reel on a player who can't even see you, you're not operating in the realm of "well what is he supposed to do?"

But he hit him with his shoulder first. The helmet was incidental and the force was more from Lee's body recoiling from the shoulder hit. It wasn't a spear and he didn't lead with his helmet. The contact was incidental. And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.

Well we're just going to have to disagree. I saw it in real time and I see it now and there's no way I can look at it and say that he was trying to make a block on the play. He was trying to put a big pop on someone and led with his helmet against a defenseless guy. It was cheap. He could have blocked in a myriad of other ways than launching his hat at him. I don't see a shoulder contact in that gif, and if it really was just a nice shoulder pop then why was Sean Lee (who is extremely tough) laying on the ground injured and getting a concussion test?

Anyway, if Pereira says he was defenseless and all the broadcasters denounce it, I'm inclined to agre ...


1) a defenseless player, by definition, is someone who is looking the other way and it not a part of the play. The relevant part of the rulebook is this:

"(8) A player who receives a "blindside" block when the blocker is moving toward his own endline and approaches the opponent from behind or from the side."

Considering that Tate drilled him in the chest (not in the side), and that Lee was actively engaged in pursuing the ball, well, he was not defenseless. It is hard to imagine what Tate would have done to block. Tap Lee on the shoulder? Dive at his knees?

2) as someone who has had concussions before, you get tested even if you don't necessarily hit your head. I have had concussions in car accidents where the force was enough that the brain moved to one side, as did the fluid, and then the brain slams into the other side before the fluid can get there, causing your brain to slap into the inside of your skull. Because Lee got tested doesn't mean he got hit in the head (though the tests were probably more of a result of his head hitting the ground, where most concussions occur in the sport).
 
2012-09-17 02:04:29 PM  

Bill Frist: Slow To Return: By my quick count, including kickoffs, punts and extra points, there were 164 other plays in that game. Because of the risk of injury, should players have been taking it easy on those plays, as well?

/or is that just the New Orleans Saints?

What you are missing here is that because the players aren't expecting contact--due to a longstanding unwritten rule that basically all teams play by--they are at a great risk of injury when players suddenly dive at their knees.


what your missing is that the other team was down by 7 points with time on the clock and tried taking advantage of what you were thinking...
 
2012-09-17 02:04:35 PM  

Bill Frist: What you are missing here is that because the players aren't expecting contact--due to a longstanding unwritten rule that basically all teams play by--they are at a great risk of injury when players suddenly dive at their knees.


Eli got knocked to the ground and very well could have fumbled, in which case it's very likely we're having an entirely different conversation this morning.

Just because your dumb ass isn't expecting it doesn't make it illegal, dirty or unfair - ask Hank Baskett.
 
2012-09-17 02:05:15 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: I don't see a shoulder contact in that gif, and if it really was just a nice shoulder pop then why was Sean Lee (who is extremely tough) laying on the ground injured and getting a concussion test?

Because there's other parts of the body that are near the shoulder and even if you hit with the shoulder first, you still get hit with the head? Obviously the helmet did make contact after the initial impact, as will happen when a guy is running, then gets hit in the chest (head keeps going forward while the body stops). Then there's a head there just past the shoulder, so his head goes back. Looks a lot more violent. And if someone gets hit like that, then yeah, they're going to visit the sideline. He missed what, three plays? Four? He was back on the field in the same drive. It's not like he was crippled.


Luckily Lee isn't a Inside-Potatobacker now. I'm glad he's ok. I just think it was a cheap head-hunting shot on a player who couldn't see the hit coming.
 
2012-09-17 02:07:28 PM  

LordStormes: turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?

turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?

The same reason they don't fake punt on every punt attempt. You do what makes sense strategically at that point in the game.


But he didn't say he was doing it because of strategy, he taught his team to fight until the game ends. There was still a whole half left, so he should have been fighting if he was genuine.
 
2012-09-17 02:08:01 PM  

Treygreen13: I just think it was a cheap head-hunting shot on a player who couldn't see the hit coming.


Lesson: don't run one way while looking another.

/why don't they have "vision enhanced" spots on helmets (like just some clear spots around eye level)? I'm pretty sure they could make the helmets clear...better peripheral vision = better awareness
 
2012-09-17 02:09:00 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Helmet was incidental. Sorry Tate isn't big enough that his shoulders don't create enough separation.

whizbangthedirtfarmer: And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.

Well, apparently they did institute a new rule this year about defensive players being considered "defenseless" on plays like that this year. So I could understand it being a penalty, even if it's sissy horsesh*t and basically encourages knee shots on unsuspecting players instead, which puts the blocker at more risk of incurring a concussion.

/ultimately didn't matter, Dallas had zero chance of winning the game; Lee is just fine


Dude had both feet on the ground. He just wasn't paying attention. If that's the rule, as a defender, I'm looking away a split second before contact and drawing a flag every time.
 
2012-09-17 02:10:22 PM  
I love how approximately two-thirds of Fark football threads become about the Seahawks. I don't even know that we Seahawks partistans are even disproportionately represented here; it's just that this team seems to give us a lot to talk about.

Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?
 
2012-09-17 02:13:00 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Considering that Tate drilled him in the chest (not in the side), and that Lee was actively engaged in pursuing the ball, well, he was not defenseless. It is hard to imagine what Tate would have done to block. Tap Lee on the shoulder? Dive at his knees?


He could have done anything below "launch your helmet at his facemask". It was unnecessary to blow him up considering he wasn't looking at him. What's worse is that, on that play, if Tate goes towards the play (instead of across the field to lay some wood) then maybe the guy who actually ends up forcing wilson out of bounds gets blocked and they pick up more yardage. You can see a defender coming in from where Tate was to end the play from the left - where Tate was standing.

But it wasn't a hit to really prevent the QB from getting tackled. It was a hit to hit someone. Nothing wrong with that, but let's not pretend it was *really* part of the play and that it was a standard block
 
2012-09-17 02:13:05 PM  

LordStormes: IAmRight: Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Helmet was incidental. Sorry Tate isn't big enough that his shoulders don't create enough separation.

whizbangthedirtfarmer: And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.

Well, apparently they did institute a new rule this year about defensive players being considered "defenseless" on plays like that this year. So I could understand it being a penalty, even if it's sissy horsesh*t and basically encourages knee shots on unsuspecting players instead, which puts the blocker at more risk of incurring a concussion.

/ultimately didn't matter, Dallas had zero chance of winning the game; Lee is just fine

Dude had both feet on the ground. He just wasn't paying attention. If that's the rule, as a defender, I'm looking away a split second before contact and drawing a flag every time.


You must've missed RG III's spectacular flops in the Rams game. He was like an Italian soccer player out there. Someone put a hand on his shoulder and gave him a little push and he dropped like he had been shot.

/effect was ruined when he popped right back up to complain
 
2012-09-17 02:13:54 PM  

Super Chronic: I love how approximately two-thirds of Fark football threads become about the Seahawks. I don't even know that we Seahawks partistans are even disproportionately represented here; it's just that this team seems to give us a lot to talk about.

Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?


Because f*ck it, I want to talk about the Seahawks and not a f*cking inconvenient nudge that caused little Eli to fall down and go boom. The Mannings are virtually indestructible. Quit worrying about them getting hurt. FFS, Peyton didn't even miss a game with the neck issues. Then he had surgery and wouldn't be good, so he didn't come back. Eli hasn't been hurt.
 
2012-09-17 02:14:53 PM  

LordStormes: IAmRight: Treygreen13: Anyone celebrating a helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless player should be mocked and called out on it.

Helmet was incidental. Sorry Tate isn't big enough that his shoulders don't create enough separation.

whizbangthedirtfarmer: And Periera's claim that Lee was "defenseless" is absolutely stupid.

Well, apparently they did institute a new rule this year about defensive players being considered "defenseless" on plays like that this year. So I could understand it being a penalty, even if it's sissy horsesh*t and basically encourages knee shots on unsuspecting players instead, which puts the blocker at more risk of incurring a concussion.

/ultimately didn't matter, Dallas had zero chance of winning the game; Lee is just fine

Dude had both feet on the ground. He just wasn't paying attention. If that's the rule, as a defender, I'm looking away a split second before contact and drawing a flag every time.


Let's just agree to disagree. We can move on from this. Lee is (apparently) ok, and now I have a new player to wish bad things upon.
 
2012-09-17 02:16:54 PM  
No animated GIF yet???
 
2012-09-17 02:17:03 PM  
Is anyone actually sure he DID try it in college Football? I keep hearing it, but nobody, sportscaster or fan, has actually confirmed seeing it, or shown video of it.

If he did do it at Rutgers, as he claimed, did it ever work? That is, did he ever run the play and the opposing Center/Quarterback fumbled the ball? I'm guessing not.

The very definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Shiano was out of line.
 
2012-09-17 02:20:18 PM  

tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet???

 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats
 
2012-09-17 02:23:52 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: The very definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.


Onside kicks are rarely recovered, so teams should probably stop trying those, too.

/Anyone know what the definition of "insanity" is?
 
2012-09-17 02:25:37 PM  

Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats


Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.
 
2012-09-17 02:26:42 PM  

Super Chronic: Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?


Why did he make different decisions in those two situations? Because they were radically different situations. The end of the first half while up 24-13 is completely different from the end of the game while down one touchdown.
 
2012-09-17 02:27:27 PM  

LordStormes: I put that on the Bucs offense for not sustaining drives. The D was gassed as hell. With two exceptions:
1. Somebody should be shot for putting 940-year-old Ronde Barber in man coverage on Victor Cruz.
2. If there had been regular refs, the Giants would have gained another 500 yards just on holding/pass interference calls on Aqib Talib. That was shameless mugging on each and every play.

// Bucs fan


I just remembered that the Bucs defensive coordinator is Bill Sheridan, architect of one of the worst defenses in NFL history when he had the same job for the Giants a few years ago. I knew the Bucs performance yesterday in the 4th quarter looked familiar, I knew it!
 
2012-09-17 02:28:36 PM  

dywed88: Super Chronic: Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?

Why did he make different decisions in those two situations? Because they were radically different situations. The end of the first half while up 24-13 is completely different from the end of the game while down one touchdown.


But he didn't say he did it to try and have a chance at winning. His excuse was that his team plays hard for 60 minutes. In this scenario, how is the end of the first half any different. You play hard 100% or the time.
 
2012-09-17 02:29:44 PM  

mainstreet62: Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats

Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.


Woah! Unsportsman-like conduct!!!
 
2012-09-17 02:30:18 PM  

Slow To Return: Onside kicks are rarely recovered, so teams should probably stop trying those, too.


Twenty-ish percent when the other team is expecting an onside kick is not "rare".
 
2012-09-17 02:31:15 PM  

turtle553: But he didn't say he did it to try and have a chance at winning. His excuse was that his team plays hard for 60 minutes. In this scenario, how is the end of the first half any different. You play hard 100% or the time.


That's right, he didn't say "we play hard for all 60 minutes, except for when we're leading by 11 points before halftime" he said they play hard for ALL 60 minutes.
 
2012-09-17 02:32:20 PM  

Super Chronic:
Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?


Bingo. End of the half, Giants take a knee a their own 8 yard line with 8 seconds left. Seems like the perfect time to go for a surprise strip/fumble/quick 7 points. Big pick 6 interception and a crappy KO return, keep your foot on their throat. Certainly a better shot than trying to get the ball at the Giants 30 with 5 seconds left, after they took the ball from you.

I guess when he says they fight until the game is over, that doesn't apply to the end of the first half. At that point, it's totally cool to give up. But boy, at the end of the second half, after the other team just kicked their teeth in to win the game, they really try hard.
 
2012-09-17 02:32:36 PM  

turtle553: LordStormes: turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?

turtle553: If playing 100% for 60 minutes was the Buc's goal, then why didn't they try this when the Giants took a knee to end the first half?

The same reason they don't fake punt on every punt attempt. You do what makes sense strategically at that point in the game.

But he didn't say he was doing it because of strategy, he taught his team to fight until the game ends. There was still a whole half left, so he should have been fighting if he was genuine.


You don't go for the hail Mary on every play, do you? Likewise, you only do this kind of thing when it's unexpected, or when you need it.
 
2012-09-17 02:34:02 PM  

LordStormes: haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.

How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.


Of course, Schiano talked about not quitting till they say "game over," not about "smart football." Maybe the two overlapped here (though one notes Belichick did not order a similar play for the Cardinals' victory formation). All I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see how Schiano reacts if/when an opponent runs the score (i.e., doesn't quit) until the clock reads zeroes.
 
2012-09-17 02:34:12 PM  

Super Chronic: I love how approximately two-thirds of Fark football threads become about the Seahawks. I don't even know that we Seahawks partistans are even disproportionately represented here; it's just that this team seems to give us a lot to talk about.

Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?


For the same reason you don't throw the Hail Mary pass every play. It's a low-percentage play, so you only do it when a) you're hoping to catch the opponent off guard, or b) you're desperate to make something happen.
 
2012-09-17 02:35:27 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: Is anyone actually sure he DID try it in college Football? I keep hearing it, but nobody, sportscaster or fan, has actually confirmed seeing it, or shown video of it.

If he did do it at Rutgers, as he claimed, did it ever work? That is, did he ever run the play and the opposing Center/Quarterback fumbled the ball? I'm guessing not.

The very definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Shiano was out of line.


Actually, yes, there have been bad/fumbled snaps.
 
2012-09-17 02:37:20 PM  

mainstreet62: Slow To Return: Onside kicks are rarely recovered, so teams should probably stop trying those, too.

Twenty-ish percent when the other team is expecting an onside kick is not "rare".


How about "going for it on 4th and 50"? Does that work for you, Mr. Pedantic?
 
2012-09-17 02:38:24 PM  

haplo53: LordStormes: haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.

How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.

Of course, Schiano talked about not quitting till they say "game over," not about "smart football." Maybe the two overlapped here (though one notes Belichick did not order a similar play for the Cardinals' victory formation). All I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see how Schiano reacts if/when an opponent runs the score (i.e., doesn't quit) until the clock reads zeroes.


Do any of you even WATCH football? Running up the score is NOT THE SAME THING. AT ALL. This isn't debatable. You're just wrong.

Running up the score = you're winning and have control of the ball. You need to do NOTHING to win except run out the clock.
vs.
Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score without the ball

One has an impact on who wins or loses. The other doesn't. That's where the line is drawn.
 
2012-09-17 02:42:29 PM  

Slow To Return: mainstreet62: Slow To Return: Onside kicks are rarely recovered, so teams should probably stop trying those, too.

Twenty-ish percent when the other team is expecting an onside kick is not "rare".

How about "going for it on 4th and 50"? Does that work for you, Mr. Pedantic?


It's not my fault you used a metric that didn't qualify as rare.

Do you want me to make your points for you? Need some help? It's OK to ask. This is FARK, we are here to help.
 
2012-09-17 02:48:23 PM  

Treygreen13: Let's just agree to disagree. We can move on from this. Lee is (apparently) ok, and now I have a new player to wish bad things upon.


Well, as he came from Notre Dame and has the first name Golden, I don't know why you wouldn't hate him. Hell, that play was one of his biggest contributions to the Seahawks in his 3+ year career.
 
2012-09-17 02:49:35 PM  

LordStormes: Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score without the ball


I think thats the fundamental difference: some of us saw it as a pointless, unnecessary, and desperate move that isn't illegal but could cause injury where it didn't have to happen.

Others think its justified just because its their last chance (and other reasons I can't grasp).

I side with the former, but in the end its inconsequential. Nothing happened. I just know I would be angry if it happened to my quarterback.
 
2012-09-17 02:51:35 PM  

mainstreet62: It's not my fault you used a metric that didn't qualify as rare.

Do you want me to make your points for you? Need some help? It's OK to ask. This is FARK, we are here to help.


I'm pretty sure you got the gist of my point since you're not arguing it, so I'll just leave it at that, thanks.
 
2012-09-17 02:52:33 PM  

LordStormes: Super Chronic: I love how approximately two-thirds of Fark football threads become about the Seahawks. I don't even know that we Seahawks partistans are even disproportionately represented here; it's just that this team seems to give us a lot to talk about.

Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?

For the same reason you don't throw the Hail Mary pass every play. It's a low-percentage play, so you only do it when a) you're hoping to catch the opponent off guard, or b) you're desperate to make something happen.


Well, at the half, if the other team is indeed intending to take a knee deep in their own territory with 8 seconds left, then there's almost zero downside to trying to punch the ball out. Leading 24-13 is nice, but leading 31-13 would be better. And all the speedy Giants players are out of the game, leaving the likes of Henry Hynoski and Bear Pascoe standing hunched over at the edges of the line, so there's almost zero chance of a 90-yard play going the other way. Even in the worst case scenario where a Giant picks up a bouncing ball and runs with it, you'll be able to chase him down.
 
2012-09-17 02:53:48 PM  

mainstreet62: Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats

Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.


I may need your help making a gif of this.
i846.photobucket.com
January 9th, 2009.
 
2012-09-17 02:54:40 PM  

LordStormes: Do any of you even WATCH football? Running up the score is NOT THE SAME THING. AT ALL. This isn't debatable. You're just wrong.

Running up the score = you're winning and have control of the ball. You need to do NOTHING to win except run out the clock.
vs.
Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score without the ball

One has an impact on who wins or loses. The other doesn't. That's where the line is drawn.


I'm not sure Schiano drew that line, based on the words he used. I think he was talking about an overarching attitude at least as much as he was this specific game situation.
 
2012-09-17 02:57:47 PM  

Treygreen13: January 9th, 2009.


One game in 16 years isn't much to be proud of. Especially when that one game was followed up with a 34-3 shellacing at the hands of Minnesota.

/fellow 'Boys fan, feeling your pain
 
2012-09-17 02:58:52 PM  

Treygreen13: mainstreet62: Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats

Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.

I may need your help making a gif of this.
[i846.photobucket.com image 850x663]
January 9th, 2009.


I've got a gif for you:

i291.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-17 02:59:09 PM  

Super Chronic: LordStormes: Super Chronic: I love how approximately two-thirds of Fark football threads become about the Seahawks. I don't even know that we Seahawks partistans are even disproportionately represented here; it's just that this team seems to give us a lot to talk about.

Anyway, back to the original topic: it occurs to me that the Giants also took a knee at the end of the first half, and we didn't see these kinds of shenanigans then. If Schiano was so sure that nothing was wrong with this, why did he only do it at a time when there were no subsequent plays in which the Giants could retaliate?

For the same reason you don't throw the Hail Mary pass every play. It's a low-percentage play, so you only do it when a) you're hoping to catch the opponent off guard, or b) you're desperate to make something happen.

Well, at the half, if the other team is indeed intending to take a knee deep in their own territory with 8 seconds left, then there's almost zero downside to trying to punch the ball out. Leading 24-13 is nice, but leading 31-13 would be better. And all the speedy Giants players are out of the game, leaving the likes of Henry Hynoski and Bear Pascoe standing hunched over at the edges of the line, so there's almost zero chance of a 90-yard play going the other way. Even in the worst case scenario where a Giant picks up a bouncing ball and runs with it, you'll be able to chase him down.


And put your trick play on film, so it won't work the rest of the year, when you need it for a situation like this one.
 
2012-09-17 03:01:43 PM  

Treygreen13: mainstreet62: Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats

Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.

I may need your help making a gif of this.
[i846.photobucket.com image 850x663]
January 9th, 2009.


haplo53: LordStormes: Do any of you even WATCH football? Running up the score is NOT THE SAME THING. AT ALL. This isn't debatable. You're just wrong.

Running up the score = you're winning and have control of the ball. You need to do NOTHING to win except run out the clock.
vs.
Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score without the ball

One has an impact on who wins or loses. The other doesn't. That's where the line is drawn.

I'm not sure Schiano drew that line, based on the words he used. I think he was talking about an overarching attitude at least as much as he was this specific game situation.


Anyone who doesn't understand enough about football to need Greg Schiano to illustrate the line between "needing to score" and "running out the clock" has no business calling out an NFL coach on ANYTHING football related. It's the same question as, "When you had 10 seconds left and were down by 5, why didn't you kick a field goal instead of try for a touchdown?" The answer is the same. We need more points to win the game.
 
2012-09-17 03:02:02 PM  

Slow To Return: Treygreen13: January 9th, 2009.

One game in 16 years isn't much to be proud of. Especially when that one game was followed up with a 34-3 shellacing at the hands of Minnesota.

/fellow 'Boys fan, feeling your pain


They all said, "the Cowboys can't win in the playoffs" and as soon as they did win in the playoffs it was "they only won once in the playoffs". That Minnesota game was certainly bad, but that pass rush from Minnesota was just beastly and the Cowboys starting LT went down in the 1st quarter so things went downhill.

Just like last week when they said, "Tony can't win big games so he'll totally blow it against the Giants on national TV" and then Tony played out of his mind and they said, "It's just week 1, not a big game."

It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.
 
2012-09-17 03:02:25 PM  
Sorry for all the weird quoting stuff in my comments today. My Chrome install is acting really weird.
 
2012-09-17 03:02:38 PM  

Slow To Return: mainstreet62: It's not my fault you used a metric that didn't qualify as rare.

Do you want me to make your points for you? Need some help? It's OK to ask. This is FARK, we are here to help.

I'm pretty sure you got the gist of my point since you're not arguing it, so I'll just leave it at that, thanks.


I can't argue with you until you get your facts straight. Are you there yet? ;-)
 
2012-09-17 03:03:28 PM  

Treygreen13: It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.


I kinda expect more, and so do you.
 
2012-09-17 03:04:54 PM  

AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?


Wasn't a kneel down.
 
2012-09-17 03:05:38 PM  

Slow To Return: Treygreen13: It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.

I kinda expect more, and so do you.


I do too. I just don't like having to remind everyone that they have, in fact, won a playoff game and have won several meaningful late-season games.
 
2012-09-17 03:05:55 PM  

LordStormes: haplo53: LordStormes: haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.

How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.

Of course, Schiano talked about not quitting till they say "game over," not about "smart football." Maybe the two overlapped here (though one notes Belichick did not order a similar play for the Cardinals' victory formation). All I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see how Schiano reacts if/when an opponent runs the score (i.e., doesn't quit) until the clock reads zeroes.

Do any of you even WATCH football? Running up the score is NOT THE SAME THING. AT ALL. This isn't debatable. You're just wrong.

Running up the score = you're winning and have control of the ball. You need to do NOTHING to win except run out the clock.
vs.
Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score witho ...



Sorry, Chump, but you can't play that card. Not on this one. Anyone who does WATCH football knows that this is never done, and isn't done because someone could get hurt.
 
2012-09-17 03:07:36 PM  

mainstreet62: Treygreen13: mainstreet62: Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats

Cool story, bro. Find the gif of the Cowboys winning a meaningful game in December/January.

I may need your help making a gif of this.
[i846.photobucket.com image 850x663]
January 9th, 2009.

I've got a gif for you:

[i291.photobucket.com image 65x93]


www.emezeta.com
 
2012-09-17 03:07:56 PM  
www.nypost.com

/what a rare play looks like
 
2012-09-17 03:07:59 PM  

Richard Sauce: AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?

Wasn't a kneel down.


yeah that was actually because they DIDN;T do a kneeldown and ran a play instead.
 
2012-09-17 03:10:50 PM  
I have to hand it to 'Boys fans, you sure are good-natured and know how to take ribbing. ;-)
 
2012-09-17 03:11:30 PM  

mainstreet62: I have to hand it to 'Boys fans, you sure are good-natured and know how to take ribbing. ;-)


Well, some of us.
 
2012-09-17 03:13:58 PM  
Also I shouldn't use that image because it has Donovan McNabb in it and it will just remind people that he spent most of that game throwing balls into the dirt like he was in on a fix.
 
2012-09-17 03:14:16 PM  

Treygreen13: several meaningful late-season games.


Tony Romo:

39-17 September-November
9-14 December

/the team was 3-2 in December the year Romo was out for the month with the mighty Jon Kitna and Stephen McGee under center
 
2012-09-17 03:14:46 PM  

Treygreen13: mainstreet62: I have to hand it to 'Boys fans, you sure are good-natured and know how to take ribbing. ;-)

Well, some of us.


It's just sports, it's all in good fun. Sometimes I press a little too hard on the trolling buttons. ;-)
 
2012-09-17 03:15:34 PM  

Treygreen13: Also I shouldn't use that image because it has Donovan McNabb in it and it will just remind people that he spent most of that game throwing balls into the dirt like he was in on a fix.


lol I was thinking that when I saw it.

/Cowboys should really consider labeling calendars in the place with "second November"
 
2012-09-17 03:18:43 PM  
Deadspin has 2 articles on this. Both explaining the view point from each side.

After reviewing the facts from both sides and seeing the gif, Im siding with the "Smart Play" side. If they were down by 2 or more scores, then yes, its cheap.Since it was a 1 score game, the complaints are pretty much adding up to "How dare the other team try to win"
 
2012-09-17 03:18:47 PM  

IAmRight: Treygreen13: several meaningful late-season games.

Tony Romo:

39-17 September-November
9-14 December

/the team was 3-2 in December the year Romo was out for the month with the mighty Jon Kitna and Stephen McGee under center


Oh, so Tony only wins 40% of his games in December, but 70% of his games in the rest of the season?

I'm not sure whether it's more insane that we think Tony Romo is somehow a different player in December, or that we're trying to come to a conclusion that a guy that wins 61% of his games is bad.
 
2012-09-17 03:20:17 PM  
Wait, how did this turn into a Tony Romo thread? Dammit.
 
2012-09-17 03:21:09 PM  

Treygreen13: Just like last week when they said, "Tony can't win big games so he'll totally blow it against the Giants on national TV" and then Tony played out of his mind and they said, "It's just week 1, not a big game."

It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.


Even though I generally agree with you, Tony only "played out of his mind" because the Giants dbs dropped those early passes hitting them in the hands. A lot of week two for Dallas was fortune not breaking the same way twice.

And by that same token, while it's hilarious to remember Romo sitting on the turf of Qwest field hands on the helmet, possibly crying all those years ago, I do in fact remember the great missed opportunity of that game wasn't Romo's. It was Witten's critical fumble, recovered by Pete Hunter, which was probably most damaging. But all people ever do is fellate Witten and blame Romo. That said, there is something about the Cowboys which causes them to come up short but in a bigger than life, or even bigger than Texas, style.

And I love watching that. The magnificent improbable spectacle of it.
 
2012-09-17 03:21:42 PM  

Treygreen13: Wait, how did this turn into a Tony Romo thread? Dammit.


Here's where. When you showed up into an Eli Manning/Bucs thread and made it about the Cowboys.

Treygreen13: A "cheap shot" was Golden Tate peeling off the play to uppercut Sean Lee with his helmet.

This is the Giants being little pansy biatches.


And I know you have me on ignore, but this is the answer.
 
2012-09-17 03:21:57 PM  

Richard Sauce: AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?

Wasn't a kneel down.


In the Miracle, they did this on a kneeldown on the previous play. This goaded the offense into running one final play, on which the turnover occurred. The Miracle happened as a direct result of this exact tactic.
 
2012-09-17 03:23:01 PM  

thecpt: LordStormes: Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and cannot score without the ball

I think thats the fundamental difference: some of us saw it as a pointless, unnecessary, and desperate move that isn't illegal but could cause injury where it didn't have to happen.

Others think its justified just because its their last chance (and other reasons I can't grasp).

I side with the former, but in the end its inconsequential. Nothing happened. I just know I would be angry if it happened to my quarterback.


Eli should be FURIOUS. But not at the Bucs, at his offensive line. Everybody in the stadium could see the Bucs were coming. The OL did nothing.
 
2012-09-17 03:23:08 PM  
NO ONE TOUCHED HIM

your argument is invalid
 
2012-09-17 03:23:22 PM  

haplo53: LordStormes: haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.

How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.

Of course, Schiano talked about not quitting till they say "game over," not about "smart football." Maybe the two overlapped here (though one notes Belichick did not order a similar play for the Cardinals' victory formation). All I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see how Schiano reacts if/when an opponent runs the score (i.e., doesn't quit) until the clock reads zeroes.


Uh, excuse me, the Cardinals never ran a victory formation. The game ended on a shanked field goal. If you're gonna rip Schiano and compare him to Belichick at least know what the hell you're talking about...
 
2012-09-17 03:23:57 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: LordStormes: I put that on the Bucs offense for not sustaining drives. The D was gassed as hell. With two exceptions:
1. Somebody should be shot for putting 940-year-old Ronde Barber in man coverage on Victor Cruz.
2. If there had been regular refs, the Giants would have gained another 500 yards just on holding/pass interference calls on Aqib Talib. That was shameless mugging on each and every play.

// Bucs fan

I just remembered that the Bucs defensive coordinator is Bill Sheridan, architect of one of the worst defenses in NFL history when he had the same job for the Giants a few years ago. I knew the Bucs performance yesterday in the 4th quarter looked familiar, I knew it!


How well would you play after being on the field for 79 NFL snaps? The failure of the defense is a direct result of the offense not extending any drives and giving them a breather.
 
2012-09-17 03:24:08 PM  

Treygreen13: IAmRight: Treygreen13: several meaningful late-season games.

Tony Romo:

39-17 September-November
9-14 December

/the team was 3-2 in December the year Romo was out for the month with the mighty Jon Kitna and Stephen McGee under center

Oh, so Tony only wins 40% of his games in December, but 70% of his games in the rest of the season?

I'm not sure whether it's more insane that we think Tony Romo is somehow a different player in December, or that we're trying to come to a conclusion that a guy that wins 61% of his games is bad.


Tony romo is a good player who has bad games occasionally. I think most of this 'doesn't play well in the playoffs' or December or whatever stuff is horse hockey. Bad qb's win playoff games and good ones lose them. All the farking time.
 
2012-09-17 03:24:57 PM  

LordStormes: How well would you play after being on the field for 79 NFL snaps? The failure of the defense is a direct result of the offense not extending any drives and giving them a breather.


Not disagreeing, I'm just taking an opportunity to say I hate Bill Sheridan and you will too.
 
2012-09-17 03:26:53 PM  

Treygreen13: Slow To Return: Treygreen13: January 9th, 2009.

One game in 16 years isn't much to be proud of. Especially when that one game was followed up with a 34-3 shellacing at the hands of Minnesota.

/fellow 'Boys fan, feeling your pain

They all said, "the Cowboys can't win in the playoffs" and as soon as they did win in the playoffs it was "they only won once in the playoffs". That Minnesota game was certainly bad, but that pass rush from Minnesota was just beastly and the Cowboys starting LT went down in the 1st quarter so things went downhill.

Just like last week when they said, "Tony can't win big games so he'll totally blow it against the Giants on national TV" and then Tony played out of his mind and they said, "It's just week 1, not a big game."

It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.


And then everyone said that the Cowboys would beat Seattle and Romo would avenge his prior humiliation.

/oh, wait
//Cowboys lack consistency across the board
///two or three players who have a breakout game one week suck the next
 
2012-09-17 03:27:26 PM  
Cheap shot, but seriously. Coughlin needs to STFU, he's as big a crybaby as Eli
 
2012-09-17 03:27:49 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: haplo53: LordStormes: haplo53: meanmutton: I don't think that's a valid comparison. In that situation, the play most likely to result in a Giants win is taking a knee. The play most likely to result on a Bucs win is trying for a fumble.

The Giants in you're example would be reducing their chance for a victory by going for it. They don't take a knee to be sporting it nice; they do it to win the game

I think you're diving too far into the hypothetical and missing the forest for the trees. It can be any game where somebody "fights till the end" and runs up the score on the Bucs - does Schiano get pissed off despite what he (said he) believes, or does he stick to what he said yesterday? I do wonder.

How blind do you guys have to be? You do what you have to do to win the game. If you're up 3 touchdowns, do you have to score to win? No. You have to get the clock to say 0, so you kneel to make that happen faster. It's not charity, it's smart football. In this case, what the Bucs had to do to win the game was get the ball back. So, as long as there is time in regulation, they can try to do that. They did. It didn't work, and the Giants won. Had the Bucs pulled this off, Schiano would be getting praised from everywhere because it's smart football.

Of course, Schiano talked about not quitting till they say "game over," not about "smart football." Maybe the two overlapped here (though one notes Belichick did not order a similar play for the Cardinals' victory formation). All I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see how Schiano reacts if/when an opponent runs the score (i.e., doesn't quit) until the clock reads zeroes.

Do any of you even WATCH football? Running up the score is NOT THE SAME THING. AT ALL. This isn't debatable. You're just wrong.

Running up the score = you're winning and have control of the ball. You need to do NOTHING to win except run out the clock.
vs.
Trying to force a turnover when you're losing = you need to score to win and canno ...


Someone can get hurt on ANY play in the NFL. The only thing that makes this play any more likely to cause injury is the OL not paying attention, which is nobody's fault but their own. Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that you can look at a guy and know if he's planning on rushing you or not. The OL could easily have seen this, and/or simply been prepared to do their job, and the Bucs would have been stuffed at the line and this would be a non-issue. The fact it almost worked is the only reason anyone is butthurt about it at all. Simply put, any play in which your OL stands around with their hands in their pockets while guys are rushing is a play likely to get somebody's block knocked off. So, maybe the guys who are in charge of blocking ought to, I don't know, block? It's one more play. You make millions of dollars a year. I think you can manage.
 
2012-09-17 03:29:45 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: LordStormes: How well would you play after being on the field for 79 NFL snaps? The failure of the defense is a direct result of the offense not extending any drives and giving them a breather.

Not disagreeing, I'm just taking an opportunity to say I hate Bill Sheridan and you will too.


After living through Raheem Morris, so far, I like Sheridan and our 5 INTs in two games just fine.
 
2012-09-17 03:35:29 PM  

LordStormes: Richard Sauce: AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?

Wasn't a kneel down.

In the Miracle, they did this on a kneeldown on the previous play. This goaded the offense into running one final play, on which the turnover occurred. The Miracle happened as a direct result of this exact tactic.


Sounds like if they kneeled again they would have been fine, and the miracle was a result of foolishly NOT kneeling. I do not know any of the additional particulars of the miracle circumstances, and base this solely on your comment.
 
2012-09-17 03:40:00 PM  

Treygreen13: Wait, how did this turn into a Tony Romo thread? Dammit.


Well it was going along just fine until, like most NFL threads, you had to turn it into a thread about the cowboys.

Now pay me biatch.
 
2012-09-17 03:40:57 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: ///two or three players who have a breakout game one week suck the next


Kevin Ogletree is one of the top WRs in the league and will easily put up 1000 yards and 8 TDs this year!

JohnBigBootay: I think most of this 'doesn't play well in the playoffs' or December or whatever stuff is horse hockey. Bad qb's win playoff games and good ones lose them. All the farking time.


Hmmmm you know what's weird? Went through and looked at his December splits. In 2011 and 2009 (the last two times he's played in December), December has been his highest rated month. Every other year it was his worst. (though his team went 4-6 in December the last two years)
 
2012-09-17 03:41:44 PM  
 
2012-09-17 03:43:38 PM  
Okay, let's break this down.

Lordstormes: Someone can get hurt on ANY play in the NFL.

Yes, and I could get hit by a meteor walking down the street. Ignoring increased or decreased probabilities does not eliminate them.

Lordstormes: The only thing that makes this play any more likely to cause injury is the OL not paying attention, which is nobody's fault but their own.

...and what is the reason for them not paying attention? Oh yeah, the other team almost never rushes on this play.

Lordstormes: Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that you can look at a guy and know if he's planning on rushing you or not. The OL could easily have seen this, and/or simply been prepared to do their job, and the Bucs would have been stuffed at the line and this would be a non-issue.

Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that this was an unexpected and borderline dirty play.

Lordstormes: The fact it almost worked is the only reason anyone is butthurt about it at all.

That's not remotely true. People are upset because they think it was a dirty play.

Lordstormes: Simply put, any play in which your OL stands around with their hands in their pockets while guys are rushing is a play likely to get somebody's block knocked off.

Anyone who has played OL can tell you they don't have pockets in football pants

Lordstormes: So, maybe the guys who are in charge of blocking ought to, I don't know, block? It's one more play. You make millions of dollars a year. I think you can manage.

So, hey, you make enough money that your body can be sacrificed? THAT is your argument? Not exactly what the league has been saying lately but at least you finally show your true colors.
 
2012-09-17 03:47:41 PM  

IAmRight: Hmmmm you know what's weird? Went through and looked at his December splits. In 2011 and 2009 (the last two times he's played in December), December has been his highest rated month. Every other year it was his worst. (though his team went 4-6 in December the last two years)


Yeah. Small sample size. Plus, you're almost always playing other good teams and it's often cold and windy as shiat. Plus it being a team game and all. Romo is hard to figure - dude looks fantastic at times and pedestrian at times but my honest opinion is he matches his team's performance. he's not Manning or Brady at their prime but he's no Dilfer if you know what I'm saying. He's certainly 'good enough' to win the big one if the opportunity presents itself. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Anyway, the Cowboys have problems but he's nowhere near the top of the list - they can win with that dude.
 
2012-09-17 03:48:09 PM  
I predict that Big Brother will use the cheap shot on Eli as a good excuse to light up Atlanta's secondary tonight, just for the lols. Beware of Demaryous Thomas...oops you forgot about Decker and Stokley.

/Go Broncos!
//Suck it, Elway haters!
 
2012-09-17 03:48:59 PM  

pion: Why you might rush the kneeldown.


Classless Chiefs. They should've let the Chargers kneel it out and then they should have stood by and watched Kaeding kick the game-winning field goal.

downtownkid: Yes, and I could get hit by a meteor walking down the street. Ignoring increased or decreased probabilities does not eliminate them.


Do you get angry at people who stop you and talk to you in the street because they've elevated your risk of being hit by a meteor while out walking?
 
2012-09-17 03:50:17 PM  

JohnBigBootay: he's no Dilfer if you know what I'm saying.


I'm really kinda tired of the Dilf being used as the epitome of a bad QB.
 
2012-09-17 03:52:33 PM  

downtownkid: Okay, let's break this down.

Lordstormes: Someone can get hurt on ANY play in the NFL.

Yes, and I could get hit by a meteor walking down the street. Ignoring increased or decreased probabilities does not eliminate them.

Lordstormes: The only thing that makes this play any more likely to cause injury is the OL not paying attention, which is nobody's fault but their own.

...and what is the reason for them not paying attention? Oh yeah, the other team almost never rushes on this play.

Lordstormes: Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that you can look at a guy and know if he's planning on rushing you or not. The OL could easily have seen this, and/or simply been prepared to do their job, and the Bucs would have been stuffed at the line and this would be a non-issue.

Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that this was an unexpected and borderline dirty play.

Lordstormes: The fact it almost worked is the only reason anyone is butthurt about it at all.

That's not remotely true. People are upset because they think it was a dirty play.

Lordstormes: Simply put, any play in which your OL stands around with their hands in their pockets while guys are rushing is a play likely to get somebody's block knocked off.

Anyone who has played OL can tell you they don't have pockets in football pants

Lordstormes: So, maybe the guys who are in charge of blocking ought to, I don't know, block? It's one more play. You make millions of dollars a year. I think you can manage.

So, hey, you make enough money that your body can be sacrificed? THAT is your argument? Not exactly what the league has been saying lately but at least you finally show your true colors.


So because the OLine isn't expecting something, the Bucs shouldn't have tried to win? Should GB have not gone for that fake FG attempt on Thursday either, since the Bears' D was obviously not expecting it?

The argument that you've continually ignored is that going for it was the ONLY chance the Bucs had to not lose this game. It doesn't matter how low that probability is, because it's still higher than zero. You're free to disagree but I'm just not going to fault a team for giving it one last shot. We'd be having a much different discussion had the Bucs miraculously gotten a TD. Had they been down by more than one score then sure, it'd be cheap.

(Don't get me started on Schiano's comments though, I have no idea why he made it about playing 60 minutes or whatever instead of using a perfectly logical argument that trying to force a fumble was the only potential way the Bucs could've won...)
 
2012-09-17 03:53:41 PM  
Cheap shot by a rookie coach. He'll learn, or he'll flame out.
 
2012-09-17 03:53:59 PM  
This is the dumbest god damn controversy I have ever seen. If you don't want your star QB getting injured while taking a knee then don't have him in the farking game to take the knee. Last I checked, every NFL team has more than one QB.
 
2012-09-17 03:56:13 PM  

LordStormes: Anyone who doesn't understand enough about football to need Greg Schiano to illustrate the line between "needing to score" and "running out the clock" has no business calling out an NFL coach on ANYTHING football related. It's the same question as, "When you had 10 seconds left and were down by 5, why didn't you kick a field goal instead of try for a touchdown?" The answer is the same. We need more points to win the game.


Sorry, you keep saying this, and I keep looking at the words and sentences Greg Schiano actually spoke with his mouth. I'm sure game situation factored into his thinking, but I see someone with two weeks' worth of experience as an NFL head coach outlining his football worldview and trying to use a moment in defeat to put a big-picture stamp on his team. There's nothing wrong with that, but I do think it's fair to wonder how he reacts if/when it's an opponent who refuses to "quit" against the Bucs in a controversial way. It will say a lot about him.
 
2012-09-17 03:57:02 PM  

IAmRight: JohnBigBootay: he's no Dilfer if you know what I'm saying.

I'm really kinda tired of the Dilf being used as the epitome of a bad QB.


Yea it should be Jake Plummer.
 
2012-09-17 03:57:12 PM  

YoungLochinvar: Uh, excuse me, the Cardinals never ran a victory formation. The game ended on a shanked field goal. If you're gonna rip Schiano and compare him to Belichick at least know what the hell you're talking about...


You are incorrect.
 
2012-09-17 04:02:05 PM  

Richard Sauce: LordStormes: Richard Sauce: AdamK: miracle at the meadowlands anybody?

Wasn't a kneel down.

In the Miracle, they did this on a kneeldown on the previous play. This goaded the offense into running one final play, on which the turnover occurred. The Miracle happened as a direct result of this exact tactic.

Sounds like if they kneeled again they would have been fine, and the miracle was a result of foolishly NOT kneeling. I do not know any of the additional particulars of the miracle circumstances, and base this solely on your comment.


Correct. While the rush of the kneel did not cause a fumble directly, it goaded the offense into running a stupid play. The Bucs would have gladly taken that outcome also.
 
2012-09-17 04:05:09 PM  
The whole thing just screams meathead-asshole coach trying to be a badass. Your team just gave up a big lead and lost, deal with it.
 
2012-09-17 04:06:11 PM  

Tickle Mittens: Treygreen13: Just like last week when they said, "Tony can't win big games so he'll totally blow it against the Giants on national TV" and then Tony played out of his mind and they said, "It's just week 1, not a big game."

It's easy to say they can't win but you can't reject proof that they have, in fact, done it before.

Even though I generally agree with you, Tony only "played out of his mind" because the Giants dbs dropped those early passes hitting them in the hands. A lot of week two for Dallas was fortune not breaking the same way twice.

And by that same token, while it's hilarious to remember Romo sitting on the turf of Qwest field hands on the helmet, possibly crying all those years ago, I do in fact remember the great missed opportunity of that game wasn't Romo's. It was Witten's critical fumble, recovered by Pete Hunter, which was probably most damaging. But all people ever do is fellate Witten and blame Romo. That said, there is something about the Cowboys which causes them to come up short but in a bigger than life, or even bigger than Texas, style.

And I love watching that. The magnificent improbable spectacle of it.


I think the biggest miscue in that game was Terry Glenn's fumble.
 
2012-09-17 04:08:09 PM  

haplo53: YoungLochinvar: Uh, excuse me, the Cardinals never ran a victory formation. The game ended on a shanked field goal. If you're gonna rip Schiano and compare him to Belichick at least know what the hell you're talking about...

You are incorrect.


Apparently I am, though I could've sworn Brady ran the clock down to one second. Then again, I wouldn't put it past the refs to have screwed that up.

/I was drinking heavily at that point
//Pats fan
///Pats didn't deserve to win so I can't really complain about the shanked FG
 
2012-09-17 04:10:25 PM  

IAmRight: I'm really kinda tired of the Dilf being used as the epitome of a bad QB.


You know, I actually agree with you. The Dilf managed a game well and knew his limitations and worked within his capabilities nicely. He gets picked on for not putting up gaudy numbers. I'll pick someone else next time. So, Romo is no Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell. No Tebow if you will.
 
2012-09-17 04:11:20 PM  

downtownkid: Okay, let's break this down.

Lordstormes: Someone can get hurt on ANY play in the NFL.
Yes, and I could get hit by a meteor walking down the street. Ignoring increased or decreased probabilities does not eliminate them.

Exactly. So how do you then, on the next bullet down, say that the OL shouldn't pay attention because it's smart to ignore decreased, but not eliminated, probability of a rush? You say you could get hit by a meteor any day. This is true. But if you knew you were going out during a meteor shower, wouldn't you watch your head? I'm pretty sure the OL saw that there were 11 guys in Bucs uniforms who looked like they might try to play defense. I know I saw that on TV. Ergo, the likelihood of "people playing defense" was significantly higher than "random meteorite" and should not have been discounted.

Lordstormes: The only thing that makes this play any more likely to cause injury is the OL not paying attention, which is nobody's fault but their own.
...and what is the reason for them not paying attention? Oh yeah, the other team almost never rushes on this play.
See above.

Lordstormes: Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that you can look at a guy and know if he's planning on rushing you or not. The OL could easily have seen this, and/or simply been prepared to do their job, and the Bucs would have been stuffed at the line and this would be a non-issue.
Anyone who has ever played OL can tell you that this was an unexpected and borderline dirty play.

It was designed to be unexpected, just like fake punts are. If you don't prepare for that possibility, you deserve to get fooled by the trick play. I bet no OL loafs on a victory formation against the Bucs (or against many other teams) for the rest of the season. That's why they watch film. This sounds to me like the Giants were taken off guard, and are butthurt about it because now every team in the league will watch film of them getting knocked on their unsuspecting asses all year. Trickery is a part of the game.

Lordstormes: The fact it almost worked is the only reason anyone is butthurt about it at all.
That's not remotely true. People are upset because they think it was a dirty play.
And the #1 argument against it is, "somebody could have gotten hurt." Which was made far more likely by the offensive line doing jack shiat.

Lordstormes: Simply put, any play in which your OL stands around with their hands in their pockets while guys are rushing is a play likely to get somebody's block knocked off.
Anyone who has played OL can tell you they don't have pockets in football pants

That one, you got me on.

Lordstormes: So, maybe the guys who are in charge of blocking ought to, I don't know, block? It's one more play. You make millions of dollars a year. I think you can manage.
So, hey, you make enough money that your body can be sacrificed? THAT is your argument? Not exactly what the league has been saying lately but at least you finally show your true colors.

I'm not saying, you make millions a year so it's OK if we break your knees. I'm saying, you make millions of dollars to block oncoming rushers. On any play where they might conceivably be oncoming rushers, you should probably try to block them. Doing your job right prevents injury just as much as pads do.
 
2012-09-17 04:11:22 PM  

JohnBigBootay: IAmRight: Hmmmm you know what's weird? Went through and looked at his December splits. In 2011 and 2009 (the last two times he's played in December), December has been his highest rated month. Every other year it was his worst. (though his team went 4-6 in December the last two years)

Yeah. Small sample size. Plus, you're almost always playing other good teams and it's often cold and windy as shiat. Plus it being a team game and all. Romo is hard to figure - dude looks fantastic at times and pedestrian at times but my honest opinion is he matches his team's performance. he's not Manning or Brady at their prime but he's no Dilfer if you know what I'm saying. He's certainly 'good enough' to win the big one if the opportunity presents itself. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Anyway, the Cowboys have problems but he's nowhere near the top of the list - they can win with that dude.


He's played 23 December games. Assuming a career of 300 total games, if he is expected to win 60% of his games then there's a 95% confidence interval of a result from that sample ending up between 40% and 80%. So, his 40% win percentage in December absolutely could be a statistical anomaly but it's right on the edge of plausibility.
 
2012-09-17 04:14:42 PM  

meanmutton: He's played 23 December games. Assuming a career of 300 total games, if he is expected to win 60% of his games then there's a 95% confidence interval of a result from that sample ending up between 40% and 80%. So, his 40% win percentage in December absolutely could be a statistical anomaly but it's right on the edge of plausibility.


1. You sound smarter than me.

2. Sounds good.
 
2012-09-17 04:15:47 PM  

haplo53: LordStormes: Anyone who doesn't understand enough about football to need Greg Schiano to illustrate the line between "needing to score" and "running out the clock" has no business calling out an NFL coach on ANYTHING football related. It's the same question as, "When you had 10 seconds left and were down by 5, why didn't you kick a field goal instead of try for a touchdown?" The answer is the same. We need more points to win the game.

Sorry, you keep saying this, and I keep looking at the words and sentences Greg Schiano actually spoke with his mouth. I'm sure game situation factored into his thinking, but I see someone with two weeks' worth of experience as an NFL head coach outlining his football worldview and trying to use a moment in defeat to put a big-picture stamp on his team. There's nothing wrong with that, but I do think it's fair to wonder how he reacts if/when it's an opponent who refuses to "quit" against the Bucs in a controversial way. It will say a lot about him.


I agree, it will look very bad for him if he gets all butthurt if somebody does THIS or similar to him. But running up the score is as far from this as it could possibly be, and as such, I reject the comparison of the two. Personally, I don't think you should get butthurt about somebody running up the score on you, either: if you don't like it, play some defense. However, that doesn't change the fact that the motivation and situation behind running up the score is diametrically opposed to what Schiano did.
 
2012-09-17 04:16:37 PM  

YoungLochinvar: haplo53: YoungLochinvar: Uh, excuse me, the Cardinals never ran a victory formation. The game ended on a shanked field goal. If you're gonna rip Schiano and compare him to Belichick at least know what the hell you're talking about...

You are incorrect.

Apparently I am, though I could've sworn Brady ran the clock down to one second. Then again, I wouldn't put it past the refs to have screwed that up.

/I was drinking heavily at that point
//Pats fan
///Pats didn't deserve to win so I can't really complain about the shanked FG


No worries.
 
2012-09-17 04:20:41 PM  

Treygreen13: tricycleracer: No animated GIF yet??? 

I found an animated gif of the Giants.
New York Football Giants of New Jersey Fainting Goats


LOLOLOL
 
2012-09-17 04:27:00 PM  

LordStormes: I agree, it will look very bad for him if he gets all butthurt if somebody does THIS or similar to him. But running up the score is as far from this as it could possibly be, and as such, I reject the comparison of the two. Personally, I don't think you should get butthurt about somebody running up the score on you, either: if you don't like it, play some defense. However, that doesn't change the fact that the motivation and situation behind running up the score is diametrically opposed to what Schiano did.


I kinda think we're both right-ish in the bolded section - I think you have a point when it comes to game situation, but I also think what he did and running the score can both be described by the broader philosophy he himself outlined after the game.

That said I think our positions are well-established at this point and I'm glad we can mostly agree. I suspect we'll learn a lot more about him in the coming weeks anyway.
 
2012-09-17 04:29:04 PM  
 
2012-09-17 04:30:13 PM  

meanmutton: He's played 23 December games. Assuming a career of 300 total games, if he is expected to win 60% of his games then there's a 95% confidence interval of a result from that sample ending up between 40% and 80%. So, his 40% win percentage in December absolutely could be a statistical anomaly but it's right on the edge of plausibility.


See, I would've gone with that type of stuff, but last year he went 1-4 despite 8 TDs/0 INT and a 120 or so QB rating in the month, so I'm now wanting to not blame it on him.
 
2012-09-17 04:34:12 PM  

IAmRight: meanmutton: He's played 23 December games. Assuming a career of 300 total games, if he is expected to win 60% of his games then there's a 95% confidence interval of a result from that sample ending up between 40% and 80%. So, his 40% win percentage in December absolutely could be a statistical anomaly but it's right on the edge of plausibility.

See, I would've gone with that type of stuff, but last year he went 1-4 despite 8 TDs/0 INT and a 120 or so QB rating in the month, so I'm now wanting to not blame it on him.


It seems like it's becoming impossible to tell how teams are doing based on QB play anymore, since frequently this season the winning QB has 3 INTs and the losing QB has 3 TDs.
 
2012-09-17 04:36:25 PM  

haplo53: LordStormes: I agree, it will look very bad for him if he gets all butthurt if somebody does THIS or similar to him. But running up the score is as far from this as it could possibly be, and as such, I reject the comparison of the two. Personally, I don't think you should get butthurt about somebody running up the score on you, either: if you don't like it, play some defense. However, that doesn't change the fact that the motivation and situation behind running up the score is diametrically opposed to what Schiano did.

I kinda think we're both right-ish in the bolded section - I think you have a point when it comes to game situation, but I also think what he did and running the score can both be described by the broader philosophy he himself outlined after the game.

That said I think our positions are well-established at this point and I'm glad we can mostly agree. I suspect we'll learn a lot more about him in the coming weeks anyway.


If nothing else, the two games he's coached, plus this stunt, has the Bucs front and center on every newscast in the country. Nobody EVER covers the Bucs. I'll take it just for that. Maybe sell some tickets. If all that comes from this is that Schiano convinces somebody to get a little of the patented Warren Sapp mean streak that made him the DL of the decade, then I'll take it.
 
2012-09-17 04:50:39 PM  
Until they have a rule in place that says "If such and such time is on the clock, and the opposing team has blank timeouts then the lead is at least 9 points, the game is over" then I have NO problem with what the Buccaneers did.

I've never liked "downing" it in the first place. Why should the team get a "free play" that pretty much allows them to run clock without risk of penalty or turnover? Run a friggin' play. If you don't want to lose, make sure and have a clean snap and/or handoff. The "victory formation" irks me, unless the team is up more than one score and it is literally impossible for the opposing team to win.

In basketball, the other team can't say "Okay, we're going to bring the ball up and run out the clock. Nobody can attempt to steal it our possession. It's OUR ball and YOU CAN'T HAVE IT." Why is it okay in football? I never understood it. And, FTR, I'm a Packers fan and thus have no dog in this fight.
 
2012-09-17 04:51:40 PM  
A desperate move by a losing team, sure, but I wouldn't classify it as a cheap shot. Had one of the Bucs clotheslined Manning after the whistle, THAT would definitely be a cheap shot.

I understand why Coughlin was p*ssed, but it was a minor breach of decorum. That's it.
 
2012-09-17 04:54:12 PM  

Captain Steroid: A desperate move by a losing team, sure, but I wouldn't classify it as a cheap shot. Had one of the Bucs clotheslined Manning after the whistle, THAT would definitely be a cheap shot.

I understand why Coughlin was p*ssed, but it was a minor breach of decorum. That's it.


You'll never make it as an ESPN analyst.
 
2012-09-17 04:59:00 PM  

careless lisper: Why should the team get a "free play" that pretty much allows them to run clock without risk of penalty or turnover? Run a friggin' play. If you don't want to lose, make sure and have a clean snap and/or handoff. The "victory formation" irks me, unless the team is up more than one score and it is literally impossible for the opposing team to win.

In basketball, the other team can't say "Okay, we're going to bring the ball up and run out the clock. Nobody can attempt to steal it our possession. It's OUR ball and YOU CAN'T HAVE IT." Why is it okay in football? I never understood it. And, FTR, I'm a Packers fan and thus have no dog in this fight.


Because possession rules are different in different sports, which is why you don't see NFL defenses intentionally committing fouls in order to stop the clock and get the ball back - it wouldn't make sense given the rules of the game. The only rules regarding possession in basketball are that you must attempt a shot within a certain time period. In football, you have specific goals once the ball is in your possession in order to maintain it - time is only one such concern in the form of the play clock, and if you don't need to advance the ball to win, you need not run an actual play.
 
2012-09-17 05:03:52 PM  

haplo53: LordStormes: Anyone who doesn't understand enough about football to need Greg Schiano to illustrate the line between "needing to score" and "running out the clock" has no business calling out an NFL coach on ANYTHING football related. It's the same question as, "When you had 10 seconds left and were down by 5, why didn't you kick a field goal instead of try for a touchdown?" The answer is the same. We need more points to win the game.

Sorry, you keep saying this, and I keep looking at the words and sentences Greg Schiano actually spoke with his mouth. I'm sure game situation factored into his thinking, but I see someone with two weeks' worth of experience as an NFL head coach outlining his football worldview and trying to use a moment in defeat to put a big-picture stamp on his team. There's nothing wrong with that, but I do think it's fair to wonder how he reacts if/when it's an opponent who refuses to "quit" against the Bucs in a controversial way. It will say a lot about him.


Wonder, sure. But don't criticize him on the assumption that he would react badly.
 
2012-09-17 05:27:50 PM  
Fark Eli
 
2012-09-17 05:30:00 PM  
Philip Rivers fumbled a kneel down snap last year while trying to run out the clock.

If you are lined up over the ball then it's a live football play

The offense doesn't dictate when the game is over
 
2012-09-17 05:33:01 PM  

keeterb: Philip Rivers fumbled a kneel down snap last year while trying to run out the clock.

If you are lined up over the ball then it's a live football play

The offense doesn't dictate when the game is over


No, you are wrong. A link to the play in question is upthread. Get your facts correct before parachuting in, you'll look slightly less stupid that way.
 
2012-09-17 05:41:23 PM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: Found it

Thanks!

Now quit crying NY fans. That was absolutely nothing.


this. they went hard at the snap. once eli was on the ground they didn't hit him. the giants can shut their whore mouths and block next time.
 
2012-09-17 06:40:38 PM  

stevie1der: Depends on the score. Down by seven or less? Bring the house. You're always one careless turnover away from a chance to win (or a chance to agonizingly choke if you're the Patriots). Down by more than a score. Sit back and take your loss like a man.


Exactly. Stranger things have happened in the NFL than a botched snap on a kneel-down. What are you supposed to do, roll over and die? If it's still close, you fight. They make you snap it and take a knee for a reason. If you're just expected to give up, why not just end the game when the winning team gets the ball?

If they'd done their research, they'd have known Schiano would try that.
 
2012-09-17 06:42:50 PM  
Look, this is real simple- it's legal, yes. It's the only way the Bucs could have won the game, yes.

But it's bush league. There are a lot of reasons you don't do this in football, at any level. They range from respect to your opponent, to basic player safety, to, quite frankly, you don't want it done to you.
 
2012-09-17 06:54:28 PM  

muck4doo: Fark Eli


*sniff* life is hard for a cowboys fan
 
2012-09-17 06:59:54 PM  
The way they did it was not acceptable. If you're going to try to get the ball in that situation, you should have some incredible play on the books.

Or have Troy Polamalu on your team.
 
2012-09-17 07:00:29 PM  
HOWEVER, diving at the QB on a spike attempt? Perfectly acceptable.
 
2012-09-17 07:01:54 PM  
1994, Giants Stadium, Dolphins v. Jets, 22 secs. on the clock. Marino fakes a spike to stop the clock, Jet corner bites, Marino launches game winning TD pass to Ingram.

Moral? Anything can happen in the last seconds when the difference is eight pts. or less.

That is all.
 
2012-09-17 07:29:16 PM  

4NSpy: Captain Steroid: A desperate move by a losing team, sure, but I wouldn't classify it as a cheap shot. Had one of the Bucs clotheslined Manning after the whistle, THAT would definitely be a cheap shot.

I understand why Coughlin was p*ssed, but it was a minor breach of decorum. That's it.

You'll never make it as an ESPN analyst.


Agreed. I'm too pretty for cable TV. :P
 
2012-09-17 08:06:48 PM  

snake_beater: Just saw the clip and my opinion of it boils down to "desperate play by desperate team bush-league coach".

FIFY

 
2012-09-17 10:08:09 PM  

Likwit: stevie1der: Depends on the score. Down by seven or less? Bring the house. You're always one careless turnover away from a chance to win (or a chance to agonizingly choke if you're the Patriots). Down by more than a score. Sit back and take your loss like a man.

Exactly. Stranger things have happened in the NFL than a botched snap on a kneel-down. What are you supposed to do, roll over and die? If it's still close, you fight. They make you snap it and take a knee for a reason. If you're just expected to give up, why not just end the game when the winning team gets the ball?

If they'd done their research, they'd have known Schiano would try that.


I love learning from smart guys like you. Please show us some of the research they should have done. Provide links to the times he has done this in the past. If he has the tendency to do it there must be a historical record. What have you got?
 
2012-09-17 10:27:12 PM  

Vanquish: The next time that the Giants and Bucs are playing, and the Giants are going to knee it to ice the game, they should fake knee it and throw a TD.


Two words: Joe Pisarcik.
 
2012-09-17 10:53:26 PM  

IAmRight: kwame: I love when a team attempts to show a little sportsmanship, and a bunch of f*cksticks on the internet call them pansies for it.

It's sportsmanship to complain that the other team tried to disrupt your final snap?


The Buccaneers play was bad sportsmanship because on a kneeldown play, the offensive line is not expected to play hard. If Tampa Bay were to just let the Giants take a knee, as they were expected to do, and the Giants offensive line surged forward and knocked the Bucs back, perhaps twisting a defensive tackle's knee in the process, you think Tampa's fans and players wouldn't be angry?

Schiano himself said that he wouldn't try to cause a fumble in every kneeldown situation. So what is the offense supposed to do, wait and see if the defensive line charges before they push back?
 
2012-09-18 02:09:41 AM  
The offense does not decide when the game is over, the clock does. The fact they are not running a play and have stopped trying has no bearing on reality. The game is still going on.

They are REQUIRED to take those snaps because things can and do go wrong and who knows what might happen. It is asinine to state that the defense shouldn't try at this point.
 
2012-09-18 02:31:11 AM  

I sound fat: The offense does not decide when the game is over, the clock does. The fact they are not running a play and have stopped trying has no bearing on reality. The game is still going on.

They are REQUIRED to take those snaps because things can and do go wrong and who knows what might happen. It is asinine to state that the defense shouldn't try at this point.


But Eli is so awesome. You should just be in awe at that point.
 
2012-09-18 02:37:06 AM  
What the shiat? You keep playing until it's 00:00.
 
2012-09-18 02:37:51 AM  

robsul82: What the shiat? You keep playing until it's 00:00.


/you know, if you're down by 8 or less
 
2012-09-18 10:34:30 AM  

The Muthaship: thecpt: Found it

Thanks!

Now quit crying NY fans. That was absolutely nothing.


THIS. Game was within 7 pts. The Bucs did the right thing. A bad handoff could've occurred or a fumble as Manning fell backwards. Like they say, it ain't over till the morbidly obese female vocalizes a tune.
 
2012-09-18 10:39:51 AM  

Cornelius Dribble: IAmRight: kwame: I love when a team attempts to show a little sportsmanship, and a bunch of f*cksticks on the internet call them pansies for it.

It's sportsmanship to complain that the other team tried to disrupt your final snap?

The Buccaneers play was bad sportsmanship because on a kneeldown play, the offensive line is not expected to play hard. If Tampa Bay were to just let the Giants take a knee, as they were expected to do, and the Giants offensive line surged forward and knocked the Bucs back, perhaps twisting a defensive tackle's knee in the process, you think Tampa's fans and players wouldn't be angry?

Schiano himself said that he wouldn't try to cause a fumble in every kneeldown situation. So what is the offense supposed to do, wait and see if the defensive line charges before they push back?


That's a lame reason. That's like saying that defense should always expect a punt when it's 4th and X yards when the offense has their punter out on the field. So what happens when the offense fakes the punt and runs for a 1st down? But but, we has our special team out there in a punt reception formation and you should be punting... because your punter is there.
 
2012-09-18 10:58:48 AM  

LordStormes: fickenchucker: thecpt: Found it

Now that I've seen it I can say it was a dick move. Millions of dollars of product on the field, breaking convention leads to cheap injuries, etc.

I never root for injuries, since they can happen to anyone during normal play. But if someone gets hurt playing my favorite team, I cheer--as long as it wasn't a cheap shot. Or career-ending. Just something simple like a thigh bruise or broken nose is best.

/Packers fan.
//Hate the Giants.

Cry, cry. "Millions of dollars on the field..." The Bucs defense gets paid, too. They're at just as much risk every time they make contact with another player. If they don't like that, they're welcome to take up figure skating.


You know how I know you've never played sports as an adult? Or if you did, you're probably the guy hard-blocking and going all out during a pickup basketball game. Athletes play to accepted unwritten rules. Not doing that hurts people for no good reason when the opponent isn't expecting a hit.

Dicks play like dicks. My guess is you're a dick.
 
2012-09-18 12:09:09 PM  

fickenchucker: Athletes play to accepted unwritten rules. Not doing that hurts people for no good reason when the opponent isn't expecting a hit.

Dicks play like dicks. My guess is you're a dick.


No, actually, not true at all. I believe in playing clean, playing fair, and playing to win. As a Bucs fan, I've seen them lay down over the decades, often quitting in the 3rd quarter. Hell, last year, I saw them quit on the season in October and play out the line for two months. I'm somebody who routinely has to pull solutions out of my ass in the nick of time for things, and I respect the value of every second you have available to complete a challenge. So, when faced with an opportunity to lie down and quit on the game, I like seeing the resilience of my team to fight back. This tactic has successfully caused fumbles several times (twice in Rutgers' 2009 season alone) and is very simply defended. It's no different than a fake punt. If somebody isn't expecting the offense to run-block, they could get destroyed by the offensive line. So, they learn to keep their head on a swivel and be prepared when they're on the field. This will be no different. It's on film now and teams will be ready for it. The fact that the Giants were unprepared does not in any way preclude the Bucs from doing this, any more than it would prevent Freeman from exercising a "quick kick" from the pocket. If it's within the rules, and not maliciously intended to injure, go for it. If the league doesn't like this practice, they will vote to outlaw it in the interest of safety, as they have done for many incidental tackles, kickoffs, and many other aspects of the game. Until then, you have no evidence it causes injury (unless you count the Bucs players that were classlessly punched in the face after this play), so you have no grounds to complain.
 
2012-09-18 01:03:09 PM  

LordStormes: fickenchucker: Athletes play to accepted unwritten rules. Not doing that hurts people for no good reason when the opponent isn't expecting a hit.

Dicks play like dicks. My guess is you're a dick.

No, actually, not true at all. I believe in playing clean, playing fair, and playing to win. As a Bucs fan, I've seen them lay down over the decades, often quitting in the 3rd quarter. Hell, last year, I saw them quit on the season in October and play out the line for two months. I'm somebody who routinely has to pull solutions out of my ass in the nick of time for things, and I respect the value of every second you have available to complete a challenge. So, when faced with an opportunity to lie down and quit on the game, I like seeing the resilience of my team to fight back. This tactic has successfully caused fumbles several times (twice in Rutgers' 2009 season alone) and is very simply defended. It's no different than a fake punt. If somebody isn't expecting the offense to run-block, they could get destroyed by the offensive line. So, they learn to keep their head on a swivel and be prepared when they're on the field. This will be no different. It's on film now and teams will be ready for it. The fact that the Giants were unprepared does not in any way preclude the Bucs from doing this, any more than it would prevent Freeman from exercising a "quick kick" from the pocket. If it's within the rules, and not maliciously intended to injure, go for it. If the league doesn't like this practice, they will vote to outlaw it in the interest of safety, as they have done for many incidental tackles, kickoffs, and many other aspects of the game. Until then, you have no evidence it causes injury (unless you count the Bucs players that were classlessly punched in the face after this play), so you have no grounds to complain.



So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.
 
2012-09-18 02:26:33 PM  

downtownkid:
So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.


It isn't dirty, and the only reason anyone would be at greater risk of getting hurt vs. any other play is if they are not paying attention, which is true of any play in the NFL.
 
2012-09-18 02:29:37 PM  

downtownkid:

So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.


Also, I lost my job to Bain Capital and was looking for work for nearly a year after. So go fark yourself with that reference.
 
2012-09-18 02:34:42 PM  
"Unwritten rules" are horseshiat and should be treated as such.

/that is all
 
2012-09-18 03:32:49 PM  
What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.
 
2012-09-18 03:44:46 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid:

So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.

Also, I lost my job to Bain Capital and was looking for work for nearly a year after. So go fark yourself with that reference.


I'm shocked. Seems like a hard charging, win-at-all-costs problem solver like yourself would be right up their alley.
 
2012-09-18 03:58:24 PM  

Orange Guy: What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.


Who said anyone was overlooking it? That's the reason you try to get the fumble, not because you can run it back. There's a reason I keep pointing out five seconds. If it was one second, I don't think this happens. But five is JUST in that area where there's a reasonable chance of pulling it out.
 
2012-09-18 04:16:44 PM  

LordStormes: As a Bucs fan,


I think we have the real reason you're a dick.

If the situation were reversed and Freeman happened to twist a knee, it would still be cool, right?

/Not a Giants fan, but now certainly adding the Bucs Gay Pirates to the list of teams I hate.
 
2012-09-18 05:38:00 PM  

IAmRight: Orange Guy: What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.

Who said anyone was overlooking it? That's the reason you try to get the fumble, not because you can run it back. There's a reason I keep pointing out five seconds. If it was one second, I don't think this happens. But five is JUST in that area where there's a reasonable chance of pulling it out.


Hail Mary my ass, the play occurred on the Giants' 29. A fumble would likely be recovered 4-5 yards back, so you're at the 25. That's a very doable distance without having to do anything too insane.
 
2012-09-18 05:39:10 PM  

IAmRight: Orange Guy: What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.

Who said anyone was overlooking it? That's the reason you try to get the fumble, not because you can run it back. There's a reason I keep pointing out five seconds. If it was one second, I don't think this happens. But five is JUST in that area where there's a reasonable chance of pulling it out.


Even with no time, a fumble would likely be recovered BEHIND the entire Giants offense. If a Bucs defender picks that up on his feet, that's six points right there.
 
2012-09-18 05:40:32 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:

So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.

Also, I lost my job to Bain Capital and was looking for work for nearly a year after. So go fark yourself with that reference.

I'm shocked. Seems like a hard charging, win-at-all-costs problem solver like yourself would be right up their alley.


Yeah... one of my biggest character flaws is not giving up on something until it's done, which is part of the reason I'm still wasting time arguing with somebody on the Internet who is far more interested in being an abject asshole than making a point.
 
2012-09-18 05:46:56 PM  

fickenchucker: LordStormes: As a Bucs fan,

I think we have the real reason you're a dick.

If the situation were reversed and Freeman happened to twist a knee, it would still be cool, right?

Actually, yes. I'd be furious at the Bucs offensive linemen who didn't block, but would not fault the defense at all. Their job is to get the ball back whether it's 5 seconds into the 1st quarter or 5 seconds from the end of the 4th.

/Not a Giants fan, but now certainly adding the Bucs Gay Pirates to the list of teams I hate.

That's fine. We have enough fairweather pricks down here from up north that root for the team when they're good and go back to cheering on their old teams whenever the Bucs lose a game.

When the Bucs do something shiatty, I speak up about it. Hell, my user name on our local paper's forum is Ir8Pir8 because I was so critical of the team at one point. But this is fair football, and if Eli had fumbled and the Bucs scored, Schiano would have been Coach of the Week and you know it. Ditto the Golden Tate hit everybody talked about in this thread. If the defender he smacked was running back an interception and coughed up the ball, that hit is all over SportsCenter. He didn't, so we vilify him. The biggest hypocrisy of all is that many of the same people who are saying Schiano is a prick for calling this play are supporting the Saints, who paid people to deliberately injure other players, and Peyton Manning will never be the same because of it.

 
2012-09-18 05:47:25 PM  

LordStormes: IAmRight: Orange Guy: What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.

Who said anyone was overlooking it? That's the reason you try to get the fumble, not because you can run it back. There's a reason I keep pointing out five seconds. If it was one second, I don't think this happens. But five is JUST in that area where there's a reasonable chance of pulling it out.

Even with no time, a fumble would likely be recovered BEHIND the entire Giants offense. If a Bucs defender picks that up on his feet, that's six points right there.


LordStormes: IAmRight: Orange Guy: What almost everyone here seems to be overlooking, even without any time outs left, if Tampa had recovered the football after causing a fumble, by rule, the clock would have stopped on the change of possession. So, Tampa, technically still had a chance to run a Hail Mary play.

Who said anyone was overlooking it? That's the reason you try to get the fumble, not because you can run it back. There's a reason I keep pointing out five seconds. If it was one second, I don't think this happens. But five is JUST in that area where there's a reasonable chance of pulling it out.

Even with no time, a fumble would likely be recovered BEHIND the entire Giants offense. If a Bucs defender picks that up on his feet, that's six points right there.



How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?
 
2012-09-18 05:55:25 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:

So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.

Also, I lost my job to Bain Capital and was looking for work for nearly a year after. So go fark yourself with that reference.

I'm shocked. Seems like a hard charging, win-at-all-costs problem solver like yourself would be right up their alley.

Yeah... one of my biggest character flaws is not giving up on something until it's done, which is part of the reason I'm still wasting time arguing with somebody on the Internet who is far more interested in being an abject asshole than making a point.


No worries, you make my point for me. It's clear that you have little to no experience in competitive sports but like to talk out of your ass.
 
2012-09-18 05:56:34 PM  

downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?


What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.
 
2012-09-18 05:57:53 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:

So it's a dirty play that's technically within the rules, and you'll take advantage of it even if people risk getting hurt. You sound like management at Bain Capital.

Also, I lost my job to Bain Capital and was looking for work for nearly a year after. So go fark yourself with that reference.

I'm shocked. Seems like a hard charging, win-at-all-costs problem solver like yourself would be right up their alley.

Yeah... one of my biggest character flaws is not giving up on something until it's done, which is part of the reason I'm still wasting time arguing with somebody on the Internet who is far more interested in being an abject asshole than making a point.

No worries, you make my point for me. It's clear that you have little to no experience in competitive sports but like to talk out of your ass.


Link your NFL player page or STFU.
 
2012-09-18 06:21:32 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.



Thanks, we're done here.
 
2012-09-18 06:24:16 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.


Before 1994, there had never been a "fake spike" either. I guess it was illegal, immoral and wrong when Dan Marino did it. There's a first time for everything.
 
2012-09-18 06:27:10 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.


Also, in 1994, Tom Tupa scored the first 2-point conversion in NFL history. A concept from college, AND HE DID IT ON A FAKE! I sure hope they burned him at the stake, as he clearly should have been.
 
2012-09-18 06:29:50 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.

Before 1994, there had never been a "fake spike" either. I guess it was illegal, immoral and wrong when Dan Marino did it. There's a first time for everything.



Yeah, I never used the words illegal or immoral. People who have successfully argued a point don't need to rely on strawmen. You, otoh...
 
2012-09-18 06:30:42 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.

Also, in 1994, Tom Tupa scored the first 2-point conversion in NFL history. A concept from college, AND HE DID IT ON A FAKE! I sure hope they burned him at the stake, as he clearly should have been.



And another strawman. That's 0 for 2, schmuck.
 
2012-09-18 06:30:46 PM  
TL;DR: Being innovative does not make you dirty.
 
2012-09-18 06:31:49 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.

Before 1994, there had never been a "fake spike" either. I guess it was illegal, immoral and wrong when Dan Marino did it. There's a first time for everything.


Yeah, I never used the words illegal or immoral. People who have successfully argued a point don't need to rely on strawmen. You, otoh...


Dirty. Cheap shot. Immoral. All the same thing. Synonyms. I haz them!
 
2012-09-18 06:33:57 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid: LordStormes: downtownkid:
How many times has that happened, in the history of the NFL?

What are you asking? How many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been recovered by the defense and returned for a touchdown? Many, Many many.

If you're asking about how many times in the NFL a fumbled snap has been caused by a defensive rush during the victory formation, none. However, it has been done successfully in college, including quite a bit by coach Schiano at Rutgers. Considering most NFL players have played in college before, they should at least be aware of it. Schiano is fresh from collegiate coaching; he's going to bring some of these ideas with him and that's OK. Many of the game's good ideas came from college, including the opportunity for a second possession in overtime and the 2-point conversion.


Thanks, we're done here.

Before 1994, there had never been a "fake spike" either. I guess it was illegal, immoral and wrong when Dan Marino did it. There's a first time for everything.


Yeah, I never used the words illegal or immoral. People who have successfully argued a point don't need to rely on strawmen. You, otoh...

Dirty. Cheap shot. Immoral. All the same thing. Synonyms. I haz them!



Wrong again. Immoral and illegal both have deeper implications and consequences. Christ, you are either too stupid to know what a synonym actually is or are being dishonest in your attempt to use the word. Sad little man.
 
2012-09-18 06:34:09 PM  
downtownkid:

People who have successfully argued a point don't need to rely on strawmen. You, otoh...

People who have successfully argued a point don't need to parse the specific adjectives used in somebody's post to try and find something to biatch about. You, otoh...
 
2012-09-18 06:35:46 PM  
Apparently strong language used for emphasis of a point is taboo on whatever pedantic rock you live under, as well.
 
2012-09-18 06:36:36 PM  

LordStormes: downtownkid:

People who have successfully argued a point don't need to rely on strawmen. You, otoh...

People who have successfully argued a point don't need to parse the specific adjectives used in somebody's post to try and find something to biatch about. You, otoh...


So you don't think it's fair that someone holds you to the actual words that you used? That's odd, you are now attempting to deny the basic function of language in an attempt to dig yourself out of a hole. You may want to see a doctor, you are becoming dangerously unhinged.
 
2012-09-18 06:36:49 PM  
Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?
 
2012-09-18 06:37:42 PM  

LordStormes: Apparently strong language used for emphasis of a point is taboo on whatever pedantic rock you live under, as well.


It's not strong language used for emphasis, not at all. You attempted to lie about what was said and were called out on it. Sucks to be you.
 
2012-09-18 06:38:45 PM  

LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?



Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.
 
2012-09-18 06:43:09 PM  
Let's look at the words you take issue with. From m-w.com:

Illegal: not sanctioned by official rules
Now, I'll grant, it does say "official" rules. But anyone making references to the "unofficial" rules that must be followed would subsequently argue that this play violated those rules, hence, illegal per the unwritten rules.

Immoral: conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles

You've used the argument that this shouldn't be done because no one does it, because everybody morally feels that it's a dirty play. So, per your assumptions, that's exactly what you're calling this play.

I'll wait while you parse my punctuation looking for something else to talk about, other than the fact that this was a perfectly legitimate play.
 
2012-09-18 06:44:19 PM  
Also, you're hiding behind word choice to avoid answering the points I made. Was the two-point conversion a dirty play when it was first run? Was the fake spike? Or the fake field goal?
 
2012-09-18 06:49:02 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?


Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.


considering he's in the right about the play being fine, i'm not sure what you're talking about. the offensive line should block, that's their job. the defense should attempt to get the ball back when victory is still possible, even if really really really farking rare, that's their job. and you're point of there never being a turnover returned for a defensive td from victory formation in only the nfl settling the argument holds little weight since; a) if there's an unwritten rule that the defense doesn't try that's going to lower the probability of such an event quite significantly, b) the sample size is much greater in college football so if a rare event was going to happen it would be more likely to happen in college football.

/next you'll tell me you should always punt on 4th a 1 from the 50.
 
2012-09-18 06:53:59 PM  

A Fark Handle:
/next you'll tell me you should always punt on 4th a 1 from the 50.


I've loved the people who have said, "You had 59:30 to win the game and you didn't, so take it gracefully and go home." Well, the Giants had 54 minutes to win the game, and didn't. They shouldn't have scored any of those touchdowns in the 4th quarter when they could have laid down and gone home. Where do you draw the line? That's the reason the clock has a 0 on it.
 
2012-09-18 07:06:58 PM  

A Fark Handle: downtownkid: LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?


Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.

considering he's in the right about the play being fine


Whoa, say what now? That is a statement of pure opinion that you are presenting as a fact. Tom Coughlin disagrees with that statement. A whole lot of players have publicly disagreed with that statement. Roughly half of the farkers in this thread disagree with that statement.

Tell you what, I'll gladly engage you in this discussion, as soon as you learn the difference between a fact and an opinion.
 
2012-09-18 07:10:36 PM  

downtownkid: A Fark Handle: downtownkid: LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?


Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.

considering he's in the right about the play being fine

Whoa, say what now? That is a statement of pure opinion that you are presenting as a fact. Tom Coughlin disagrees with that statement. A whole lot of players have publicly disagreed with that statement. Roughly half of the farkers in this thread disagree with that statement.

Tell you what, I'll gladly engage you in this discussion, as soon as you learn the difference between a fact and an opinion.


Start by giving us a legitimate reason why this play should be frowned upon, other than "it's never been done before" which is a useless argument, and "it makes the offensive linemen who didn't do their job look stupid and feel sad."
 
2012-09-18 07:11:42 PM  

LordStormes: Also, you're hiding behind word choice to avoid answering the points I made. Was the two-point conversion a dirty play when it was first run? Was the fake spike? Or the fake field goal?



No, dude, I'm not hiding behind anything. You created multiple straw men, lied, denied and mischaracterized your own words. I am not hiding at all, I am putting someone lacking the intellect to carry on an honest discussion on ignore. Try to recover however you choose, anyone reading the thread can see your failings. Best of luck with them.
 
2012-09-18 07:18:20 PM  

downtownkid: LordStormes: Also, you're hiding behind word choice to avoid answering the points I made. Was the two-point conversion a dirty play when it was first run? Was the fake spike? Or the fake field goal?


No, dude, I'm not hiding behind anything. You created multiple straw men, lied, denied and mischaracterized your own words. I am not hiding at all, I am putting someone lacking the intellect to carry on an honest discussion on ignore. Try to recover however you choose, anyone reading the thread can see your failings. Best of luck with them.


Read above, where I show that my words are perfectly legitimate for the matter at hand. You wouldn't know intellect if it bit you in the face. Go right ahead and ignore me and focus on what's really important to you. Namely, the fact that I *would* like fries with that.
 
2012-09-18 07:21:21 PM  

downtownkid: A Fark Handle: downtownkid: LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?


Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.

considering he's in the right about the play being fine

Whoa, say what now? That is a statement of pure opinion that you are presenting as a fact. Tom Coughlin disagrees with that statement. A whole lot of players have publicly disagreed with that statement. Roughly half of the farkers in this thread disagree with that statement.

Tell you what, I'll gladly engage you in this discussion, as soon as you learn the difference between a fact and an opinion.


Is it against the rules? No? THEN IT IS FARKING FINE YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT.
 
2012-09-18 08:02:37 PM  

umad: Is it against the rules? No? THEN IT IS FARKING FINE YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT.


i1234.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-18 08:34:33 PM  

Tickle Mittens: umad: Is it against the rules? No? THEN IT IS FARKING FINE YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT.

[i1234.photobucket.com image 319x243]


I mad. This thread is absurd.
 
2012-09-18 08:41:10 PM  

umad: downtownkid: A Fark Handle: downtownkid: LordStormes: Are you even arguing about football anymore, or are you just throwing handfuls of mud you pull from your vagina?


Says the guy who was caught lying? Fine we're done. Anyone who cares to read the thread can enjoy your desperate flailing and ultimate failure.

considering he's in the right about the play being fine

Whoa, say what now? That is a statement of pure opinion that you are presenting as a fact. Tom Coughlin disagrees with that statement. A whole lot of players have publicly disagreed with that statement. Roughly half of the farkers in this thread disagree with that statement.

Tell you what, I'll gladly engage you in this discussion, as soon as you learn the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Is it against the rules? No? THEN IT IS FARKING FINE YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT.


Really, that's how it is? Even though vast numbers of coaches, players and fans say it is not fine, you say that because it isn't against the rules that it is, indeed, fine.

There's no rule against it, so the next time I'm next to you on the bus I'll let out a big, wet, mucousy sneeze, showering you with a mist of unidentified wet particles. That'll be fine, right, as there is no rule against it?
 
2012-09-18 09:26:01 PM  

umad: Tickle Mittens: umad: Is it against the rules? No? THEN IT IS FARKING FINE YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT.

[i1234.photobucket.com image 319x243]

I mad. This thread is absurd.


It is, but god damn, how could I not, you know? Anyway, that post is toast soon.
 
2012-09-18 11:21:13 PM  

downtownkid: Likwit: stevie1der: Depends on the score. Down by seven or less? Bring the house. You're always one careless turnover away from a chance to win (or a chance to agonizingly choke if you're the Patriots). Down by more than a score. Sit back and take your loss like a man.

Exactly. Stranger things have happened in the NFL than a botched snap on a kneel-down. What are you supposed to do, roll over and die? If it's still close, you fight. They make you snap it and take a knee for a reason. If you're just expected to give up, why not just end the game when the winning team gets the ball?

If they'd done their research, they'd have known Schiano would try that.

I love learning from smart guys like you. Please show us some of the research they should have done. Provide links to the times he has done this in the past. If he has the tendency to do it there must be a historical record. What have you got?


Schiano did this at least three times at Rutgers, twice in 2009
 
2012-09-18 11:47:51 PM  
The kneeldown is a designed QB rush. If no penalty is committed, the defense is allowed to defend against said rush in any manner they like.
 
2012-09-19 07:37:43 AM  
What's the point of having a victory formation (where you load everyone around the quarterback to protect him long enough to take a knee) if you aren't planning on something like this happening. The Giants got caught not caring and luckily they didn't fumble and turn it over.
 
2012-09-19 10:05:00 AM  

downtownkid: There's no rule against it, so the next time I'm next to you on the bus I'll let out a big, wet, mucousy sneeze, showering you with a mist of unidentified wet particles. That'll be fine, right, as there is no rule against it?


If you do it intentionally, that can legally be considered assault. So yeah, there is a rule against it.
 
2012-09-19 10:17:49 AM  

IAmRight: downtownkid: There's no rule against it, so the next time I'm next to you on the bus I'll let out a big, wet, mucousy sneeze, showering you with a mist of unidentified wet particles. That'll be fine, right, as there is no rule against it?

If you do it intentionally, that can legally be considered assault. So yeah, there is a rule against it.


and besides that there are public health laws too. you should read about some of the stuff folks did back in the day trying to stop epidemics. and i know the difference between opinion and fact. and the fact is it's a legal play. it's whiny biatch coughlin's opinion that the giants only have to play 59 minutes of a game.

when i heard that the bucs had "taken a cheap shot," i assume one of them had come around the corner and knocked eli over after he had taken a knee. now that's a dirty cheap shot by a poor loser. then i saw the play. a defensive line surging forward at the snap is football.
 
2012-09-19 11:01:02 AM  

A Fark Handle: IAmRight: downtownkid: There's no rule against it, so the next time I'm next to you on the bus I'll let out a big, wet, mucousy sneeze, showering you with a mist of unidentified wet particles. That'll be fine, right, as there is no rule against it?

If you do it intentionally, that can legally be considered assault. So yeah, there is a rule against it.

and besides that there are public health laws too. you should read about some of the stuff folks did back in the day trying to stop epidemics. and i know the difference between opinion and fact. and the fact is it's a legal play. it's whiny biatch coughlin's opinion that the giants only have to play 59 minutes of a game.

when i heard that the bucs had "taken a cheap shot," i assume one of them had come around the corner and knocked eli over after he had taken a knee. now that's a dirty cheap shot by a poor loser. then i saw the play. a defensive line surging forward at the snap is football.



Why don't you let me know when you are done moving the goalposts?

In your Boobies you claimed that it was "fine" to do.

Now you backpedalled to "it's legal" to do.

Those are two different standards my friend. And good luck proving in court that someone intentionally sneezed on you.
 
2012-09-19 12:07:26 PM  

downtownkid: Why don't you let me know when you are done moving the goalposts?


i didn't move shiat. it's both fine and legal. and one of the reasons it's fine is because it's legal. you're the one that wants to argue the finer points of the definition of similar words rather than deal with the fact that you're idiotically arguing that a team should not try to win when the whole point of the nfl is to win. (it's not college or high school where one can argue the game is about developing young players/boys/men, wins are all that matter in the nfl.) if the whiny ass giants don't want to be shoved back into their pansy ass quarterback, they should shut their whore mouths and block next time. i'm not sure i can make it any clearer.
 
2012-09-19 12:16:19 PM  

A Fark Handle: downtownkid: Why don't you let me know when you are done moving the goalposts?

i didn't move shiat. it's both fine and legal. and one of the reasons it's fine is because it's legal. you're the one that wants to argue the finer points of the definition of similar words rather than deal with the fact that you're idiotically arguing that a team should not try to win when the whole point of the nfl is to win. (it's not college or high school where one can argue the game is about developing young players/boys/men, wins are all that matter in the nfl.) if the whiny ass giants don't want to be shoved back into their pansy ass quarterback, they should shut their whore mouths and block next time. i'm not sure i can make it any clearer.


Once again you are dishonest. Where did I argue that a team "should not try to win"? I said nothing of the sort. Another failed attempt at a straw man.

I can understand why you are getting angry, it's common amongst people who aren't bright enough to hold their own in a debate. Frustration sets in. I'm sorry for your intellectual shortcomings and hope you don't get overly stressed by all this.
 
2012-09-19 12:43:22 PM  

downtownkid: Once again you are dishonest. Where did I argue that a team "should not try to win"? I said nothing of the sort. Another failed attempt at a straw man.

I can understand why you are getting angry, it's common amongst people who aren't bright enough to hold their own in a debate. Frustration sets in. I'm sorry for your intellectual shortcomings and hope you don't get overly stressed by all this.


how would arguing with a tard stress me? sure it shows poor judgement to converse with someone with a room temperature iq, but it's not stressful. i'm well aware that i'm surround by idiots and this is particularly true on the internet and even more so in football threads.

if the bucs do not attempt to cause a turnover while down 7 with limited time on the clock, i would say they are "not trying to win."  that said, i'll let you define what their premature acceptance of defeat should be called since clearly it's not "not trying to win." after all, you're great with definitions and the meaning of words.
 
2012-09-19 01:19:58 PM  

A Fark Handle: downtownkid: Once again you are dishonest. Where did I argue that a team "should not try to win"? I said nothing of the sort. Another failed attempt at a straw man.

I can understand why you are getting angry, it's common amongst people who aren't bright enough to hold their own in a debate. Frustration sets in. I'm sorry for your intellectual shortcomings and hope you don't get overly stressed by all this.

how would arguing with a tard stress me? sure it shows poor judgement to converse with someone with a room temperature iq, but it's not stressful. i'm well aware that i'm surround by idiots and this is particularly true on the internet and even more so in football threads.

if the bucs do not attempt to cause a turnover while down 7 with limited time on the clock, i would say they are "not trying to win."  that said, i'll let you define what their premature acceptance of defeat should be called since clearly it's not "not trying to win." after all, you're great with definitions and the meaning of words.



A. "Schiano's move was a bush league, dirty play."

B. "if the bucs do not attempt to cause a turnover while down 7 with limited time on the clock, i would say they are "not trying to win."


A and B are two entirely distinct arguments. This is NOT a matter of parsing words, or making any sort of fine distinction. Try to wrap your head around that before embarrassing yourself any further.
 
2012-09-19 01:36:06 PM  

downtownkid: A. "Schiano's move was a bush league, dirty play."


but it is NOT dirty. there's a reason that the victory formation has at least two players flanking the qb and another 7-10 yards back. that reason is because it's a live play and the offense knows a fumble is possible and is setting up in a formation to protect the ball and/or recover said fumble in the unlikely event of a fumble. as a live play the offense should expect the defense to try to win (you play to win the game). the fact that the defense tried to win on a live play is NOT dirty. it is the essence of nfl football. what would be dirty and wrong is if the bucs were not trying to win (you play to win the game). the giants can shut their whore mouths and block next time they're in the victory formation with a lead of 8 points or less.
 
2012-09-19 02:13:10 PM  
"Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?
 
2012-09-19 02:21:37 PM  

downtownkid: "Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?


wait, you don't say that the whiny ass pansies on the giants who whined about it being dirty because they didn't feel like blocking whined about it being dirty? no farking shiat. they are the whiny ass biatches. and i haven't change my argument. the play was fine. the giants should shut their whore mouths and block next time.

from TFA you linked: Many past players have come out to support Schiano's decision of "playing the game until it's over." Those in support include Mike Golic, Cris Carter, Ron Joworski, Joe Namath and Mike Ditka. Ditka feels that Coughlin is wrong, and that you need to finish the game.
 
2012-09-19 02:23:27 PM  
and if ditka says so, it is so.

thelaughbutton.com
 
2012-09-19 02:26:21 PM  

A Fark Handle: downtownkid: "Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?

wait, you don't say that the whiny ass pansies on the giants who whined about it being dirty because they didn't feel like blocking whined about it being dirty? no farking shiat. they are the whiny ass biatches. and i haven't change my argument. the play was fine. the giants should shut their whore mouths and block next time.

from TFA you linked: Many past players have come out to support Schiano's decision of "playing the game until it's over." Those in support include Mike Golic, Cris Carter, Ron Joworski, Joe Namath and Mike Ditka. Ditka feels that Coughlin is wrong, and that you need to finish the game.


The same Ditka who traded his entire draft for Ricky Williams? Those are all guys who played a long time ago, not current players.

Your argument was that it is a fact that it was a dirty play. As experts disagree as to whether or not it was dirty, you have no leg to stand on. Care to begin by apologizing and admitting that you were wrong before we go any further?
 
2012-09-19 02:36:34 PM  

downtownkid: Your argument was that it is a fact that it was

NOT a dirty play. As experts disagree as to whether or not it was dirty, you have no leg to stand on. Care to begin by apologizing and admitting that you were wrong before we go any further?

your argument was that it was a dirty play. as experts disagree as to whether or not it was dirty, you have no leg to stand on. care to apologize and admit you were wrong before you waste more of my time?

/also you forgot the "NOT". words have meaning damn it!
 
2012-09-19 02:41:43 PM  

A Fark Handle: downtownkid: Your argument was that it is a fact that it was NOT a dirty play. As experts disagree as to whether or not it was dirty, you have no leg to stand on. Care to begin by apologizing and admitting that you were wrong before we go any further?

your argument was that it was a dirty play. as experts disagree as to whether or not it was dirty, you have no leg to stand on. care to apologize and admit you were wrong before you waste more of my time?

/also you forgot the "NOT". words have meaning damn it!



You really are stupid, aren't you. I mean, really, really dumb? Once again I'll carefully explain what a moron you are.

I am indeed arguing that it was a dirty play. I believe it was, as do many others. This is an ongoing argument that has not been conclusively decided either way, so why would an apology from me be in order?

You, however, argued that "it was not a dirty play" was a factual statement. As we all agree that the dirtiness or lack thereof is still in question your statement was clearly not factual in nature, but rather an opinion. As you were clearly proved incorrect in your argument the apology (or at very least an admission that you were incorrect) would be called for.

Need any help with the big words?
 
2012-09-19 03:03:06 PM  

downtownkid: You, however, argued that "it was not a dirty play" was a factual statement.


a) you assumed i stated a fact, when it could have just been an opinion. b) it is a fact that the play is not dirty. that's why the nfl didn't fine the bucs and said the play required no league action. c) you're a farking tard. you should play in traffic. the head trauma might do you some good.
 
2012-09-19 03:26:49 PM  

downtownkid: "Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?


Yeah, if you want your argument to have credibility, don't post quotes from players on the receiving end. I'm sure all 53 players from the Bucs would say it wasn't a dirty play.

Find some neutral players to back your argument up.
 
2012-09-19 04:11:25 PM  

pion: downtownkid: "Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?

Yeah, if you want your argument to have credibility, don't post quotes from players on the receiving end. I'm sure all 53 players from the Bucs would say it wasn't a dirty play.

Find some neutral players to back your argument up.


How about you provide quotes disputing the ones I posted first? If you are sure all 53 players from the Bucs think it wasn't dirty why don't you provide links demonstrating as much.

See, that's how debate works. I provide an argument and you use evidence to refute it. You do not get to merely say "I don't believe you, provide more evidence." That's not how this works. So put up or shut up.
 
2012-09-19 05:37:58 PM  

downtownkid: I provide an argument


yeah but you only provide the biatching and moaning of a bunch of biased whiny biatches. that's not actually an argument. so maybe you should provide better sources. that's another way debate works. if you provide "evidence" from shiatty biased sources, then i get to say your sources are shiatty and biased.
 
2012-09-19 05:38:29 PM  

downtownkid: How about you provide quotes disputing the ones I posted first? If you are sure all 53 players from the Bucs think it wasn't dirty why don't you provide links demonstrating as much.

See, that's how debate works. I provide an argument and you use evidence to refute it. You do not get to merely say "I don't believe you, provide more evidence." That's not how this works. So put up or shut up.


You provided them

Buc's players
Safety Ronde Barber said that is the way he plays as well -till the game is over. Defensive end Michael Bennett said, "That's how we play the game.

Retired players (who can be objective)
Those in support include Mike Golic, Cris Carter, Ron Joworski, Joe Namath and Mike Ditka.

Your article also says that Jerry Jones supports the Bucs.

Eli and other Giants saying it is dirty is meaningless (just like Bucs who defend it).
 
2012-09-19 06:35:35 PM  

pion: downtownkid: "Sean Locklear of the Giants called it a dirty play and so did Justin Tuck" Link

"Manning felt like it was a cheap shot." Link

Let's see, do I go with actual football players or some schmuck on the internet who has changed his argument numerous times?

Yeah, if you want your argument to have credibility, don't post quotes from players on the receiving end. I'm sure all 53 players from the Bucs would say it wasn't a dirty play.

Find some neutral players to back your argument up.


But it's OK for downtownkid to quote the Giants players as proof that it WAS dirty?
 
Displayed 447 of 447 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report