Page 4 of 7
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:37 pm
by StorminMormon86
skinsfan#33 wrote:But lets assume it is credibl. He showed an improvement from week 1 to week 2 and then regressed in week three. Anyone that watched him play all three games knows that is not the case.
Statiscially, he did drop off from week 2 to 3. More TD's (3) in week 2, none in week 3. Well almost one.
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:01 pm
by Deadskins
skinsfan#33 wrote:Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up.
Nope, that rule's been the same for at least 10 years.
Nope, as I said it was changed in the off season. A couple of years ago Victor Cruise caught a pass in a two minute fill from Eli dove to the ground and left the football on the ground. Since he had never been touched the Cardinals pounced on the ball. The refs have the ball to the Giants because they said VC had declared him self down.
This rule was changed during the off season.
No, it wasn't. That was just the refs giving the vaGiants a break. Also, the rules are different for a scrambling QB, than they are for anybody else. To give himself up, a QB must slide feet first. That has been the rule for at least 10 years.
Everybit of that is incorrect including the part about the only way a QB can declare himself down is by sliding feet first. How about taking a knee? Victory formation?
Obviously I wasn't saying that is the only way a QB can give himself up. But, those other ways don't occur after he has made himself a runner by leaving the pocket.
skinsfan#33 wrote:Chris
ey said it on air during the game that he thought that Robert was down prior to the fumble because he had declared himself down. Then later this week he was imformed that the rule had in fact changed during the off season and admitted he was wrong.
I don't know about what CC said, but he would have been incorrect if he said RGIII gave himself up, because he has to slide feet first for that to be the case. He may have admitted he was wrong during the game, but I doubt it was because he was informed the rule had changed, because it did not.
skinsfan#33 wrote:And there aren't different rules for "scrambling QBs". There different rules for a player running a football (weathe that player is RG3, AP, or Peyton Manning) then there are for a QB attempting to make a pass from the pocket.
Absolutely there are different rules for a QB in the pocket, than there are once he scrambles, thereby making himself a runner.
skinsfan#33 wrote:I would bet that you still believe you are correct and that is fine.
You would win that bet, because I do. If you can show me any link to an NFL website showing the rule changed this last off-season, I will make an apology to you, and acknowledge it in my sig line for a month. I will look online to see when that rule was actually established. If I can find a link, I hope you're man enough to admit you are the one who was wrong all along.
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:48 pm
by Deadskins
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:58 pm
by Deadskins
More interesting rules involving only the QB from the
2012 NFL Rules Casebook:
A.R. 12.49 ACTION AGAINST THE QUARTERBACK WHEN HE IS BEYOND THE LINE
Second-and-10 on A20. Quarterback A1 drops back to pass but is chased out of the pocket and scrambles. At the A21,
believing he is still behind the line, A1 throws a pass to A2 who catches the ball and goes out of bounds at the A35. Just as A1
releases the pass, a) B2 hits him helmet to helmet in an attempt to tackle him; b) B2’s arm hits A1’s helmet as B2 tries to
tackle him; c) B2 clubs A1 in the head as he attempts to make the tackle; or
d) B2 tackles A1 below the knees.
Rulings: a) Second-and-10 on A20. Replay the down. Unnecessary roughness and illegal forward pass.
b) Third-and-14 on A16. This is not a foul by B2 because the passer is beyond the line. It is an illegal forward pass.
c) Second-and-10 on A20. Replay the down. Unnecessary roughness and illegal forward pass.
d) Third-and-14 on A16. This is not a foul by B2 because the passer is beyond the line. It is an illegal forward pass.
(12-2-8, 12-2-8-g)
A.R. 12.54 NOT ROUGHING THE PASSER
First-and-10 on A20. Quarterback A1 rolls out of the pocket, and while moving, throws an incomplete pass. Defender B1 takes
two steps after A1 released the ball and then tackles A1.
Ruling: Second-and-10 on A20.
Not roughing the passer as the one-step rule is not in effect when the quarterback is out of
the pocket, unless the quarterback stops and sets up again in a passing position. (12-2-8-g)
****Remember, this is the 2012 rulebook*****
This extends to all players, but my point in showing this rule is to acknowledge the feet first slide rule predates 2013.
A.R. 12.94.b CONTACT WITH SLIDING PLAYER
Second-and-10 on A30. QB A1 scrambles to the A35 where
he slides feet first at the last minute. B1 has already committed
himself to tackle A1 before A1 begins to slide. a) B1 makes contact with his helmet to A1’s chest, as A1 is going to the
ground, or b) B1 makes contact to A1’s head with his helmet, shoulder or forearm, as A1 is going to the ground.
Rulings:
a) Third-and-5 on A35. No foul.
b) A’s ball, first-and-10 on 50. A player sliding feet first cannot be hit in the head by the defender’s helmet, shoulder
or forearm, even if he slides at the last minute. (7-2-1-d-1)
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:32 pm
by skinsfan#33
Deadskins,
I'll agree with you that the feet first slide has been in the rule books almost as long as I have been watching football and I was never questioning that. I was however wrong about the qb ie Amy player being able to declare themselves down just ny going to the ground. That is what I get for trusting all of the redskins near reporters because they all reported that it changed in this off season.
I found the 2011 rule book where it highlighted a change to the section where it talks about ways that a player can declare himself down. I can't find the 2010 rule book that shows the where a player can give himself up by just going to the ground. I'll keep looking but that was the off-season after the Victor Cruise catch and non fumble because the rules at the time allowed fit him to give himself up.
I'll admit that I was wrong but it hasn't been ten years, more like two years.
I think we are arguing different sides of the same coin on the scrambling qb thing. Ib thought you were saying that there are different rules for pocket parts and scrambling/running qbs and there aren't. There are different rules for runners and passers. If a qb is acting as a runner he isn't provided the same protection qb that is hasn't ran has. However, if a scrambling qb sets his feet to throw a pass he is provided the same protection he would be given in the pocket.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:16 am
by crazyhorse1
StorminMormon86 wrote:grampi wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:grampi wrote:I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play. I want to to see him back to 100% and playing like he was last year before his injury, but is it worth scrapping the entire season just to find out IF he's gonna come around this year? He may not. The season isn't over yet, and I'd hate to see the entire season wasted when we've got a backup as good as Cousins sitting on the bench. Is he good enough to get the team a SB win...probably not, but I certainly think he's good enough to get to the play-offs, which RG3 is not, not playing the way he's playing right now anyway. I'd say if RG3 isn't playing markedly better in the OAK game, then it's time to start Cousins after the bye...
I'd say you'd have to give Griffin until at least after the bye before there are legitimate calls for him to be benched.
Nah, I think 4 games is enough to tell if RG's gonna come around this year or not...if the team gets to 0-5 or 0-6 the season is basically over at that point...right now it's still savalgable...
What I meant was that before giving up on Griffin, you should see how he plays after the bye because then there can be no more "well it's preseason for him" because he would have played 4 games and had a full week off. If he shows no meaningful improvement (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6) then I'm all for having a serious discussion about sitting him. But I just do not see that happening.
If Aldrick catches that pass, which was perfectly thrown and Herculean at that, Griffin passes for almost 400 yards and is likely up for player of the week. The play is up for plays of the week. I call that improvement. It would be insane to bench him now.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:17 am
by crazyhorse1
StorminMormon86 wrote:grampi wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:grampi wrote:I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play. I want to to see him back to 100% and playing like he was last year before his injury, but is it worth scrapping the entire season just to find out IF he's gonna come around this year? He may not. The season isn't over yet, and I'd hate to see the entire season wasted when we've got a backup as good as Cousins sitting on the bench. Is he good enough to get the team a SB win...probably not, but I certainly think he's good enough to get to the play-offs, which RG3 is not, not playing the way he's playing right now anyway. I'd say if RG3 isn't playing markedly better in the OAK game, then it's time to start Cousins after the bye...
I'd say you'd have to give Griffin until at least after the bye before there are legitimate calls for him to be benched.
Nah, I think 4 games is enough to tell if RG's gonna come around this year or not...if the team gets to 0-5 or 0-6 the season is basically over at that point...right now it's still savalgable...
What I meant was that before giving up on Griffin, you should see how he plays after the bye because then there can be no more "well it's preseason for him" because he would have played 4 games and had a full week off. If he shows no meaningful improvement (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6) then I'm all for having a serious discussion about sitting him. But I just do not see that happening.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:01 am
by Deadskins
And the play he fumbled on, his knee looked pretty darn healed as he eluded guys in the pocket, then left them behind as he sprinted downfield.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:48 am
by Scottskins
Griffin looked much better against the Lions. He wasn't hesitant or jumpy and he was stepping into his throws. He did throw a stupid interception, and he's gotta learn to tuck the ball when he runs, but we lost that game because of the rest of the team. Drops, penalties and bad dbs all played a part in that loss. Griffin looked normal for a full game. First time this season...
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:34 am
by SkinsJock
RG3 AND Kyle are having a hard time "adjusting" - they both will find a way to make the offense better
here's a quote:
"Brown, meanwhile, tweeted this important read-option distinction: "[The] purpose of read option is not for the quarterback to keep the ball; it's to keep the backside defensive end/outside linebacker/defensive tackle from making a play."
So is this the end of the read-option? Hardly. It just means that as defenses adapt offenses will have to tweak their strategy accordingly. Guys like Griffin, Colin Kaepernick and Russell Wilson aren't suddenly obsolete; instead, coaches will need to find more inventive ways to use them."
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:57 am
by skinsfan#33
Exactly. The D can stop both the rb and qb but that will make them vulnerable some place else. The team hasn't found those spots yet or they haven't been effective in exploiting those weaknesses yet but they will become good at it.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:09 pm
by frankcal20
Last week was RG3s third preseason game. Both coach and player are still figuring it out right now. What he can do and can't do at this point. RG3 is getting better each and every week. Having a threat of a run game will only help RG3 grow as a passer and also a duel threat. Also takes a lot of pressure off his shoulders.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:31 pm
by SkinsJock
frankcal20 wrote:Last week was RG3s third preseason game. Both coach and player are still figuring it out right now. What he can do and can't do at this point.
RG3 is getting better each and every week.
Having a threat of a run game will only help RG3 grow as a passer and also a duel threat. Also takes a lot of pressure off his shoulders.
I agree - some here are just not able to 'see' this
IMO the offense will get better soon - getting the defense 'better' will take time - having a good offense will help but our D was really hurt by the cap hit
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:52 pm
by skinsfan#33
frankcal20 wrote:Last week was RG3s third preseason game.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that. He got as much playing time in the first game as he would have in the first three preason games combined. So that anaolgy is a bunch of bunk.
Go sell that snake oil some place else!
If you want to say the first game was his presaon then I'm ok with that.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:03 pm
by Deadskins
skinsfan#33 wrote:frankcal20 wrote:Last week was RG3s third preseason game.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that.
He got as much playing time in the first game as he would have in the first three preason games combined.
That's simply not true. Maybe the first two games (or 1/2 to be more exact), but you can't discount the weeks in between the games, where you can study film and address mistakes during practices. Plus, the rest of the team also has to adjust to RGIII being under center and not another QB.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:13 pm
by langleyparkjoe
The rule was never changed.. it's always been that way. Simple.
Can we move on now?
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:31 pm
by skinsfan#33
Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:frankcal20 wrote:Last week was RG3s third preseason game.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that.
He got as much playing time in the first game as he would have in the first three preason games combined.
That's simply not true. Maybe the first two games (or 1/2 to be more exact), but you can't discount the weeks in between the games, where you can study film and address mistakes during practices. Plus, the rest of the team also has to adjust to RGIII being under center and not another QB.
OK, so i'm off by what a quarter or less. First game is typically one or two drives, the second game is a half minus a drive or two at the end of the half, and the third game is a half plus a drive or two in the second half. So i'm off by a drive or two.
All of that other stuff he got just like all of the other QBs did.
So you're going to tell me Im wrong based on a drive or two...
I'm much closer than you are!
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:33 pm
by skinsfan#33
langleyparkjoe wrote:The rule was never changed.. it's always been that way. Simple.
Can we move on now?
Yes, we can move on, but the rule was changed between the 2010 and 2011 season.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:15 pm
by StorminMormon86
skinsfan#33 wrote:frankcal20 wrote:Last week was RG3s third preseason game.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that. He got as much playing time in the first game as he would have in the first three preason games combined. So that anaolgy is a bunch of bunk.
Go sell that snake oil some place else!
If you want to say the first game was his presaon then I'm ok with that.
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
So sick of hearing this excuse. Last time I checked, these last 3 games actually counted ergo they are not preseason games.
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:11 am
by Deadskins
skinsfan#33 wrote:All of that other stuff he got just like all of the other QBs did.
How so?
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:02 am
by skinsfan#33
[quote deadskins"]
skinsfan#33 wrote: All of the other stuff he did just like of the other QBs did.
How so?[/quote]
He was sitting in the meeting room just like all of the other QBs ok. All of the off field stuff he did just like everyone else.
Come you can do it, just admit that you were wrong.
The playing time in one regular season game is roughly that of the first three preseason games. You said that the first three regular season games were like his preseason. You were wrong. It's is ok to say it.
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:55 am
by StorminMormon86
Some fans just cannot admit or accept that Griffin has not returned to form. Not yet, anway.
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:39 am
by HEROHAMO
StorminMormon86 wrote:Some fans just cannot admit or accept that Griffin has not returned to form. Not yet, anway.
Its pretty obvious you think that we should have started Kirk Cousins.
However what if Kirk had started and we still had the same record of 0-3?
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:49 pm
by Deadskins
skinsfan#33 wrote:Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote: All of the other stuff he did just like of the other QBs did.
How so?
He was sitting in the meeting room just like all of the other QBs ok. All of the off field stuff he did just like everyone else.
Come you can do it, just admit that you were wrong.
The playing time in one regular season game is roughly that of the first three preseason games. You said that the first three regular season games were like his preseason. You were wrong. It's is ok to say it.
If I were wrong, I would be the first to admit it. But here, you are incorrect again on many fronts. First, I wasn't the one who said the three games were like his pre-season, that was frankcal. I was merely refuting your point that that statement was total bunk. Second, you totally glossed over my other points, by saying he got the same practice and film study between games as the other QBs. That is patently false. Watching film of another QB, does nothing to help you correct problems with your own mechanics. And yes, he participated in practices, but there was no real game time between those practices where he could work on his timing with receivers under real pressure and defensive game planning. So no, RGIII never had a preseason, and is only now showing the effects that live game experience brings. Instead you chose to focus on a silly point about actual game time, which varies greatly from club to club. I even said it was more like a game and a half of regular season, because I didn't feel the need to argue a stupid semantic point, when the point I was actually making was far more important.
I'm sorry if my correcting you on the feet first slide thing got your panties in a twist, but I'm not singling you out or anything. I just like to set the record straight when I see misinformation being reported as fact.
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 3:51 pm
by DarthMonk
I think a guy can also declare himself down by going down to one knee like kick returners do in the end zone. I saw a guy do it a couple years ago and then call timeout so a field goal could be attempted.