Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

250 Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. yeah i guess that could accomplish the same goal. fine with this too
  2. you think they'd intentionally risk giving up free plays all the time? any offense with a semblance of discipline would shred that team and stop that gimmick within 2-3 plays. just imagine trying to pull that off against rodgers
  3. filthy NZI supporters... look guys, Rodgers is the GOAT at goading offsides penalties, but you know what, they snap the ball and take a deep shot. they dont have bakhtiari start doing the macarena to draw a measley 5 yard penalty
  4. They have exclusive knowledge of the snap count. They don't need to react to physical queues to know when to start moving.
  5. Addressed in the OP. I recongized the spirit of the rule what what it seeks to prevent, but I find it unnecessary. Offensive players have the decided advantage of actually knowing the snap count. They have no reason to react to defenders. I mean this is the whole concept of hard counts. You stay stoic knowing that they might react. Heck in some cases a guy like Bakhtiari doesn't even listen for the count, he turns his head and actually looks at the ball for every snap despite being a left tackle. Sure, I'm giving the defense more leeway than the offense, who get flagged for the slightest twitch... but it works out fine because the offense (and sometimes Troy Polamalu) has the unique benefit of knowing the snap count and don't have to wait for physical queues.
  6. but mostly Tommy Kelly, with a side of Seymour
  7. i get it in the sense that sports fans have a vested interest in teams winning, not players making money. but i've never personally held it against players for trying to get paid.
  8. not to mention his bruising style. ride him for the 4 years + the 5th option. tag him after that if need be. if there's a 2nd deal/extension it would have to be incredibly team friendly and have him in a committee or something.
  9. Gurley, Bell... you'd think teams would learn
  10. They are, though. If they get back behind the line before the snap, no flag. But if they get back behind the line before the snap, and then an OL does the ymca, there's a flag.
  11. This has been a peeve of mine for a while now, wanted to see if I'm completely insane and missing something obvious, but I think this is a bad rule that can be removed without harming the game at all. To be clear, I have zero issue with the false start, offsides, and encroachment penalties... it is just the neutral zone infraction (NZI). My problem with the NZI rule is that it incentivizes offensive linemen to jump up and point. If the defensive player enters the neutral zone and retreats before the snap, there's no harm no foul. But if the defensive player enters the neutral zone and retreats before the snap, and then 1.5 seconds later an offensive lineman starts jumping and pointing, it's the defense that gets penalized. It's completely absurd. The defensive player should not be penalized based solely on the reaction of the offensive player. I somewhat understand the rationale behind the rule, because otherwise the defensive players can try jumping offsides to bait offensive linemen into twitching for a false start call. To this I say tough luck. The offensive players have the decided advantage of knowing the snap count. If I know that we are snapping on 2, and I for whatever reason flinch because a defensive player jumped on 1, then that's just on me. If the offensive line still wants to have the ability to "react" to create a penalty, then that burden should just be limited to the center deciding to prematurely snap the ball to "catch" somebody who jumped offisdes, rather than allowing any linemen to delay for a second or two to think about it, and then start doing jumping jacks and pointing to draw a flag. tl;dr: offensive linemen know the snap count. if you flinch as a result of a defender's antics, that's on you (espeically when defensive players emulating QB calls is already unsportsmanlike conduct). if you're a defensive player who jumps offsides, you risk getting "caught" if they snap the ball, either because the QB is alert like rodgers, or maybe if the center has the wherewithall to snap it anyway just to catch you. but if you retreat before the snap, no harm no foul. What am I missing? I just hate the OL antics and feel it's cheap.
  12. still think you would pretty easily get a 2nd for Darnold. the colts, Football Team seem obvious. there are a bunch of potential landing spots. heck i could see the Bucs doing it. i think a good team that's not going to be picking top 15-20 would even ponder sending a first for him, like the Patriots. might be a stretch, but it wouldnt shock me. i think he has more value now than Rosen did during the draft last year
  13. i never said that. what i did say is that the jets only invested 1 first round pick in the QB position lawnrece isn't a "great, hyped prospect much like darnold was." darnold wasn't in the same tier of prospect as Lawrence, who is much more in the Andrew Luck category. if he busts, it will be a monumental affair that will have scouts scratching their heads for years to come. not to say people didnt believe in darnold during the draft, but we're talking apples and oranges i agree that there are ways the jets can improve their situation to make it more condusive for a QB to be developed. clearly they lack weapons, and eveith with becton looking good, they could still to better on the line. still, getting a cant-miss qb talent is one that nobody in their right mind would pass up
  • Create New...