9-8-2013 Packers vs 49ers - REVENGE

[HyponGrey]

Wasn't there a Clay quote somewhere about "sitting back and playing pattycake with the Tackle?" Probably on ESPN.

Speaking of ESPN, great article on our defense
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/common/page.php?feed=2&id=9301&is_corp=1

GREEN BAY – The University of Wisconsin had just finished its spring football practices, and Dave Aranda was in a bit of a rush. He had a 135-mile drive from Camp Randall Stadium to Lambeau Field ahead of him, and as he pulled onto Monroe Street around 8 o’clock that morning, he was excited. While he made sure he didn’t get himself a ticket in the speed trap locals know as Rosendale, the 36-year-old new Badgers defensive coordinator had to get to Green Bay as quickly as he could. There was so much to learn.

Little did he know how much he would teach.

Also, Brad Jones and Burnett questionable. VD epidemic on the way.

 

[weeds]

Thanks for the unneeded jab. I hope you cried in 1997-98.

*caps for emphasis. I find this notion that the Packers need to play like the 2011 49ers to have a shot at winning to be ridiculous. That's the exact opposite of what they need to do on offense. The OFFENSIVE key is Rodgers, and the defensive key is stopping the regular run, because you probably won't see much read-option.

#1 - I was NOT jabbing at you over the 9'ers SB loss. There is something internet-singular about people who can razz other fans about such things. I clearly stated that I understood the agony of watching your team lose a Super Bowl. Yes, I was referring to San Diego ... I was there. There were fans of 30 other teams that would give their eye teeth to be one of two left standing. So, calm down.

#2 - Nowhere in my post did I so much as infer that the Packers need to play like the 9'ers to be successful.

 

[Crazy Packers Fan]

I for one am on record that I don't think this is going to be a very good year for the Packers. But I'm sick of losing to San Francisco. So here's what I want Rodgers to be saying before this game...

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[ExpatPacker]

What he said is perfectly reasonable only if you're willfully ignorant to what he implied. The rule is in place out of fairness to defenders who might legitimately believe the QB is really running with the ball. It's not there just so you can get a free shot in. If he wasn't talking about actively trying to injure Kaepernick, then why did he say quarterbacks are "too important to their offense"?

In baseball what happens when a pitcher decides to bean the batter? Thanks, Matthews, for the locker room material.

Complete BS. The rule is clear and ChiefWhiner Harbaugh doesn't like it because it applies to his QB: If a QB fakes the handoff and drops back for a play-action, he's protected. If Kaepernick does that, he's fine. But if a QB holds the ball or fakes the hand-off and moves LATERALLY, he's not protected and he can be hit.

Want Kaepernick protected? All Whinebaugh has to do is have him drop back after a fake hand-off. That's called play-action.

Oh and btw, I hope that the Smith bros go after Rodgers like you say, because Rodgers is a pocket-passer. And they'll get a yellow flag thrown their way right and left. The only time Rodgers goes outside the pocket is on a scramble. Then he's not protected.

In other words, the QB is fair game until he takes himself out of the play which he can do by dropping back without the ball. IF he is in a running posture however, he is not protected, and moving laterally 9 times out of 10 is equivalent to a running posture.

/bye

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

Complete BS. The rule is clear and ChiefWhiner Harbaugh doesn't like it because it applies to his QB: If a QB fakes the handoff and drops back for a play-action, he's protected. If Kaepernick does that, he's fine. But if a QB holds the ball or fakes the hand-off and moves LATERALLY, he's not protected and he can be hit.

Want Kaepernick protected? All Whinebaugh has to do is have him drop back after a fake hand-off. That's called play-action.

Oh and btw, I hope that the Smith bros go after Rodgers like you say, because Rodgers is a pocket-passer. And they'll get a yellow flag thrown their way right and left. The only time Rodgers goes outside the pocket is on a scramble. Then he's not protected.

In other words, the QB is fair game until he takes himself out of the play which he can do by dropping back without the ball. IF he is in a running posture however, he is not protected, and moving laterally 9 times out of 10 is equivalent to a running posture.

/bye

In a video distributed to the media, NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino said read-option quarterbacks can be viewed by the defense as ballcarriers, even when they no longer have the ball.

"He is still treated as a runner until he is clearly out of the play," Blandino said. "The quarterback makes the pitch, he's still a runner – he can be hit like a runner until he's clearly out of the play."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/07/5714192/49ers-notes-harbaugh-calls-nfl.html#storylink=cpy

 

[12theTruth]

In a video distributed to the media, NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino said read-option quarterbacks can be viewed by the defense as ballcarriers, even when they no longer have the ball.

"He is still treated as a runner until he is clearly out of the play," Blandino said. "The quarterback makes the pitch, he's still a runner – he can be hit like a runner until he's clearly out of the play."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/07/5714192/49ers-notes-harbaugh-calls-nfl.html#storylink=cpy

If the QB is still in a position behind the RB or close enough to get in a position to be lateraled the ball then YES he can still be pitched the ball, so yes he would still be a threat the defense has to worry about. If he is 10 or 15 yards away and it is obvious that he has taken himself out of the play then you will see a flag if he were to be throttled in that situation.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

If the QB is still in a position behind the RB or close enough to get in a position to be lateraled the ball then YES he can still be pitched the ball, so yes he would still be a threat the defense has to worry about. If he is 10 or 15 yards away and it is obvious that he has taken himself out of the play then you will see a flag if he were to be throttled in that situation.

That's true in ALL plays, not just a read option. And it makes no sense to treat him like a runner until he is actually a runner (or pretends to be one).

 

[12theTruth]

That's true in ALL plays, not just a read option. And it makes no sense to treat him like a runner until he is actually a runner (or pretends to be one).

Harbaugh is the one who wants special protections for his QB. All he is doing is trying to create doubt in the referees minds. The only ones taking seriously his complaints is 49er fans. About 70% of folks disagree and see what Harbaugh is up too.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

Harbaugh is the one who wants special protections for his QB. All he is doing is trying to create doubt in the referees minds. The only ones taking seriously his complaints is 49er fans. About 70% of folks disagree and see what Harbaugh is up too.

You didn't at all address what I said.

"That's true in ALL plays, not just a read option. And it makes no sense to treat him like a runner until he is actually a runner (or pretends to be one)."

 

[NorthWestCheeseHead]

Okay, I`m not a fan of Harbaugh either, and I`ve read all the comments that us Packer fans have made to our visitors on this subject BUT that said, If the role is reversed and THEIR defensive line put Aaron out of the game with a fluke injury because of one of these FAIR hits, are we going to be philosophical about it ??? Somehow I dont think we will guys. Just saying !

I already remarked on this point in a post above. But yeah, basically I'll still be waxing philosophically about it as I prepare the hangman's noose for myself. hahaha In all seriousness though, it may happen and it may not. If it does happen it will suck a lot. I however won't cry to the NFL about needing to change the rule or whatever. Simple matter of fact is that I highly doubt that Rodgers will be running a R-O play all too often if at all.

 

[longtimefan]

Okay, I`m not a fan of Harbaugh either, and I`ve read all the comments that us Packer fans have made to our visitors on this subject BUT that said, If the role is reversed and THEIR defensive line put Aaron out of the game with a fluke injury because of one of these FAIR hits, are we going to be philosophical about it ??? Somehow I dont think we will guys. Just saying !

As long as it was with in the rules, so be it.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

I already remarked on this point in a post above. But yeah, basically I'll still be waxing philosophically about it as I prepare the hangman's noose for myself. hahaha In all seriousness though, it may happen and it may not. If it does happen it will suck a lot. I however won't cry to the NFL about needing to change the rule or whatever. Simple matter of fact is that I highly doubt that Rodgers will be running a R-O play all too often if at all.

thats okay Bud, not looking to argue, I`m just asking

 

[NorthWestCheeseHead]

You didn't at all address what I said.

"That's true in ALL plays, not just a read option. And it makes no sense to treat him like a runner until he is actually a runner (or pretends to be one)."

It makes no sense to have a guy on the field that can't be hit, unless it is the Kicker.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

It makes no sense to have a guy on the field that can't be hit, unless it is the Kicker.

Non sequitur.

 

[NorthWestCheeseHead]

Non sequitur.

I see your "non sequitur" and raise you "not an offencive threat".

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

I see your "non sequitur" and raise you "not an offencive threat".

You're either not getting it or you're deliberately trying to avoid the point.

A quarterback (more specifically, a passer) standing in the pocket on a conventional pass play is also an offensive threat, but by NFL rules is afforded certain protections that other ball carriers (running backs, full backs, etc) are not afforded. Hence, special rules about "roughing the passer" that don't apply to running backs.

The VP of NFL officiating stated that during a read option play the passer loses protection normally afforded to a passer, simply because it's a read option. If the passer is not running with the ball, why?

 

[NorthWestCheeseHead]

You're either not getting it or you're deliberately trying to avoid the point.

A quarterback (more specifically, a passer) standing in the pocket on a conventional pass play is also an offensive threat, but by NFL rules is afforded certain protections that other ball carriers (running backs, full backs, etc) are not afforded. Hence, special rules about "roughing the passer" that don't apply to running backs.

The VP of NFL officiating stated that during a read option play the passer loses protection normally afforded to a passer, simply because it's a read option. If the passer is not running with the ball, why?

Well for one if he is faking a run, acting as a blocker, or positioning himself to receive the ball potentially at some point again after the snap why should he be treated as a passer when he is obviously not passing?

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

Well for one if he is faking a run, acting as a blocker, or positioning himself to receive the ball potentially at some point again after the snap why should he be treated as a passer when he is obviously not passing?

Some of those have always applied, and are not specific to the read option. It has always been that if the QB is running the ball outside the pocket, either on a scramble or a designed run play, he is considered a running back. It has also always been that if a QB engages as a blocker he loses his "roughing the passer" protections. So why the need for a change specific to the read option?

The way the VP of officiating explained it, it doesn't seem to matter if the QB is outside of the pocket. Once the passer hands the ball off, if he fakes like he still has the ball a defender can hit him low and say he is a run threat - even if he's still in the pocket.

All Harbaugh is asking for is clarification on the "strike zone" (his words) that the QB still receives passer protection if he stays inside the pocket. Unreasonable?

 

[gatorpack]

.
Yawn... Kap is so good he don't need to use the option anyways so who cares. Right?

 

[ExpatPacker]

You're either not getting it or you're deliberately trying to avoid the point.

A quarterback (more specifically, a passer) standing in the pocket on a conventional pass play is also an offensive threat, but by NFL rules is afforded certain protections that other ball carriers (running backs, full backs, etc) are not afforded. Hence, special rules about "roughing the passer" that don't apply to running backs.

The VP of NFL officiating stated that during a read option play the passer loses protection normally afforded to a passer, simply because it's a read option. If the passer is not running with the ball, why?

"Simply because it is a read option" is the phrase that you do not pay enough attention to. What is the read option and how does it differ from play-action?

Play-action: the QB fakes a hand-off to the RB and drops back for a pass. If he releases the ball he's out of the play. If he doesn't and, say, scrambles, guess what? he's a running back.

Read Option: the QB an the RB meet. The QB looks at the defender on the side of the play who is not being blocked, determines whether he is keying on the RB or on himself, and then decides whether to hand the ball off or to keep it on a running play that is designed to go in the opposite direction of the defender who is not blocked. The principle behind the Read Option is to create a mismatch: leave one defender on the opposite side from where the play will go unblocked, and seal everyone else off on the side that the running play is designed for.

In the Read Option, the QB waits to see who the unblocked defender is going after before he decides. That makes him a runner, even when he's in the pocket. He is not faking the hand-off to drop back for a pass; he is trying to get the defender to commit and then handing off or not. He is a runner, whether he hands the ball off or not, just in the same way that a RB who is part of a fake hand-off can be tackled without penalty.

The Read option means that the QB is engaging in deliberate trickery to make himself look like a runner, even if he isn't the actual runner. IF the defense was not able to treat the QB as a runner even while in the pocket, it would give the QB a huge and unreasonable advantage since he could hand the ball off and fake like he's tucking it in and running. Under the normal rules, if he did the latter and the defender tackled him, the defender would be called for roughing the passer, which the new rule is designed to correct.

In a play-action, the QB is faking the hand-off to get the defense to go after the RB while he drops back for a pass.

That's why.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

.
Yawn... Kap is so good he don't need to use the option anyways so who cares. Right?

Well he is the greatest quarterback in football history, dating all the way back to the very first game in 1869. That's why I want to protect him.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

"Simply because it is a read option" is the phrase that you do not pay enough attention to. What is the read option and how does it differ from play-action?

Play-action: the QB fakes a hand-off to the RB and drops back for a pass. If he releases the ball he's out of the play. If he doesn't and, say, scrambles, guess what? he's a running back.

Read Option: the QB an the RB meet. The QB looks at the defender on the side of the play who is not being blocked, determines whether he is keying on the RB or on himself, and then decides whether to hand the ball off or to keep it on a running play that is designed to go in the opposite direction of the defender who is not blocked. The principle behind the Read Option is to create a mismatch: leave one defender on the opposite side from where the play will go unblocked, and seal everyone else off on the side that the running play is designed for.

In the Read Option, the QB waits to see who the unblocked defender is going after before he decides. That makes him a runner, even when he's in the pocket. He is not faking the hand-off to drop back for a pass; he is trying to get the defender to commit and then handing off or not. He is a runner, whether he hands the ball off or not, just in the same way that a RB who is part of a fake hand-off can be tackled without penalty.

The Read option means that the QB is engaging in deliberate trickery to make himself look like a runner, even if he isn't the actual runner. In a play-action, the QB is faking the hand-off to get the defense to go after the RB while he drops back for a pass.

That's why.

Actually, a read option can also end up being a pass play. The QB can keep it, hand it, or throw it.

 

[ExpatPacker]

Actually, a read option can also end up being a pass play. The QB can keep it, hand it, or throw it.

So can a RB you hand the ball off to, but that doesn't change anything because the Read option is designed around fooling the defender in a run-type formation.

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

So can a RB you hand the ball off to, but that doesn't change anything because the Read option is designed around fooling the defender in a run-type formation.

Under normal rules on a halfback pass, once the half back takes a passing posture inside the pocket he receives passer protections. Roughing the passer isn't specific to the quarterback, it applies to any passer.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Well he is the greatest quarterback in football history, dating all the way back to the very first game in 1869. That's why I want to protect him.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!