2023 NFL Regular Season Thread

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I

Why should it be the current rule rather than a 5 or 10 yard penalty (and loss of down) for fumbling into the endzone?

Wouldn't that still be committing the apparent mortal sin of "treating it differently than anywhere else on the field"?

If we can acknowledge different parts of the fields are different and can have different rules, it really just comes down to a preference thing, whether someone thinks the result is too harsh for the offense, and I think, more often, its something people whine about when it goes against their own team. But I love the high stakes of that particular fuckup.

[RainMaker]

The end zones are always treated differently. If you fumble through your own end zone, it's a safety. If there is a change of possession in the end zone, it's a touchback.

The rule is harsh but makes sense. You fumbled through the other team's end zone. Why would you get to keep possession any more than you would keep possession fumbling through your own end zone?

[GrantDawg]

On the coaching cycle that will never end, the Falcons continue to interview people with Mike Vrabel coming in today. Chris Mortinson on the radio a little while ago said he has it from someone in Harbaugh's camp that Jim Harbaugh is still very interested in the Falcons job, regardless of the stories about LA. Meanwhile, there is also huge buzz about how impressed Atlanta was with Bobby Slowik, and he is scheduled to come in for an interview today.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Why should it be the current rule rather than a 5 or 10 yard penalty (and loss of down) for fumbling into the endzone?

NFL end zone touchback rule under scrutiny again, but owners not interested in change - CBSSports.com

Answers in no particular order.

1) It does not happen enough for teams to change the rule.

2) They can't agree on what the change should be

3) They are throwing a bone to the defense.

According to a source, the competition committee last had a discussion on the play following the 2017 season.

"There was some sentiment from clubs and fans that the rule was too punitive against the offense," a 2018 committee report obtained by CBS Sports reads. "… After much consideration and review of video, the Committee did not believe a rule change was necessary, believing that it is an exciting play that rewards the defense for an offensive error."

Now it was a Chiefs/Bills playoff game. The last time they played in the playoffs they changed the rules for overtime afterwards so you never know what may happened.

[GrantDawg]

Two things happened at once that sort of sparked a "will we get an announcement today?" sentiment. First, the Falcons had their second in person minority interview and are now compliant with the Rooney Rule, and then the Jim Harbaugh interview was cancelled for today. The immediate jump was they might have someone they are about to hire, but now it is cooling off with the Harbaugh interview moved to Thursday. That is of course unless he makes some other decision.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

Wouldn't that still be committing the apparent mortal sin of "treating it differently than anywhere else on the field"?

If we can acknowledge different parts of the fields are different and can have different rules, it really just comes down to a preference thing, whether someone thinks the result is too harsh for the offense, and I think, more often, its something people whine about when it goes against their own team. But I love the high stakes of that particular fuckup.

The reason for the special rules is because there is no way to enforce the normal rules in the end zone. It's not simply because "it's the end zone." A holding call is normally a 10 yard penalty, but even half the distance to the goal feels unfair when a holding call has likely prevented a safety, so it's a safety. Same with intentional grounding - the point is to put the team in the same position as if a sack had occurred (spot foul, loss of down). Impossible in the end zone. These are required rule modifications because the standard rule that applies in the field of play doesn't work.

In the case of a fumble forward through the end zone, the standard rule does work. If it's not recovered by the defense, it's the offense's ball at the spot of the fumble. Now, as I pointed out earlier, I actually think there should be a distinction between OOB on the end zone sideline versus through the back of the end zone because in the latter case, you've introduced an impossibility that doesn't occur on fumbles in the field of play (eventually someone is going to recover it if it doesn't go OOB).

So, maybe in that case, you give it to the defense as a touchback, or the offense retains possession, but you penalize the offense 15 yards. But I don't really understand the reason why the defense should get the ball as the default rule, other than that's the rule and it's been that way forever and no one is all that worked up about it. But logically, to me, it doesn't make much sense.

[weegeebored]

A lot of this would be mitigated if the NFL would treat "breaking the plane" a little differently. Why should a potential catch be scrutinized thoroughly but the offensive player just needs to have some part of the ball touch this imaginary goal line plane and it's a TD? I suggest that the ball carrier has to have complete control of the football into the end zone until the play is ruled dead. It would prevent the silliness of arm/ball extension when attempting to score, and would make fumbling out of the end zone even less prevalent than it is now (in theory). Touchdowns have a larger impact on a game than a catch so it makes more sense to scrutinize TDs at least as much as a catch if not more.

[Ksyrup]

I think the answer is that you can't have a TD without possession, so the catch rule (whatever it is) takes precedence over breaking the plane when a TD on a catch is involved, because without the catch, there can't be TD no matter where they are in (or outside) the end zone.

As far as a regular ball carrier having to be totally into the end zone for it to count as a TD, I think you're just asking for a huge replay issue and putting more stress on refs to try to accurately determine a TD.

[cartman]

go back to rugby origins and you have to ground the ball for a touchdown

[GrantDawg]

Harbaugh to the Chargers done. Crap.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think the answer is that you can't have a TD without possession, so the catch rule (whatever it is) takes precedence over breaking the plane when a TD on a catch is involved, because without the catch, there can't be TD no matter where they are in (or outside) the end zone.

As far as a regular ball carrier having to be totally into the end zone for it to count as a TD, I think you're just asking for a huge replay issue and putting more stress on refs to try to accurately determine a TD.

I was referring to scrutinizing the catch anywhere, not necessarily in the end zone. They replay whether or not the ball broke the plane. I don't see how there will be more replays if the ball carrier has clear possession into the end zone. And I was thinking something more along the lines of the controlling the catch rule, only this would be controlling the ball through the plane until the whistle blows. The ball needs to be controlled; the carrier's body doesn't necessarily need to be in the end zone.

Or what cartman wrote.

[stevew]

Steelers interviewed dat Thomas Brown for OC today. Also talking to Kingsbury soon I believe.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Harbaugh to the Chargers done. Crap.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Hooray!!!! I'm gonna laugh my ass off if the Falcons end up with NOBODY because of that assistant billionaire friend. Even funnier if they made that billionaire the coach

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Hooray!!!! I'm gonna laugh my ass off if the Falcons end up with NOBODY because of that assistant billionaire friend. Even funnier if they made that billionaire the coach

Rich McKay is not a billionaire. The owner is, as are all the owners. Maybe you are confusing him with the Head Coach that was fired, Arthur Smith. He was the son of the founder of Fed EX.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Rich McKay is not a billionaire. The owner is, as are all the owners. Maybe you are confusing him with the Head Coach that was fired, Arthur Smith. He was the son of the founder of Fed EX.

yeah Rich McKay...or maybe we should just refer to him as the handicap

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by stevew

Steelers interviewed dat Thomas Brown for OC today. Also talking to Kingsbury soon I believe.

So I am not sure what Brown's offense philosophy is exactly but I don't get the sense it is an Air Raid style. I am curious what sort of offense Steeler fans are expecting and/or are wanting to see the team run next year. Also, whether the pieces to run said offense are in place.

[GrantDawg]

Here's a crazy rumor that Mike Florio just floated in Rich Eisen's show. Andy Reid plans on retiring after this season, and Bill Belichick is actually holding out to get that job.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Kodos]

That does sound crazy.

[RainMaker]

I guess it would explain the lack of interest we've seen in Belichick. But that does seem like an odd move for Kansas City to make. I'd figure they would have just hired someone in-house and kept the rest of the staff. Seems like a huge risk to completely overhaul the coaching staff for a successful team.

[Thomkal]

raheem morris gets the head coaching job in Atlanta, not Bellichek

[GrantDawg]

Well, that is not exciting.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Danny]

Sounds like saving face for BB getting passed over. I dont think BB is a hot commodity at this point in his career

[Danny]

On the plus side, we have four new minority head coach hires.

[GrantDawg]

The Falcon's fanbase is rioting.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Hooray!!!! I'm gonna laugh my ass off if the Falcons end up with NOBODY because of that assistant billionaire friend. Even funnier if they made that billionaire the coach

heh I was right that the falcons got nobody

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The Falcon's fanbase is rioting.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

reading the tweets it seems that the falcons fans hate BOTH Rich McKay AND Bill Belichek

[GrantDawg]

He really isn't nobody. He is actually a pretty well-respected coach. Players love him. I'm going to be more interested in who he hires as coordinators. He is not a splashy hire, but he is a safe hire. I think given the tools he can be a solid coach.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Wait, what's the story about the assistant billionaire friend?

[stevew]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

So I am not sure what Brown's offense philosophy is exactly but I don't get the sense it is an Air Raid style. I am curious what sort of offense Steeler fans are expecting and/or are wanting to see the team run next year. Also, whether the pieces to run said offense are in place.

Pretty hard to run any kind of offense with the QB dreck. I kind of hope we hire Brown because if he has 2 good years he’ll get a head coaching job easy. And if he fails it’s cause he had no chance with Kenny 2 Gloves.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Wait, what's the story about the assistant billionaire friend?

Rich McKay...the CEO. Apparently whoever is head coach has to run all decisions by both Rich AND the owner.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Rich McKay...the CEO. Apparently whoever is head coach has to run all decisions by both Rich AND the owner.

Explains why the Falcons pick a guy they already had before with a 21-38 record. Willing to be a Yes man.

[GrantDawg]

No they don't. Rich McKay is the CEO and runs the day to day business operations of the club.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Just to be clear on what happened. Belchick wanted Blank to clean house in the front office. Belichick wanted to have final say on eveyone hired and everyone was to report to him. Blank did not want that because McKay has been his guy since he bought the club. He wanted Belichick to be a Head Coach and, not a Czar. He tried to get him in the room with McKay and Fontenot to work it out, and they obviously didn't.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[CrimsonFox]

Bill should just go to washington so he doesn't have to move

Has the panthers job been confirmed filled? reading different things

[CrimsonFox]

they really shoulda let him clean house. atlanta is terrible.
they will continue to be terrible

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by stevew

Pretty hard to run any kind of offense with the QB dreck. I kind of hope we hire Brown because if he has 2 good years he’ll get a head coaching job easy. And if he fails it’s cause he had no chance with Kenny 2 Gloves.

This is it. Especially in the AFC, you can't win in the playoffs without a good QB. It just isn't realistic to see Pittsburgh beating some combo of KC, Buf, Cin, SD, Bal, and Mia. Maybe some years they beat one, but until they have a QB they aren't getting three wins against these teams.

[flere-imsaho]

Is there still someone out there who is going to let Belichick run the whole show? No owner's that stupid, right?

[GrantDawg]

I don't think so. Not many teams are going to want to fire their whole front office for a coach/GM whose recent drafting results have been pretty bad and that will likely only be around for two years. It is a pretty insane ask.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This is it. Especially in the AFC, you can't win in the playoffs without a good QB. It just isn't realistic to see Pittsburgh beating some combo of KC, Buf, Cin, SD, Bal, and Mia. Maybe some years they beat one, but until they have a QB they aren't getting three wins against these teams.

I was just listening to Bill Barnwell's podcast where he talked about Jim Harbaugh's time in San Fran and his effect on Alex Smith. I just looked it up and well it is obvious when Harbaugh became the coach.

Page Not Found (404 error) | Pro-Football-Reference.com

I'm not saying either Pickett or Rudolph are the next Alex Smith. But with the right coach?

Alex Smith (2005-2006) vs. Kenny Pickett (2022-2023) vs. Mason Rudolph (2019-2020): Head-to-Head Stats Comparison | Stathead.com

[JPhillips]

Maybe. I think Tomlin is probably the best coach in the AFC right now. It's incredible what he's done since Ben left. I'd love to see what he could do with Cousins.

Not really. Go Bengals.

[GrantDawg]

The more I look at the Morris hire, the more I like it. The reaction around the league is super positive. Players love to play for him. Coaches are going to be lining up to work with him. He has been both a Passing Coordinator and a Defensive Coordinator. He has two Super Bowl rings. Now it is just a matter of who he brings in as staff, and what the team does about the quarterback position.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Btw, in the official announcement, Rich McKay has been removed from football operations and is just handling business affairs. So this was not a Rich Mc Kay hire. He lost his position regardless of hiring Belchick.

Edot: And now the Falcons fanbase is happy.

[miked]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

He really isn't nobody. He is actually a pretty well-respected coach. Players love him. I'm going to be more interested in who he hires as coordinators. He is not a splashy hire, but he is a safe hire. I think given the tools he can be a solid coach.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

How is he safe? He bombed in Tampa and was 4-7 as Falcons interim. I mean, I'm glad finally coaches of color get to be failed retreads like the white guys, but he still is not safe or exciting.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, in the official announcement, Rich McKay has been removed from football operations and is just handling business affairs. So this was not a Rich Mc Kay hire. He lost his position regardless of hiring Belchick.

Edot: And now the Falcons fanbase is happy.

whoa did not see that coming

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, in the official announcement, Rich McKay has been removed from football operations and is just handling business affairs. So this was not a Rich Mc Kay hire. He lost his position regardless of hiring Belchick.

Edot: And now the Falcons fanbase is happy.

[GrantDawg]

"How is he safe? He bombed in Tampa and was 4-7 as Falcons interim. I mean, I'm glad finally coaches of color get to be failed retreads like the white guys, but he still is not safe or exciting."
He is safe because he has the experience and is well-known to the organization. He was 33 when he was hired in Tampa in 2009. That organization was in shambles, and he was young and unprepared. Holding something that long ago against him is ridiculous, just like holding that 4-7 when he was an interim coach in Atlanta. That was a bad roster which is why Quinn was fired during the season. It also cost the GM his job. From every report, he did a great job with what he had and came very close to getting the job then. They instead decided to roll the dice with the hot OC that everyone wanted in Arthur Smith. We saw how that went.
Blank wants a guy who knows what he is doing and can take control from day one, not have to learn on the job. It looks like they had a hierarchy of hires from Belichick (who wanted complete control and Blank was unwilling to do that), to Harbaugh (who took the Chargers job before the Falcons could offer), to Vrabel (who wants Smith as his OC which made him a pass), to Morris. The only other real option they considered looked to be Slowick, but he must have not been as impressive on the second interview. They came out of that interview and immediately offered Morris.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by miked

How is he safe? He bombed in Tampa and was 4-7 as Falcons interim. I mean, I'm glad finally coaches of color get to be failed retreads like the white guys, but he still is not safe or exciting.

He'll guarantee good draft picks and no excess news coverage

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Blank wants a guy who knows what he is doing and can take control from day one, not have to learn on the job. It looks like they had a hierarchy of hires from Belichick (who wanted complete control and Blank was unwilling to do that), to Harbaugh (who took the Chargers job before the Falcons could offer), to Vrabel (who wants Smith as his OC which made him a pass), to Morris. The only other real option they considered looked to be Slowick, but he must have not been as impressive on the second interview. They came out of that interview and immediately offered Morris.

I am not sure I agree with the final choice but I can't really argue with this thought process if it is true. The Vrabel piece is just weird. From the outside, it looked and sounded like Smith's handling of the offense and offensive pieces was the main reason for his firing. Why would Vrabel think he could bring that guy back into the building as an OC for next season?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Holding something that long ago against him is ridiculous ...

That's what I'm saying about BMFP (aka Bobby My Friend Petrino).

[miami_fan]

Speaking of solid thought process, has David Tepper actually made a good HC hire? Instead of going to get the guy whose success is tied to coaching Brady or Rodgers or Mahomes, Dave Caneles is credited with getting the best out of Russell Wilson at the end in Seattle, Geno Smith and Baker Mayfield. I can see why Tepper would think if he can get that out of those guys, he is the guy to get the best out of Bryce Young. If not, then it is a Bryce Young problem.