Packerraymond Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 7 hours ago, Outpost31 said: Didn't get him any touchdowns tonight though, did it? Yeah I hope you watched, perfect illustration of what my hypothesis was. Mix of a whole bunch of circumstances, I wouldn't call any of them all Jones's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 "can't play defense" 18-12 game. But yes the new rules suck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyecatcher Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 8 hours ago, Outpost31 said: Didn't get him any touchdowns tonight though, did it? It only got him 3 last year. Why should it surprise anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted September 7, 2018 Author Share Posted September 7, 2018 53 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: "can't play defense" 18-12 game. But yes the new rules suck Did you watch the game or do you just like to be an a-hole? The score was 18-12 because of ****ty QB play on both sides. And yes, the new rules absolutely suck and you'll be bitching as soon as one of those new rules costs the Packers a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 8 hours ago, Outpost31 said: Didn't get him any touchdowns tonight though, did it? Did you... Did you watch the game? Julio had like 2 targets in the red zone and they were uncatchable. Every other play he was doubled. Not to mention him not even being on the field for their first two RZ trips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Just now, JBURGE said: Did you... Did you watch the game? Julio had like 2 targets in the red zone and they were uncatchable. Every other play he was doubled. Not to mention him not even being on the field for their first two RZ trips Yeah they pull him off the field for the first two trips, they put him in the slot for the last two where the slot CB and safety can both line up on top of him, instead of isolating him on the opposite side of the trips. You can certainly still double him out wide in isolation but now I know I've got 1-1 to the trips side of the field. It was all just bad, Sark sucks as an OC, ATL is only to be feared by Dom Capers so long as he is their OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted September 7, 2018 Author Share Posted September 7, 2018 2 minutes ago, JBURGE said: Did you... Did you watch the game? Julio had like 2 targets in the red zone and they were uncatchable. Every other play he was doubled. Not to mention him not even being on the field for their first two RZ trips Between bad coaching and ****ty QB play, Atlanta is a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 11 hours ago, Cakeshoppe said: just checked the rulebook, not seeing anything new there. It's always been the rule that if the OL moves in response to defense entering the neutral zone, that's an NZI and is blown dead. It's just not always enforced well. They talked all preseason how they were going to be quicker on blowing then dead supposedly. Rodgers was brought up every single time. I guess they said there was too many free or close to free shots at the QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moretti19 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 8 hours ago, Outpost31 said: The push out rule hasn't been in the NFL for about five years now. I never understood on the endzone fade routes why the CB's are not trained to let the receiver jump to catch the ball and simply hold the receiver up and walk him out of bounds. Usually the CB has their back to the qb and the wr jumps into the body of the cb which would make it easy to just carry the wr out of bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 23 minutes ago, moretti19 said: I never understood on the endzone fade routes why the CB's are not trained to let the receiver jump to catch the ball and simply hold the receiver up and walk him out of bounds. Usually the CB has their back to the qb and the wr jumps into the body of the cb which would make it easy to just carry the wr out of bounds. I agree. I'll admit this rule change went right past me - but for good reason (so to speak). Rather than defending against the reception as detailed above - more often you see the DB go up to contest, knock down or intercept the ball itself. Why? Based on the rule as is - just shove the guy out of bounds. He goes up for the ball - boom - whatever happens with the ball all you do is insure he lands out of bounds. It's amazingly easier - especially when your contesting receptions with a guy the size of Julio Jones. No flags. No nothing other than a non reception. Bring on the next down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cakeshoppe Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 35 minutes ago, Norm said: They talked all preseason how they were going to be quicker on blowing then dead supposedly. Rodgers was brought up every single time. I guess they said there was too many free or close to free shots at the QB. hmm. Honestly, most of the enforcement issues I've seen are with induced movement on the O-line, not unimpeded to the QB. I didn't hear much of this discussion, but I watched most of the preseason on mute. I do see a point of emphasis on general whistle blows on NFL ops website though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 6 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said: hmm. Honestly, most of the enforcement issues I've seen are with induced movement on the O-line, not unimpeded to the QB. I didn't hear much of this discussion, but I watched most of the preseason on mute. I do see a point of emphasis on general whistle blows on NFL ops website though. I know I heard it a few times. But I don't think I noticed anything different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 20 minutes ago, Leader said: I agree. I'll admit this rule change went right past me - but for good reason (so to speak). Rather than defending against the reception as detailed above - more often you see the DB go up to contest, knock down or intercept the ball itself. Why? Based on the rule as is - just shove the guy out of bounds. He goes up for the ball - boom - whatever happens with the ball all you do is insure he lands out of bounds. It's amazingly easier - especially when your contesting receptions with a guy the size of Julio Jones. No flags. No nothing other than a non reception. Bring on the next down. Didn't this happen last night once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 It's easy to say it's easy to just insure he lands out of bounds. You're talking about a fraction of a second here. The receiver has to touch the ball first, otherwise it's pass interference. It's not so easy to time up when to suddenly lift 200 plus athletes up or push them out of bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 55 minutes ago, JBURGE said: Did you... Did you watch the game? Julio had like 2 targets in the red zone and they were uncatchable. Every other play he was doubled. Not to mention him not even being on the field for their first two RZ trips Receivers with worse quarterbacks and worse offensive coordinators have gotten better red zone production. Anything wrong with the throw shown in the photo below? Did Julio Jones get a bad luck demon poking him in his eyes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.