Studs n duds Seattle

[PFanCan]

lol I've never seen Daytone Jones and Nick Perry both listed as studs. Two guys taken in the first round on defense finally doing something.

Agreed. I don't think either would have normally received a stud designation, but it's all relative.

I think that for many of us, just noticing them on the field is a huge "Wow!"

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Forgive me if this has already been covered. But someone explain the time clock at the end of the first half? Cobb was tackled short of the endzone with 30 seconds to go, Packers started lining up as the clock ran. Officials stopped the clock to review if Cobb scored. When they saw they he didn't, they wound the clock and started it at 13 seconds? Why were 17 seconds taken off the clock for an official review? Obviously the Packers wouldn't have gotten a play off at the 30 second mark, but they would have snapped it before 13 and even could have had a shot at running it in and then spiking the ball.

 

[thisisnate]

Forgive me if this has already been covered. But someone explain the time clock at the end of the first half? Cobb was tackled short of the endzone with 30 seconds to go, Packers started lining up as the clock ran. Officials stopped the clock to review if Cobb scored. When they saw they he didn't, they wound the clock and started it at 13 seconds? Why were 17 seconds taken off the clock for an official review? Obviously the Packers wouldn't have gotten a play off at the 30 second mark, but they would have snapped it before 13 and even could have had a shot at running it in and then spiking the ball.

I wondered that as well. Commentators even said something like, "I'm sure they'll put time back on the clock now," but nope.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Didn't hear or read much about it, but in my mind it may have cost the Packers 4 points. Of course, they also could have fumbled it and lost 3 points. But bad time keeping like that just bugs me. Same thing with resetting the play clock to 25 and starting the game clock after an offensive illegal procedure penalty. IMO, clock stops. This is a way to milk more time off the clock by an offense with a big lead.

 

[longtimefan]

Forgive me if this has already been covered. But someone explain the time clock at the end of the first half? Cobb was tackled short of the endzone with 30 seconds to go, Packers started lining up as the clock ran. Officials stopped the clock to review if Cobb scored. When they saw they he didn't, they wound the clock and started it at 13 seconds? Why were 17 seconds taken off the clock for an official review? Obviously the Packers wouldn't have gotten a play off at the 30 second mark, but they would have snapped it before 13 and even could have had a shot at running it in and then spiking the ball.

Ball snapped at 35 secs.

Seattle called t/0 at 13 secs

25 sec to get down there ? Like to find a replay of it, but I cant

 

[Carl]

Tackles have been mentioned as a dud, which makes sense. Should be noted that only 2 sacks were given up though. Since Rodgers is so freakishly good, it didn't matter much there was so much pressure.

I started thinking during the last two games how frustrating it was when Cutler and Wilson escaped sacks, but how much worse it's got to be a fan of team playing against Rodgers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Have watched it a "few" times......Cobb is tackled down at the 1 with 30 seconds left on the game clock....Packers line up, Refs throw flag and blow whistle and stop the clock at 13 seconds and state that the previous play is under review (in case its a score). Al Michaels comments, "time will be put back on the clock after this". Refs announce the decision that "runner was short and 13 seconds remain on the clock and start the clock on my signal"...Packers line back up, Seattle calls timeout before clock is restarted.

Not sure what the rules are for auto booth reviews inside of 2 minutes in regards to the clock. But you would think it would be wound back to the 30 second mark (time on clock at the end of play under review). Otherwise, who is to say how much time it takes to signal the refs from the booth that the previous play is under review?

 

[longtimefan]

Have watched it a "few" times......Cobb is tackled down at the 1 with 30 seconds left on the game clock....Packers line up, Refs throw flag and blow whistle and stop the clock at 13 seconds and state that the previous play is under review (in case its a score). Al Michaels comments, "time will be put back on the clock after this". Refs announce the decision that "runner was short and 13 seconds remain on the clock and start the clock on my signal"...Packers line back up, Seattle calls timeout before clock is restarted.

Not sure what the rules are for auto booth reviews inside of 2 minutes in regards to the clock. But you would think it would be wound back to the 30 second mark (time on clock at the end of play under review). Otherwise, who is to say how much time it takes to signal the refs from the booth that the previous play is under review?

My impression is if they line up and refs stop it at 13...Not so sure why there should be more time..

How about this-----A catch in mid field, in middle of a quarter, but in hurry up mode, Cobb is tackled at 30 sec, at the 40 yard line, they get set and ready to snap at 13 secs, but Pete tosses flag to see if it was a catch..13 sec left

Why would any time be added in that scenario?

Wouldnt that in principle the same thing?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Like I said, don't know how the clock is managed when it comes to auto booth reviews. In your scenario, Pete is controlling when he tosses the flag. In the one I stated, the booth is reviewing it automatically, because it may have been a score. How much time is reasonable to pass?

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

Like I said, don't know how the clock is managed when it comes to auto booth reviews. In your scenario, Pete is controlling when he tosses the flag. In the one I stated, the booth is reviewing it automatically, because it may have been a score. How much time is reasonable to pass?

That's a good distinction between an official review and a challenge. But what if the booth decides no review and play continues? It wouldn't make sense to reset it on a decision not to review so I'm guessing the same applies when a review is called. The Packers were "using" the 17 seconds either way by lining up. So I think not adding time back is the right call

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

Like I said, don't know how the clock is managed when it comes to auto booth reviews. In your scenario, Pete is controlling when he tosses the flag. In the one I stated, the booth is reviewing it automatically, because it may have been a score. How much time is reasonable to pass?

Now there could be an argument made that the officials should have called for the review way before the clock got to 13.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

IMO....in the case of an official review, clock should be reset to where it was at the end of the play being reviewed, since its an "automatic booth review". What would have happened had there been 17 seconds on the clock when Cobb is tackled, Packers line up for one last play, the officials blow their whistle with one second left to review and then start the clock (as the official winds sets the ball down and walks away) with one second to go? good luck getting a play off.

Reminds me a bit of the poor officiating of the clock at the end of the Badgers VS ASU game a few years ago.

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

 

[Mondio]

IMO....in the case of an official review, clock should be reset to where it was at the end of the play being reviewed, since its an "automatic booth review". What would have happened had there been 17 seconds on the clock when Cobb is tackled, Packers line up for one last play, the officials blow their whistle with one second left to review and then start the clock (as the official winds sets the ball down and walks away) with one second to go? good luck getting a play off.

Reminds me a bit of the poor officiating of the clock at the end of the Badgers VS ASU game a few years ago.

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

That was different though, the refs clearly screwed up. If they thought it was a TO, clock stops on change of possession or it was spiked and clock stops. Either way the clock should have stopped at end of play. Not keep it running while they stand around and figure it out.

That isn't what happened here. They correctly called no TD, and lined it up for the next play. The play should have kept the clock running and it did. The booth then called down for a stoppage. GB hadn't run a play yet, they simply lined up. They are then allowed to line up well before the ball is put in play to get ready for the next play. Unfortunate to a degree, but still fine IMO

 

[PFanCan]

Agreed with all comments above. I thought the refs waited to stop the clock for a review on purpose. That is, rather than stopping the clock right away, which would unfairly give the Packers more time, they let the clock run as it would have normally right up to the point of the Packers about to snap the ball. At this time, the refs blew the whistle and stopped the clock to make the review.

If it was a TD, no harm done.

If it was not a TD (which it wasn't), then the Packers can get back into position, the ref blows the whistle, the clock restarts at 13 seconds and the Packers hike the ball, just as if the review was never done in the first place.

Seemed fair to me.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

*throws a flag on myself for delay of forum*........thanks for the explanations. Still think that if there isn't, there should be a clear cut rule on how much time is run off before the official review stops the clock. Will wait to see what happens if that same situation ever arises and the clock gets wound down to one second before being stopped.........carry on boys.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Forgive me if this has already been covered. But someone explain the time clock at the end of the first half? Cobb was tackled short of the endzone with 30 seconds to go, Packers started lining up as the clock ran. Officials stopped the clock to review if Cobb scored. When they saw they he didn't, they wound the clock and started it at 13 seconds? Why were 17 seconds taken off the clock for an official review? Obviously the Packers wouldn't have gotten a play off at the 30 second mark, but they would have snapped it before 13 and even could have had a shot at running it in and then spiking the ball.

Actually the referees messed up that situation but not because of wrongfully managing the clock. If you take another look at the play the back judge threw a flag to stop the clock as it seems he thought the Seahawks had too many men on the field (he´s counting the players on the field right before throwing the flag). You have to realize that the replay assistant in the booth is only able to alert the referee of wanting to review a play within the two minute warning. IMO the referee bailed out his back judge by announcing the crew wants to take a look at the play.

In addition there was no reason to review that play as it was obvious Cobb was stopped short of the goal line.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Agreed Captain, saw the flag and they never really explained that either, was kind of a CF at the end of the half for sure. In regards to too many men on the field, is that normally blown dead before the snap or like defensive offsides, assessed after the play?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Agreed Captain, saw the flag and they never really explained that either, was kind of a CF at the end of the half for sure. In regards to too many men on the field, is that normally blown dead before the snap or like defensive offsides, assessed after the play?

The referees don´t have to blow the play dead (Rodgers has exploited teams having 12 men on the field a lot of times throwing deep on a free play) but sometimes they blow the whistle for whatever reason.

 

[longtimefan]

In regards to too many men on the field, is that normally blown dead before the snap or like defensive offsides, assessed after the play?

Can be challenged by the coaches..Refs will flag it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_(gridiron_football)#Too_many_men_on_the_field

not the nfl version but something I saw

Twelve or more players participate during the play, because the extra players either are not detected before the snap or enter during the play. Once the down begins, no further players may enter the field and participate, even if there are fewer than 11 players. Illegal participation is also called when an offensive player goes out of bounds (unless forced out by contact by the defense) and returns during the play.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Agreed. I don't think either would have normally received a stud designation, but it's all relative.

I think that for many of us, just noticing them on the field is a huge "Wow!"

How about week 13 last season? It seems it's been forgotten that Neal whipped Solder off the edge and got the hit on Brady on 3 and 9 at the Packer's 20 in the closing minutes. He shared the sack with Daniels cleaning up, but it was Neal who made the play of the game.

Neal is a smart, solid ballplayer. He's tough holding the edge, doesn't make many mistakes, and he's versatile being able to rush inside in nickel though we'll probably see less of that this season. Is he a 10 sack edge rusher? No. Does he play up to his $4 mil/year contract? Yes...and with cap space always at a premium you need those guys.

Neal and Perry will be FAs after this season. I would hope the Packers can find money in the budget to keep Neal around. Indy paid Walden $4 mil per year to play 4-3 OLB back in 2013 when the cap was meaningfully lower than where it is and where it is going, so there's a possibility somebody will throw some money at him.

As it stands, the $15 mil cap war chest after the draft has shrunk to $11.4 mil. Anybody else going to IR will nibble more off than number.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The referees don´t have to blow the play dead (Rodgers has exploited teams having 12 men on the field a lot of times throwing deep on a free play) but sometimes they blow the whistle for whatever reason.

It's illegal to have 12 men in the huddle. The refs will blow that dead before the snap if they happen to spot it.

In the more common situation, where there are fewer than 12 in the huddle but the team gets caught with 12 while shuttling guys in and out, as in this last game, the refs cannot blow that play dead before the snap for the simple reason that until the ball is snapped it is unknown whether the 12th. guy gets off in time. Once the ball is snapped, they let the play run.

 

[easyk83]

Tackles have been mentioned as a dud, which makes sense. Should be noted that only 2 sacks were given up though. Since Rodgers is so freakishly good, it didn't matter much there was so much pressure.

I started thinking during the last two games how frustrating it was when Cutler and Wilson escaped sacks, but how much worse it's got to be a fan of team playing against Rodgers.

It wasn't just Rodgers, the interior line stoned Seattle's inside rushers throughout the night which gave Rodgers room to step up.

 

[Champagne]

The whole Packer football team deserve kudos for this great win over the Seahawks. Very impressive win.

 

[PFanCan]

One more late-arriving stud nomination: The fans who were tail-gating and inside the stadium

Read the following report from a Seattle fan and her fiancé who attended the game here.

Also a link to the Seahawks forum of a thread that discusses this same report.

Well done, Green Bay and fellow fans. Am proud of you all.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

Agreed with all comments above. I thought the refs waited to stop the clock for a review on purpose. That is, rather than stopping the clock right away, which would unfairly give the Packers more time, they let the clock run as it would have normally right up to the point of the Packers about to snap the ball. At this time, the refs blew the whistle and stopped the clock to make the review.

If it was a TD, no harm done.

If it was not a TD (which it wasn't), then the Packers can get back into position, the ref blows the whistle, the clock restarts at 13 seconds and the Packers hike the ball, just as if the review was never done in the first place.

Seemed fair to me.

Right. If the officials had decided a review was NOT warranted, play continues and the Packers snap the ball at or very close to 13 seconds. The officials weren't responsible for the 17 seconds, during which the Packers were lining up and preparing for the next play anyway. Giving that time back because a decision WAS made to review the play doesn't make sense. I do wish the officials had decided a little sooner, but that's football. I mean, it took the Packers 17 seconds to prepare and line up. They weren't standing around waiting for the officials to decide if they were going to review or not.