2019 Wild Card Playoffs

[Mazrimiv]

1 minute ago, Joe said:

I hope not. I mean how many teams are employing this tactic? Is it kosher amongst coaching circles or is it considered unprofessional?

I am sure coaches around the league will bypass a competitive advantage in the name of professionalism.  Wait... no they won't.

[Leader]

1 minute ago, Fox_NFLs_GG said:

If MLF could use it during the playoffs if given the chance before the change happens. I believe that Bellacheat used it before.

Do it! Maybe you can get the opposing team to use a time out to end the sequence. Do it. 

[Mazrimiv]

I did appreciate seeing a BB disciple turn the tables on BB using his own flaky tactics against him. 

[Cakeshoppe]

9 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Now that it's out in the open, it almost seems dumb for a team up by 10 with 6 minutes left not to shave off a couple minutes by purposely taking a delay of game, then running down the play clock and purposely committing 2 or 3 false starts.  Unless I am missing something, there is nothing that can be done to stop it under the current rules.

if it became egregious, I'm sure a ref could throw a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct. Rule 12, section 3, article 3:

"ARTICLE 3. INTENTIONAL FOULS TO MANIPULATE GAME CLOCK. A team may not commit multiple fouls during the same down in an attempt to manipulate the game clock.

 

Penalty: For multiple fouls to run off time from the game clock: Loss of 15 yards, and the game clock will be reset to where it was at the snap. After the penalty is enforced, the game clock will start on the next snap."

Two delay of game penalties in a row is a case specifically mentioned in Article 1, but Article 3 seems to give pretty broad leeway for refs to throw a flag in these cases.

[Leader]

Just now, Cakeshoppe said:

if it became egregious, I'm sure a ref could throw a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct. Rule 12, section 3, article 3:

"ARTICLE 3. INTENTIONAL FOULS TO MANIPULATE GAME CLOCK. A team may not commit multiple fouls during the same down in an attempt to manipulate the game clock. Penalty: For multiple fouls to run off time from the game clock: Loss of 15 yards, and the game clock will be reset to where it was at the snap. After the penalty is enforced, the game clock will start on the next snap."

Two delay of game penalties in a row is a case specifically mentioned in Article 1, but Article 3 seems to give pretty broad leeway for refs to throw a flag in these cases.

Impossible for a Ref to tell.

Delay of game penalty followed up by two false starts.....which Ref is going to *interpret* the intent of those false starts?

 

[Mazrimiv]

6 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said:

if it became egregious, I'm sure a ref could throw a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct. Rule 12, section 3, article 3:

"ARTICLE 3. INTENTIONAL FOULS TO MANIPULATE GAME CLOCK. A team may not commit multiple fouls during the same down in an attempt to manipulate the game clock.

 

Penalty: For multiple fouls to run off time from the game clock: Loss of 15 yards, and the game clock will be reset to where it was at the snap. After the penalty is enforced, the game clock will start on the next snap."

Two delay of game penalties in a row is a case specifically mentioned in Article 1, but Article 3 seems to give pretty broad leeway for refs to throw a flag in these cases.

Since it's already established that a delay of game paired with a false start does not trigger this rule, I'd be doing that on every punt in Q4 if I was trying to burn clock.  Eventually I'd try another false start just to see what would happen.

A far simpler, and far more logical solution for the league would be setting a limit on the amount of time that can can be burned between plays.

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mazrimiv

[Cakeshoppe]

2 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Since it's already established that a delay of game paired with a false start does not trigger this rule, I'd be doing that on every punt in Q4 if I was trying to burn clock.  Eventually I'd try another false start just to see what would happen.

eh, I don't think reffing works like legal precedent. I think the fact that it's an uncommon occurrence lends plausible deniability. If it starts becoming a regular thing, I think those flags start flying. It's left up to the ref's judgement, and if everyone in the audience knows that's what's going on, then so does the ref. I do suspect we'll see some kind of tweak though, like stopping the clock for a subsequent penalty on the same down any time in the 4th quarter or giving the opposing team the option to stop the clock in such a situation.

[Rainmaker90]

Let’s go Vikings!

 

Although at home I like our chances vs them, I REALLY like our chances vs Philly or Sea

[Leader]

Ryan Wood -  Saints vs. Vikings is fascinating. On paper, there’s no reason Vikings can’t win that game. In reality, what have these Vikings shown to indicate they can win that game? Big moment for that group.

[St Vince]

1 hour ago, ReadyToThump said:

I still can't believe the Pats gave up a 2nd for Sanu lol. 

Pats are in win now mode every year with Brady. 2nd was pretty steep but with the Brown Gordon debacle that was purely a desperation move.

[Mazrimiv]

4 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said:

eh, I don't think reffing works like legal precedent. I think the fact that it's an uncommon occurrence lends plausible deniability. If it starts becoming a regular thing, I think those flags start flying. It's left up to the ref's judgement, and if everyone in the audience knows that's what's going on, then so does the ref. I do suspect we'll see some kind of tweak though, like stopping the clock for a subsequent penalty on the same down any time in the 4th quarter or giving the opposing team the option to stop the clock in such a situation.

Is that not effectively a rule change to combat this tactic? 

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mazrimiv

[St Vince]

With the AFC playoff games historically being snooze fest,   those two yesterday will be hard for the NFC to match. If they do this has to be one of the best Wild card rounds in history.

[deathstar]

44 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Also, I didn't like how Vrabel used it.  About 5.5 minutes left when it started.  You figure it's the Patriots, it's Tom Brady, you gotta believe they're going to grit out a drive over 4-5 minutes and at least score a field goal.  In that situation in the game, I want that drive of theirs over as soon as possible. 

I don’t think it works after five minutes left.

[Leader]

16 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said:

I do suspect we'll see some kind of tweak though, like stopping the clock for a subsequent penalty on the same down any time in the 4th quarter or giving the opposing team the option to stop the clock in such a situation.

They have that already. It's called a time out.

Outside of using a TO - you're transferring "intent" from the Ref to the opposing team.

[AlexGreen#20]

I feel like not nearly enough is being made of Belichick being the one who brought this loophole to the league's attention when he did it against the Jets.