Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Audibles at the Line: Week 4

compiled by Bill Barnwell

Each Sunday, the FO staff sends around e-mails about the games that each of us are watching. We share information about the games that the rest of the group might not be watching, ask questions, and keep everyone else informed about which games they might want to tune into (if they can).

On Monday, we compile a digest of those e-mails and produce this feature. By its nature, it can be disjointed and dissimilar to the other articles on the site.

Please also note that we do not write the e-mails specifically to produce this column, which means we aren't going to cover every game, or every important play. We watch the games that we, as fans, are interested in watching, so your favorite team's game might not be covered to your fullest desires or even at all. (If you are a Seahawks or Patriots fan, you are probably in luck; if you are a Bills fan, not so much.) We have no intention of adding new authors to cover every game on a given Sunday, nor will we watch a different game from the ones that we're personally interested in watching, just to ensure that Audibles covers every game.

San Francisco 49ers 14 at Atlanta Falcons 16

Doug Farrar: So … the 49ers go cross-country and are up, 14-0 on the Falcons in the first quarter. We all had that one, right? Completely awesome play by Taylor Mays on a blocked punt – he gets serious air and tippy-toes the back of the end zone to keep the ball in bounds for the 49ers’ second touchdown. That’s the pure raw athleticism Mays brings; any receiver would consider that a career catch.

Vince Verhei: I've come to the conclusion that Mike Singletary hates long pass plays. By anyone. San Francisco plays a lot of Cover-3, and it's working today -- Atlanta is moving the ball, but they usually drop a pass or turn it over before reaching the end zone. And their own offense seems to consist entirely of screens, dumpoffs, and flat routes, although that may just be Alex Smith being Alex Smith.

Ben Muth: Alex Smith just threw a brutal pick in Falcons territory. I don't think a new offensive coordinator is going to fix San Francisco's offense.

Benjy Rose: Falcons are having a terrible time tackling today. They're getting no pass rush, and when they are, little Alex Smith dumpoffs & screens are getting way too many yards after catch.

On offense, the Falcons look ugly. After a great start, Ryan's looking really uncomfortable. His timing with his receivers is nonexistent, possibly due to the 49ers getting pressure while rushing three and four.

Inside two minutes, Ryan's pass gets picked off by Nate Clements, who runs it back for the game-icer....except Roddy White goes all Don Beebe on Clements, hustling back and punching the ball out for Harvey Dahl to recover. Falcons currently re-marching down the field, thanks to some terrific catches by White. They're in field goal range...

...and the field goal is good. Crushing, crushing defeat for SF, who dominated the whole game, and who should have been able to end it with Clements' pick.

Aaron Schatz: Just drop to the ground, Nate. Just drop to the damn ground.

New York Jets 38 at Buffalo Bills 14

Aaron Schatz: 31-7 Jets. Two touchdowns Dustin Keller. Once again, points for Bill Barnwell, who pointed out last week that the Bills defense can't stop tight ends when Paul Posluszny is out.

Baltimore Ravens 17 at Pittsburgh Steelers 14

Bill Barnwell: Ravens aren't really big-blitzing Charlie Batch so much, although they just got him on an A-gap blitz with Terrell Suggs to push the Steelers into a long field goal attempt that Jeff Reed pushed onto the bar. They've gotten a few sacks with coverage where Batch couldn't find someone within three seconds and started running around with his finger locked on the pump fake button.

Doug Farrar: I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- there isn't a team in the league that's worse at altering protections and picking up the blitz than the Steelers. You start to wonder if they even have those types of calls in the playbook. I guess they just got spoiled by their old (and soon to be new) quarterback.

Bill Barnwell: Steelers are throwing downfield at Lardarius Webb with Mike Wallace, and Webb has done a good job of breaking them up; he just picked up two passes defensed in the course of a few minutes in what looked like one-on-one coverage.

Chris Carr just took a terrible angle to Rashard Mendenhall on the Steelers' rushing touchdown. He decided to beat Mendenhall to a spot that Mendenhall was about three steps ahead of.

Aaron Schatz: OK, you are Baltimore. You are down 14-10 on the Pittsburgh 3. It is fourth-and-goal with 2:44 left. Do you kick the field goal, or go for it?

Well, here's what you don't do. TAKE A TIMEOUT. You know, a timeout you may need if you DON'T SCORE HERE, in order to stop Pittsburgh and get the ball back.

Oh but wait, there's more. Baltimore lines up for the play now, to go for it. And PITTSBURGH takes a timeout. You know, a timeout that they might need if Baltimore scores, so that they have the time to come back down the field for a game-winning drive. Let's see... they saw Baltimore line up and decided they wanted a defense to counter that formation. OK, sure, but what if Baltimore comes out in a different formation?

AAARRGGGHHHH. This kind of timeout wasting silliness MAKES ME SO ANGRY.

Mike Kurtz: The end of BAL-PIT was absolutely pathetic. The Steelers begin with the ball on their own 2 or so, and three absurdly predictable runs and two false starts later, they're punting from the exact same spot after killing a whopping 30 seconds of clock. A decent punt to midfield gets cut down by a holding call, and the Ravens just waltz down the short field to score. Conventional, conservative playcalling massively backfires and costs the Steelers a 4-0 start.

Bill Barnwell: Joe Flacco appears to have about one great throw a game in him, but that throw seems to lead to a touchdown every time.

Also, stupid graphic of the day: CBS showed one that said "Charlie Batch has not completed a pass in the last one hour and six minutes." They didn't mean an hour and six minutes of football time. They meant real-time, which had included halftime and two Ravens possessions.

Carolina Panthers 14 at New Orleans Saints 16

Doug Farrar: Less than a minute into the Panthers-Saints game, Steve Smith calls time out from the slot, walks over to Jimmy Clausen, and earholes Clausen for not getting the play off in time. Meanwhile, in St. Louis, Sam Bradford guts Seattle’s defense on a first-quarter drive like the proverbial trout. Moral: There are rookies, and there are rookies. Watching Bradford this week, I was tremendously impressed by his ability to grasp his new offense and his sense around pressure.

Denver Broncos 26 at Tennessee Titans 20

Bill Barnwell: Wow. Ryan Clady just got sprinted past on a sack. He barely even came out of his stance.

Tom Gower: It's scoreless in Nashville after a quarter, but play has been far from as even as the scoreline as the Titans have outgained the Broncos by 115-15. The Broncos haven't found any room in the running game at all, and Orton has been sacked thrice on eight dropbacks. The Titans have moved the ball fairly successfully, but Rob Bironas missed from 35 yards out and Chris Johnson fumbled inside the 30 to kill the second drive; Fisher challenged and he probably didn't fumble, but there wasn't enough to overturn.

Doug Farrar: Okay, Tom – what on earth is going on with this Titans’ pass defense this season? New personnel? New schemes? Somebody just added water to Chuck Cecil? They look amazing.

Tom Gower: Well, in the first three games they've played Jason Campbell and Dennis Dixon/Charlie Batch and given up 386 yards to Eli Manning, who went 17-20 the first half with two drops and that tipped ball INT, so I'm not sure they're any better than average. One thing they've been doing more is blitzing-I think I've already seen more zone blitzes this year, including on one of the sacks today, than they ran the previous 4 years put together. I'll hit this again later.

Chuck Cecil just flipped off the officials while the sideline camera had a close-up on him.

The second quarter in Tennessee was definitely more high-scoring than the first; the Broncos moved down the field on a series of pass plays, capped off by an Orton to Royal TD on a rub route. The Titans matched with Vince Young to Kenny Britt on a smash-type play, set up by a 54 yard run by Javon Ringer -- not sure exactly what happened on the Ringer run to spring him free. The Broncos took a lead on a field goal late in the first half, but Josh McDaniels, Boy Genius, called his TO with about :28 left and the Titans took advantage of that to set up a game-tying 55-yard field goal by Bironas.

Offensively, the Broncos are still getting absolutely nothing out of Laurence Maroney: Seven carries for -4 yards, including an eight-yard gain on a cutback after some overpursuit. When Orton's had time to throw, though, he's found open receivers, frequently against Alterraun Verner, starting for an injured Jason McCourty.

A game written off by those gathered in the Barnwell residence as a Titans win turns into a Broncos victory...

Bill Barnwell: What on earth happened at the end of the Titans game?

Tom Gower: The Titans lost, as I expected. They had a kickoff return touchdown, but otherwise the offense struggled greatly to move the ball in the second half from generally bad field position. Chris Johnson ended up 19 for 53, with 9 of those carries coming in the first quarter and aside from his big 54-yard run, Ringer had little work and just as little productivity.

Orton generally moved the ball successfully with hardly any help from a running back, though Correll Buckhalter was marginally better than Maroney. The Titans lost both Derrick Morgan and SenDerrick Marks to injury in the second half; neither seems to be serious from the early indications, but it did result in a more tired DL. I was listening to Greg Cosell on the FantasyGuru podcast this week, and he mentioned the Titans' secondary struggles in coverage when the DL doesn't get pressure, and he's absolutely right. I also will say Orton is a much better quarterback than I ever expected him to be -- it's not just that he was awful as a rookie, but that he was also so mediocre at Purdue. It really surprises me that he's able to move around in the pocket, read the D, and find an open receiver.

Moment of what would've been amusement if I wasn't a Titans fan but instead invoked pathos: after the Broncos scored a TD to go up 23-20 with about 1:40 left, the kickoff (into the wind) bounced about the 20 and took a very high bounce. Marc Mariani, who had the TD return earlier, got hit while he was trying to haul it in off the bounce and couldn't; the Broncos got it and burned a minute and the Titans' last 2 TOs off the scoreboard. The Titans had already used their third TO on Fisher's second lost cause challenge of the game, this one on a QB sneak that converted fourth-and-inches.

Oh, and I think the Titans also had about four defensive offsides today, so they're back in form when it comes to that.

From today's post-game press conference, Josh McDaniels was asked about refusing to abandon the run:

I think though at some point, in a game, and for today I think it was 9:27 to go in the fourth quarter, we were, that’s it, that’s enough. I’m done talking about the running game right now. If that’s what we’ve got to do at some point in the game , that’s what we’ve got to do. You play to win the game, and if you don’t always [inaudible] then you have to try to do it the other way.

For some reason, that answer cracks me up.

Cincinnati Bengals 20 at Cleveland Browns 23

Bill Barnwell: The Browns challenge a play in the end zone where Benjamin Watson catches a pass and loses it on the way down with the ref about six inches away. Five replays and 30 seconds later, they decide to challenge. Don't you have a guy who watches that stuff?

Doug Farrar: Perhaps Mangenius was impressed by Lane Kiffin’s creative use of time outs yesterday.

T.J. Ward launches an elbow right at Jordan Shipley’s head on a potential touchdown in the fourth quarter, and Shipley goes down like he’s been shot. Carson Palmer wanted to discuss the matter further with Mr. Ward, that’s for sure.

Ben Muth: I saw that hit too. Happened on third down, just a really dumb play, that's gonna cost Ward some money.

Rob Weintraub: Defensive holding. On a defensive lineman. On a run. With 3.5 minutes left. Pass interference. When the covering linebacker didn't touch or otherwise impede the receiver, and the ball was five yards over his head. Unnecessary roughness on a safety for tackling a tight end who had just made a reception. No blow to the head. Nothing late. Just a collision tackle.

I hate to complain about the refs, and lord knows Cincy had its chances to win regardless, but these three ridiculous calls cost the Bengals the game. The roughness set up a FG at the end of the half. The interference kept a drive alive that became a TD. And the worst of all, the holding on Pat Sims for the crime of getting shoved out of the play, allowed Cleveland to run out the clock. Simply maddening, especially as Palmer finally looked like an NFL quarterback, and TO was a mismatch all day against the smaller Browns corners. He is now the oldest player to go over 200 yards receiving in a game, and is number two all time on the receiving yards list.

Cincinnati still has red zone issues, still allow too many completions to the tight end, still have protection problems on the right side. But the Bengals should have won this game, and instead lose in the division for the first time since 2008. To the hated Browns, who still stink. Ugh.

Detroit Lions 26 at Green Bay Packers 28

Doug Farrar: Play about halfway through the first quarter shows how the Lions just aren’t … there yet. Kyle Vanden Bosch jumps early, so Aaron Rogers knows he has a free play. Green Bay receivers go deep vertical on the left side, and Donald Driver takes to the middle of the field. There are no Lions defenders anywhere near Driver, and it’s a 48-yard completion. I mean, nobody. Looked like 7-on-7 out there.

Tom Gower: In the first 48 minutes of the game, the Green Bay Packers have run 25 plays from scrimmage. They're currently leading 28-26 after the Lions make their 4th field goal of the afternoon.

Elias Holman: I had the pleasure of attending the game at Lambeau today with my five-year-old, which meant I was a a bit distracted, but it was fun to see the game through his eyes. Overall, I'm starting to have some serious doubts about the GB offense. It seems like they can only move the ball and score in chunks of yardage, and they have had a lot of trouble sustaining drives and moving down the field in increments. They have been lucky to put enough points on the board in this big plays to get some wins, but if you can stop the big pass plays, they simply cannot move the ball effectively right now. I wonder if they will start relying on Kuhn more often after seeing how they were able to sustain that drive at the very end to hold the lead feeding him the ball, but I also hope they can figure out why Brandon Jackson continues to be so inconsistent. The defense seemed to be just the opposite, preventing big plays but giving up 5-10 yd runs and passes over and over, and allowing third down conversion after third down conversion, and of course, special teams continues to be atrocious.

On the flip side, I came away very impressed with the Lions, and maybe a lot of my observations about the Packers can be attributed to the quality coaching and playcalling on the other side of the ball. It seemed like on every play there was a receiver running free, and every blitz was anticipated and countered with good pickups, a screen play, or a run away from the pressure. The defense all but shut down the Packers for the entire second half. Their biggest problem was settling for field goals or this game could have easily been 42-28 or worse. I am definitely not looking forward to the game at Ford Field.

Doug Farrar: The Lions are coming up from seven years under the worst personnel executive in the world history of sports, but they’ve had two stellar drafts in a row under new management. They’re definitely putting things together, and you can see flashes of greatness from different places. Unfortunately, you’ll just as surely see equal amounts of fail at the worst possible times. This is not a team other teams will enjoy facing over the next few seasons.

Seattle Seahawks 3 at St. Louis Rams 20

Doug Farrar: Note to the Seattle Seahawks: If you’re going to re-implement something from the Mike Holmgren days, why must it be The Walrus’ two-minute clock management and play-calling? For the second week in a row, Seattle leaves points on the board near the end of the half – last week with an ill-times quarterback draw, and this week with a really stupid fake field goal that looked like a designed run play for punter/holder Jon Ryan.

Oh, and Pete Carroll has borrowed Mike Martz’s tinfoil hat for his challenges today.

Vince Verhei: Seattle's constant reliance on cute plays is really starting to frustrate me. Late in the first, they hit a Michael Robinson-to-Leon Washington double pass to set up a long field goal attempt. Then instead of a 51-yard field goal, they run a fake field goal with Jon Ryan running a sweep. I thought at first it was a pass play with blown blocking, but John Carlson was downfield looking to block someone, not catch a pass. Rams take advantage of the field position and add a last- second field goal to go up 10-3 at halftime.

Doug Farrar: Bad day for the Seahawks. Not only do they get clowned by the Rams, but T.J. Houshmandzadeh scored the winning touchdown for the Ravens against the Steelers today, and Seattle is still paying $6 million of his 2010 salary. Housh was the only person who has worn a Seahawks uniform this season who actually scored a touchdown today.

This Seahawks team was the one I initially feared I would see under Pete Carroll. Strategically outmatched, prone to resorting to gimmicks just for the sake of it, and clueless when it comes to time and game management. I have been more impressed with the coaching staff than I first expected, but this is a worrisome loss. And that’s not to take anything from the Rams – their victory over the Redskins last week was just as legit as this one.

Ladies and gentlemen, the St. Louis Rams are your NFC West leaders. And they’re already won more games than they did last year.

Indianapolis Colts 28 at Jacksonville Jaguars 31

Will Carroll: Wow, David Garrard just ran an option for a touchdown. It was as simple an option as I've ever seen in the NFL. Naturally, the Colts didn't have a damn clue what to do with it.

Tom Gower: The top QB-WR combos by yardage in NFL history: 1. Peyton Manning-Marvin Harrison 2. Peyton Manning-Reggie Wayne

Bill Barnwell: Clint Session just timed a third-and-1 snap count perfectly and leaped over the line and would've been able to give David Garrard a jumping neckbreaker...but Garrard just ran the sneak to the left and picked up a first down. Had he timed the snap count wrong, he would've bounced off Garrard's back while Garrard was under center.

Huge swing in the Jaguars-Colts game. Peyton Manning throws a pick that would just about end the game, but Derek Cox bumbles around and drops it after about five steps. Then the Jaguars big blitz on fourth-and-10 and the Colts hit Dallas Clark against soft zone coverage for a big gain. Manning rushes them to the line and Reggie Wayne runs past David Jones on a go route to get the Colts inside the 10. Oh, and then Derek Cox goes down on with an injury and the Jags are forced to take a timeout.

Aaron Schatz: I've mostly been watching the Eagles-Redskins game, so does anyone know what on earth happened in this Colts-Jaguars game? How did the Jaguars actually stay close with the Colts all day? We just watched the Colts make their game-tying drive and the Jags' defense looked as porous as always. Derek Cox was so bad at one corner that they've benched him for David Jones, who was Cincinnati's dime back last year. Jones is covering Reggie Wayne. Wayne is going off. Last year, Cox covered Wayne and Wayne went off. What happened to "Rashean Mathis, Pro Bowl cornerback?" Shouldn't he perhaps be covering Reggie Wayne?

Will Carroll: Turnovers. And a 59-yard kick by Scobee. Wow.

Tom Gower: After 4 weeks of the 2010 NFL regular season, the Indianapolis Colts are in last place in the AFC South. I have no more to say than that.

Houston Texans 31 at Oakland Raiders 24

Bill Barnwell: Arian Foster benched because of a "coach's decision". This is why the Texans can't have nice things.

Tom Gower: It's been an offensive showdown early in O-town, as both teams have moved the ball well. Slaton looks better than he has since '08, and the Raiders are just getting it done with their bailing wire offense of McFadden, some Bush, and Gradkowski doing what he does -- converting third and fourth down on an zone read option keeper and then finishing off the drive with a simple fullback flat pass on third-and-short to exploit the Texans' short area coverage problems thanks to a Zach Miller pick.

Query: is anybody else as annoyed as I am by all these rub routes? Am I just noticing them more, or does it really seem like they're more prevalent than they used to be? I know they kind of addressed it with the umpire move, but I wonder if that could be something the Competition Committee takes a look at in the next couple years.

A Raiders' promising drive at the end of the first half is snuffed out when Mario Williams destroys Langston Walker and strips Gradkowski. The Texans have some success moving down the field, but Rackers hits the upright from 46. Other notes: Jacoby Jones would be a good receiver if he could actually catch the ball. Matt Schaub seems to be running around a lot from pressure. Joel Dreessen is looking like a much more viable receiving option than I thought he was, which may say more about the Raiders' coverage units. The Raiders seem to primarily be matching up Asomugha with Kevin Walter.

Gradkowski got smoked by Pollard on a very hard hit on a failed third down scramble. Campbell was warming on the sidelines, but Bruce came back in on the next possession ... and immediately threw an interception. Really bad read, tip was by the underneath defender who was in the passing lane.

What is up with the Texans and fourth quarters? They were comfortably in control of this game at 31-14, but the Raiders drive the field and it's 31-21. Another quick defensive stop, and it's 31-24. Another defensive stop, and the Raiders have the ball at their own 25 with 3:03 left and a chance to tie the game.

Tom Gower: Bruce Gradkowski: a kind of marginal intentional grounding on second down, incomplete for DHB on 3rd down, and Louis Murphy drops it on 4th down. Zach Miller had a huge game, abusing the Texans' safeties and linebackers in coverage, but it wasn't enough.

Vince Verhei: What's up with Houston is that their offense is capable of scoring on anyone at any time, but their pass defense is so miserably bad that anyone can score on them at any time from anywhere. Raiders had a fourth-and-16 on their last drive and Gradkowski hit Murphy for what should have been a conversion, but the ball bounced off Murphy's chest and was intercepted. They got a lucky break.

They're 3-1, but it's an unimpressive 3-1. That seems to be the story of the league this year, how every team has obvious, glaring faults. Somebody is going to win the Super Bowl by default.

I think the lack of great teams is part of the reason. Colts lose on a 59-yard field goal at the gun -- who cares? Even with Peyton, it's hard to call a team with that defense a Super Bowl favorite. The whole day just felt like a bunch of mediocre teams repeatedly falling behind each other.

Sean McCormick: And the Jets strangling a chicken.

Aaron Schatz: I don't know. Is that defense really any different than past years? Sometimes they're okay at stopping the run. Sometimes they suck at it. But basically, same defense. I think they're still a major Super Bowl contender, 2-2 or no 2-2.

Bill Barnwell: I don't know if I'm with you guys on the "There are no Super Bowl contenders" page. The Falcons are 3-1, and while they've needed two game-winning field goals to do it, their one loss is to arguably the best team in the AFC, the Steelers, who haven't played a single game with their starting quarterback yet and nearly won with Charlie freaking Batch today. The Jets lost a game to one of the other teams in that top tier by one point and otherwise have been pretty great, and that's been without their best player for two weeks.

Mike Kurtz: I agree with Barnwell. Also, while Tennessee and Denver may not be Super Bowl contenders, the game at least seems like it was interesting and exciting.

Also, at the risk of sounding like a giant homer, Steelers-Ravens is a blowout if Roethlisberger played. Batch had so many great opportunities both downfield and over the middle and completely squandered them.

Tom Gower: I don't know what you people are talking about. Steelers-Ravens was a defensive slugfest between two very good teams that went down to the final two minutes, Titans-Broncos went down to the final two minutes and was close throughout, Falcons and Saints both scored late to win closer than expected games, and in the late block, Raiders were driving for a tie with less than two minutes left, the Eagles had a drop on a Hail Mary that would have won the game, and the Jaguars beat the Colts on a 59-yard field goal with no time left right after a dropped pick and after the Colts tied the game with less than a minute left. I was pretty entertained today.

Now, are there any great teams? I'm not sure. If Roethlisberger comes back and plays at a pretty high level, then Pittsburgh almost certainly will be if they avoid devastating defensive injuries.

Aaron Schatz: I don't think this year is that much different than any other year. Yes, there are not one or two dominant early teams, but even those dominant early teams usually have weaknesses. Last year, for example, the Colts and Saints were great teams but they had weaknesses. (Oddly, opposing weaknesses -- the Colts couldn't run and the Saints couldn't stop the run.) Not only are there definitely strong teams out there, but I still think the Colts are one of them. The Colts lost by three on the road against a division opponent. This is not a sign that they are suddenly mediocre.

Arizona Cardinals 10 at San Diego Chargers 41

Ben Muth: The Cardinals strategy of manning linebackers up with Antonio Gates hasn't been great so far. But it's still early, maybe Paris Lenon will get significantly better in pass coverage as the game goes on.

Aaron Schatz: I don't know if there's one linebacker in the league who can man up with Antonio Gates, but there certainly isn't one on Arizona.

Vince Verhei: Chargers are ahead 38-7 in the fourth quarter, and Philip Rivers is not only still in the game, he is still throwing passes. Why?

Washington Redskins 17 at Philadelphia Eagles 12

Mike Tanier: The boos down in booville just made a strange sound. It wasn't a boo, but something quite loud. It sounded like cheers, these fans so demanding. They started to cheer! They really were standing!

Bill Barnwell: But then the Eagles fans booed when McNabb took the field.

Mike Tanier: Vick is slow to get up. Kolb got polite applause. This is more polite applause than I have ever heard in this city.

Even McNabb couldn't overthrow all of the wide-open receivers streaking through the Eagles secondary. My God, now I'm doing it.

Aaron Schatz: LeSean McCoy looks excellent right now for Philadelphia. Really doing a great job with vision, weaving through guys. Scary moment when he seemed to suffer a knee injury, but it was just a helmet hitting his knee, painful but not a tear or anything, and he was soon back in the game.

Mike Tanier: Yep, Shady's back. Tell a friend. Kolb settled down a little and threw a few checkdowns. McCoy made plays for him in space. This game simply stopped with 0:23 left in the half. I don't think I have seen a play in 20 minutes.

Mike Kurtz: Troy Aikman is seriously considering that the officials should have stopped the clock because Andy Reid wanted to ask them a question, after the time out period. And then calling it some kind of league-wide officiating epidemic.

Thankfully, they cut to Pereira, who tells Aikman he's completely full of it. Best hire ever.

Aaron Schatz: That booth review with 23 seconds left in the first half is the longest review challenge I've ever seen in my life.

Mike Kurtz: Aikman and Buck still yakking about the play clock. I actually didn't see Reid try to call a timeout, but that's kind of irrelevant. Aikman's thesis seems to be that Reid should be given unlimited to time derp at the refs over the result of the replay (claiming that knowing why the spot changed would change the play call, which is absolutely absurd because the only important question is where the ball is, not why it's there), because he feels like it, and that shouldn't eat up any clock. It doesn't even make sense, and despite being told point-blank by the guy his network hired SPECIFICALLY to be the ultimate authority on officiating why his theory made no sense, he's still going on about it.

Mike Tanier: After that three-hour challenge, Reid REALLY should have just had a play ready.

Aaron Schatz: You know, for all the Vick Vick Vick before this game, I think the story here is the Eagles defense. It is not playing well. They're giving up a lot of yards to Portis, and some big catches to a variety of receivers. This is not good when you play a team that doesn't actually have a variety of *good* receivers. Ernie Sims with a stupid roughing the passer penalty just for extra fun.

Bill Barnwell: Donovan McNabb threw three passes on that drive that should have been intercepted. Only the third one was picked.

Mike Tanier: Yeah, but then Kolb was incapable of finding any underneath receivers, many of which were open. He now just looks at DeSean Jackson and panicks, though he seemed a little calmer before halftime than on the first drive of the third quarter.

Aaron Schatz: My god, another replay taking forever in the Eagles-Redskins game. Is Alberto Riveron always like this?

Mike Tanier: Asante Samuel is now hurt. Soon, Chase Utley will find a way to get injured in this game.

Oh no. Kolb thinks he's Vick. He's running on every play. Diving head first, He just threw an underhanded pass. It's like he's the little brother imitating the big brother to get attention.

BTW, I love the fact that's 17-6, but in the second half the Eagles have completely abandoned the run, running only on 1st-and-20 type situations. LeSean McCoy has been playing well. The pass rush is teeing off. Reid just keeps passing.

Bill Barnwell: Oh wow. That's a dropped pass on a Hail Mary. We don't see that very often.

Mike Tanier: Final thoughts on McNabb's Return:

What I learned today was that the fans who actually go to games are different from the fans who call radio shows, post on the fan blogs, and complain around the water cooler. The ticket-holder fans invests thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours in the home team. These fans experience real joy -- lifestyle-defining, family-and-friends, life-enriching pleasure -- when the home team is playing well and every Sunday has a celebration quality. These fans "get it:" all the tough-guy talk about "one winner and 31 losers" is neither realistic nor fulfilling.

So the fans that walk into Lincoln Financial Field are much more like FO readers or FO writers than all the people who make most of the noise on the radio or in the lunchroom. They recognize what McNabb did, week after week and year after year. They can mock his overthrows and root against him while at the same time appreciating how much fun he gave them over 11 years.

I guess I should know all that, but it's easy to get sucked into floatsam and jetsam attitudes, not just from the radio guys but from casual fans and non-fans, the Aunt Ginny types who glom onto negativity hovering in the zeitgeist. Real fans still love the Sundays, love the games, and love the players, and they don't let the loudmouths convince them not to. Thank heavens.

Chicago Bears 3 at New York Giants 17

Bill Barnwell: By my count, four different Bears blockers blew blocks on that sack of Jay Cutler on the opening series.

Tom Gower: I've defended Cutler a lot against criticism, and I think Jaws was a bit overaggressive in attributing none of his picks last year to the offensive line difficulties, but that first quarter pick by Terrell Thomas was about as bad a read as you'll see this season.

Bill Barnwell: Boy howdy, does Cutler look terrible so far. Of course, you'll have to direct me to the universe where Greg Olsen can block Osi Umenyiora so I can ask Mike Martz what he was thinking.

Doug Farrar: Cutler’s a weird cat. I think Jaws was looking at him strictly mechanically, which you can’t really do or you’ll just drive yourself insane. He throws off his back foot all the time, which the cardinal sin at his position … but he’s really, really good at it. He’s been that way since his early Denver days, when he would be almost falling backward out of pressure and still throw a perfect 50-yard air dart to Eddie Royal or whoever. I have never seen him look comfortable on short throws, though. Those little out patterns like the Thomas pick was – I don’t know. It seems as if something in his body rebels against those throws . Bill Lee used to say that he was incapable of throwing a pitch the same way twice, and that’s probably why he was more effective with coaches who understood his idiosyncrasies and worked around them. I think Cutler’s that same type of person – he balks at simple, repeatable stuff but will do harder things that just blow your mind.

Mike Kurtz: Imagine what the Bears could be doing with Orton, Martz, and two draft picks!

Doug Farrar: I don’t think Orton is a Martz guy at all.

Tom Gower: The problem wasn't really the throw-it was a little ahead of the intended receiver (Olsen, I think) but not awful. It was the read-he simply didn't see Thomas or if he did he completely ignored his presence. I mean, I'll do that sort of thing but that's one of the many, many reasons I'm not qualified to be an NFL quarterback.

Mike Kurtz: I was mostly joking. Then again, I don't really think Cutler is, either. And unwillingness to be coached out of some of his bad tendencies really does not help.

Okay, apparently Cutler is not longer interested in throwing the ball. I'm not entirely sure this isn't some kind of postmodern performance art exhibition.

Bill Barnwell: The Giants have apparently employed several sentries with the Hallucination technique.

The Giants are really showing off some impressive coverage tonight. Cutler has nothing to throw at, and while he's holding onto the ball too long, he's picking up coverage sacks.

Mike Tanier: So... Cutler didn't see Ross blitzing, though he looked right at him? And he didn't see that Earl Bennett was uncovered?

Bill Barnwell: The psionic storm is powerful.

Aaron Schatz: Is Winston Justice playing in this game and I didn't notice? How on earth did this line manage to protect Cutler against Green Bay and Dallas? It can't be as simple as "hey, they know how to block against 3-4 defenses."

I thought that a couple of the sacks were coverage sacks at first -- Corey Webster in particular has had really good coverage tonight -- but by the end of the second half it was just total constant protection disintegration.

Mike Kurtz: I think it's all three. The coverage was great early, which let them get to Cutler, which spooked Cutler, which made him slow and amplified the protection issues, until you get near the end of the half and there are open or semi-open receivers and Cutler isn't even looking at them because he's immediately curling into the fetal position every snap.

Ahmad Bradshaw fumbles at the 1-yard line.

Bill Barnwell: Oh, my lord. What an ugly, stupid football game.

Aaron Schatz: The Bears are stuck with a seventh-round rookie, J'Marcus Webb, over at right tackle. Last year he was playing at West Texas A&M. Barry Cofield just threw him aside like a rag doll to force a hurry.

Mike Kurtz: Looking at all the sacks in the montage, Cutler simply refused to move up in the pocket. He either ran backward or vertically. It's a flashback to the start of the Dallas game. When he did start moving up, he just held on so long and had zero pocket presence. It's like he was scared to even be out there.

This Is Commercial

Bill Barnwell: We were having the good commercial/bad commercial debate at my place today. Three notes:

  • I think we can all agree that the silly Russian accent guy in the DirecTV "Opulence, I has it" spot is a winner.
  • The AT&T commercial where the hipster says without batting an eye "I do like cool jams" is an early favorite for me just for that line. But I am weird.
  • The little boy covering the car in shampoo in the Nissan commercial, unfortunately, reminds me of a particularly unfortunate scene from Jackass.

Mike Kurtz: "I also like savings the money." Hell yes.

The new set of "bags fly free" commercials make me want to kill someone. I'm only being slightly hyperbolic.

Bill Barnwell: I agree. At the very least, it turns an advantage -- Southwest not charging for checking a bag -- into a disadvantage, since I would not want to fly Southwest because I find those commercials so obnoxious.

Elias: At the stadium, they played that Droid commercial that is supposed to demonstrate the movie playback quality, so the guy is sitting at an office desk late at night watching The Bourne Identity on this tiny screen and I always find myself asking, "why did you stay late at work just to watch movies on your phone? Why not go home and watch it on a regular TV? Shouldn't you be working?"


182 comments, Last at 06 Oct 2010, 4:53am

1 Cutler

Cutler was likely playing with a concussion from very early in the game. It's likely why he didn't see open guys, and generally looked like he was dazed and confused - it's because he was.

The sack they kept on showing on replay was likely his 2nd concussion. Earlier in the game after a sack he got up dazed and started to go to the Giants sideline. He was totally out of it after that point.

When he's right he will still typically make some dumb throws into tight coverage, but he doesn't usually miss reads on open guys, and just hold the ball staring at them.

6 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Mac32 (not verified)

Agreed. I didn't see the play where he started to go to the Giant's sideline, but I did notice that he was making mental errors that he hadn't been making this season. I thought it was just a case of pressure-induced yips, but it's pretty scary to think that he got hit a half-dozen times after he was already concussed.

Caleb Hanie is probably good enough to beat the Steve Smith-less Panthers, but the Bears have no chance if Cutler has to miss significant time.

14 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Charles Jake (not verified)

Somebody on the Bears' coaching staff has got to be responsible for noticing that and pulling him from the game. I was actually terrified for him on those last dropbacks of the half - he was staggering like a drunkard, and it looked like he was ready to simply collapse.

It is scary to think about how many hits he took after a concussion.

19 Re: Cutler

In reply to by mac32 (not verified)

It'll be interesting to see if any visuals turn up, and if so will The Bears get the same treatment as The Eagles (i.e. get villified in the press for one news cycle and then forgotten).

131 Re: Cutler

In reply to by mac32 (not verified)

Given Martz's track record of noticing QB injuries, it's hardly surprising, at least on his end.

In Warner's last start for the Rams, he got concussed in the first quarter and stumbled around in a fog for the rest of the game, very similarly to Cutler.

17 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Charles Jake (not verified)

It's scary to me to think that nobody on the Bears coaching staff would pick up on their qb suffering a concussion. It will be interesting to see what is said about the matter this week. I could see an NFL organization being, well, less than forthcoming, about when their highly paid qb first was concussed.

31 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Will Allen

So, does the fact that he kept going in there mean he's tough? Or was he lacking the good judgement to pull himself from the game because of the previous concussion(s)?

34 Re: Cutler

In reply to by peterplaysbass

Oh, I think Cutler is plenty tough; I couldn't believe how quickly he shook off the helmet to the jaw shot he took last week. Guys cannot be expected to self-diagnose brain injuries, and subsequently exercise good judgement. One would hope that a coaching staff earning many millions of dollars would exercise some powers of observation and good judgement.

37 Re: Cutler

In reply to by peterplaysbass

These are not mutually exclusive.

51 Re: Cutler

In reply to by peterplaysbass

I hope that's a snarkjoke. You can't expect someone with a concussion to have good judgment on anything, that's why if he had one early on, this was a system and team failure. No way he should have been out there had he already had one, and it wasn't Cutler's responsibility to take himself out.

103 Re: Cutler

In reply to by tunesmith

Agreed. It's often difficult for someone who's had a concussion to recognize their own dulled senses and jumbled judgment. That's why it's called a brain injury.

11 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Mac32 (not verified)

Oops. If this post had been up when I wrote my post, I wouldn't have written mine. Anyway, I agree - Cutler's bizarre decisions and dazed body language made me wonder if he got concussed earlier in the game.

123 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Mac32 (not verified)

I reviewed the 9 Cutler sacks, and I'd say that 4 were primarily a protection problem, 4 were primarily on Cutler, and 1 was primarily a coverage sack. Here they are in order, from the play-by-play:

1st quarter
13:36 3-10 Umenyiora
6 block, 4 rush plus Tuck spies & comes late
Primarily a protection problem. Cutler made a 7-step drop, but as soon as he got back there the pocket was collapsing as Jason Pierre-Paul was coming around the offensive right side. Cutler tried to step up, but Umenyiora was right there coming up the middle, and Tuck was also closing in.

10:11 1-10 Canty
6 block, 4 rush
Another protection problem on a 7-step drop. Tuck came around the offensive right side and Canty broke through up the middle, giving Cutler no time and nowhere to move to evade the rush.

2nd quarter
14:27 3-07 Umenyiora (fumble)
7 block, 4 rush
Primarily protection, and Cutler may have been a split second too slow to get rid of it. The Bears try a designed rollout with Cutler moving to the right, but Tuck comes flying around the offensive right side to contain him and keep him from continuing to the right, and Umenyiora comes all the way around from the offensive left side, quickly beating Olsen and getting to Cutler as he throws to force a fumble (caught by Kreutz).

11:25 1-10 Tuck (fumble)
7 block, 4 rush
Primarily on Cutler holding the ball too long, plus Manumaleuna let Tuck go right around him on the offensive right.

09:59 3-19 Umenyiora (fumble lost)
6 block, 4 rush
Primarily on Cutler holding the ball too long. Umenyiora came around the offensive left, but was forced wide and around. Cutler stepped up and clutched a couple times but didn't get rid of it, and Osi eventually got to him for the strip sack turnover.

07:05 2-07 Goff/Cofield (out of bounds)
8 block, 4 rush
This was on the coverage and Cutler. It was a three-step drop and supposed to be a quick slant, but a Giants defender jumped the route so Cutler held it, scrambled right, and went out of bounds.

06:26 3-09 Tuck
7 block, 4 rush
Primarily on Cutler, and not great protection. Cutler slips at the end of his 7-step drop, then resets his feet but doesn't throw. By then the pressure is there and he moves around in the pocket to try to avoid the rush but can't escape

05:07 1-10 Cofield
7 block, 4 rush
A protection problem. Cofield blew right by the center (Kreutz) and then the right guard (Louis) and came right at Cutler.

00:58 1-10 Ross
5 block, 5 rush
Cutler doesn't make the read. Bears go five wide, Ross blitzes from the slot on the offensive left and comes unblocked, Cutler doesn't see him and make the quick throw so he takes the sack. Not sure if someone on the OL was supposed to take the blitzer - perhaps the left tackle Omiyale?

128 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Dan

Thanks for the breakdown, that was very informative. Amazing how many protection problems the Bears had even with a TE or RB helping against four rushers.

136 Re: Cutler

In reply to by Dan

Wow, thanks for that breakdown. Nine sacks, and only the last one was an actual blitz.

Speaking of Martz, I distinctly recall wondering if Kurt Warner was going to survive this game during the St. Louis years.

2 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I don't think STL is currently the leaders in the NFC West (unless it comes down to a weird 3 Way Tie Breaker) since Arizona has the same record and beat them Head to Head

52 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I think you're right that Arizona is still technically on top. It would start as a 3-way tie-breaker looking at head-to-head among the three teams, but Seattle would get eliminated (being 0-1 while the other teams are 1-1) and then it would revert to head-to-head.

3 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I think Bill was playing Starcraft 2 when he was supposed to be watching the night game

4 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

GB notes-

That silly ‘freak’ defense of Capers’ never works. It just slows down the pass rush, and never seems to get a free guy going to the QB, or even a mismatch. More importantly, the blitzing in general is almost always counterproductive. All game (and this applied to the Bears game for the most part too) when GB blitzed, Hill found a TE –the LB, who usually never got near Hill, would let him go by unchecked and Hill would easily find him. The underneath was there all day for Detroit, and with two or three LBs rushing, the TE or RB would often have a lot of room to run before finding a defender. With the Pack’s struggles to cover the middle last year and this, and with a new safety, you’d think they’d try to cover for this. Instead, they’re trying to augment a pretty good 4-man pass rush way too often. I love me some blitzing, but it’s killing the Packers right now.

Also, GB can’t decide if they want to try to run or just bail on it, and they clearly don’t have confidence in Jackson, who is just as clearly much more able to make yardage on his own than Kuhn. It’s hurting their continuity on offense – they can’t decide if they want to cover for the lack of a running game by using more short stuff, but they’ve gotten away from the timing patterns, WR screens and conventional screens that allow them to turn short passes into long plays. The long passes were a broken coverage and an INT. Four games in, I don’t know what their offensive philosophy is, and after 4+ years, I’m still unimpressed with McCarthy’s play calling. Outstanding talent covers for a lot, though.

The penalty situation was better, and I hope McCarthy has stopped bitching about it and actually taken responsibility for it, i.e., threatening players with removal and/or healthy scratches, or whatever it takes. Let’s see them do it on the road now.

23 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I kept hearing Easterbrook in my head everytime the Packers big-blitzed and the TE or RB was WIDE OPEN. The DBs this year are improved and yet this strategy effectively takes that strength away by leaving the poor-covering LBs in pass coverage.

Personally I'd like to see more passing out of I and T formations, keep the defense guessing a bit. Jackson sucks, but facing contact behind the line of scrimmage will do that to anyone. The OL needs to man up and start run blocking. I know the guy is old, but it sure would be nice to have Ahman Green competing for some snaps like last year. (Or ANYONE at this point)

Playoffs are possible in current form, but beyond the first round will be impossible. The special teams nightmare (a 12 yard punt, two fumbled KRs), no running game, and soft pass coverage will doom them.

126 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Completely agreed about the defense. All out blitzes work once in a while, but if the offense sees them coming it invites disaster.

What I want to know is what happened to the play calling from when GB first added the 3-4 last year. When they opened against the Bears the play calling was beautiful, with almost no pass rush combination used more than once in the entire game. In that game the pressure was well disguised and didn't leave the secondary vulnerable.

GB needs to augment its D-line by moving Matthews around so that the right tackle can't just zero in on him, and by augmenting with at most one extra LB on most plays, and occasionally dropping Matthews into coverage to effectively create a zone blitz. Anything extra should be used very sparingly.

They also need to get Jackson more involved in the passing game. He's a better receiver than Grant was, so run a few screens with him and throw some checkdowns his way. Especially when playing with the lead. Taking deeps shots against single coverage is not really bad odds, but it's an unnecessary risk on first down when playing with the lead, and when the defense is already getting tired.

163 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

A lot of Packer fans are pushing for more screens. I think they need to practice them if they want to use them in a game situaiton. I saw one screen against the Lions and Rodgers pump faked the pass before he threw it. That kind of telegraphs what is going on.

I think there are many things that Rodgers does extremely well but it appears, based on the only screen I've seen them run this season, that screens are not one of them.

7 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Nice to see someone noticing that Sam Bradford looks like a budding star. Too bad none of the Seahawks Fans in the staff noticed.

He's still a rookie and the growing pains and bad games are inevitable, but this kid looks like he's really going to be something.

25 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I said last week, even if he doesnt improve he's still at the level of borderline starter. He's improved from last week. The pass on tge first TD was an absolute beauty. He does have a weird proclivity for throwing picks when he gets to start deep in opposition territory.

I think what impresses me most is his scrambling under pressure - he doesnt scramble, he starts running but all the time has his head up looking for the pass, and does a great job of throwing it away rather than taking sacks.

I'd like to see him against an elite defence (or allowed to throw deep every so often) though, but in 4 games he's basically guaranteed that he'll play pretty much all of his career besides maybe the last couple of years for the Rams.

Also, Danny Amendola made one of the best non-sideline catches I've ever seen. Low diving 1-hander.

77 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I don't know that I want to see him against an elite defense just yet. Eventually, but it may be a little soon for that test. He's still got some growing pains to take along the way. But he doesn't look like a rookie. Poised beyond his years. I just hope for the STL fans that they don't get him killed. That line is not playing anywhere close to its potential.

141 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I dunno, one on one the line is pretty decent. Saffold was excellent on Sunday, Smith was pretty good. The interior can handle themselves 3 on 2. They just kind of suck in blitz pickup, particularly when DBs come. I don't know who that is on, whether its Bradford, in which case its something the rookie isn't looking at, or its Jason Smith, in which case its a veteran center not doing his job properly.

I think I'd just like to see him against an elite D just to stop the words "Peyton Manning as a rookie" trying to sneak themselves into so many sentences.

8 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Could someone please explain why, if the Head Referee, Alberto Riveron in this case, announces the play stands as called, the ball gets re-spotted? If it stands, it stands, spot and all, right? Is this a problem with the nomenclature? I have come to expect clock management issues when watching the Eagles play, but I honestly think some common sense has to come into play here. I am giving Reid and (ugh) Troy the benefit of the doubt. Why they hell did the ball move? The 1-foot line is completely different than the 1-yard line.

(I am perfectly willing to admit, some homerism may have come into play in the preceding rant. That notwithstanding, I would still appreciate some clarification anyone could provide on why the ball can be moved if the ruling on the field stands.)

28 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Because the subject of the review was not the spot of the ball. The review is over the result of the play, which is a separate consideration. As Pereira noted in one of his spots yesterday, it's actually two separate portions of the review: up to a minute to determine whether the ruling was correct (and if not, what the ruling should be), then an indeterminate period to figure out where the spot is. Despite the line judges' skill at spotting the ball, it is much more art than science, so if there is a review, the league wants to use the opportunity of the replay and the play stoppage to get the spot as precise as possible.

74 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

The reason Andy and everyone were pissed, however, was the fact that the ball moved between the beginning and end of the timeout. Once the challenge was done, then the Eagles called timeout. At that point, the ball should've been set, done, never touched. But it was - it was moved back somewhere between when the timeout was called and when it ended.

Kolb: When they came back and said he didn't get in they placed the ball at a certain spot. We had a play call with that spot. And then they moved the ball back...

That's why Aikman was pissed. He saw them move the ball, and from that time until when the play clock started running down was much shorter than what he would've expected, because it was during the timeout.

I also call complete bull on them moving the ball backwards at all. There was no video whatsoever which showed the ball's position when his knee went down - the spot on the field should've been what they went with.

78 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

So the spot of the ball can move independent of the review result and inches can become a yard. If this results from a coaching decision to challenge a call, that is a risk the HC must be willing to take. In this instance, Reid was completely at the mercy of the booth review. I understand the mechanism, but the review is supposed to be unobtrusive to the flow of the game. To allow the officiating crew 5+ minutes to determine the ruling and the spot and give a head coach no time or explanation to adjust to a re-spot of the ball is inequitable.

I may be grousing, but the whole situation has left a foul taste in my mouth.

9 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Once again Nate Clements kills his team's chances at a victory by trying to do more than what was necessary. I still can't get over how stupid he was back in the 2004 opener against Jacksonville, when he could have ended the game by knocking down a desperation 4th down throw. Instead, he went for the interception and ended up surrendering the completion. Jacksonville kept the drive alive and ended up winning at the end of regulation. And of course the Bills finished the season a game behind in the wild card standings.

24 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

The best part of the Nate Clements play is that Roddy White did the same thing to Dre Bly when the Falcons and 49ers played last year. Maybe Roddy can coach the defense up on forcing fumbles?

92 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Ouch that hurts, being reminded of Bly last year. Someone needs to teach 49er CBs Basic Football Situation Awareness. Of course, if we can sneak in like a dozen other courses too we might work.

20 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I didn't see the game... how many timeouts did Atlanta have when Clements intercepted the ball?

With over 1 minute to go and clinging to a 1 point lead, trying to score the TD after an INT is defensible if the opposing team still has multiple timeouts. Of course, Clements is still a goat because ball security is even more important than the TD (I imagine if he had merely got tackled short of the endzone, SF could have burned some clock and kicked a FG to go up by 4, but the real problem was fumbling).

On the other hand, if Atlanta had 1 or no timeouts, then simply kneeling down would have clinched the game for SF, in which case trying to run it back is unforgiveable.

124 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

In that case, Clements trying to score is defensible.

Again, I didn't see the game, but it sounded like the INT happened near midfield, or at least well out of SF FG range. Had he taken a knee after the INT, then it is highly likely that the Niners would have run into the line three times, that they would have been held to minimal gain all three times, and that a timeout would have been called after each. They then punt the ball away, and Atlanta gets it in almost the same situation.

In other words, Clements trying to run it back for the score but fumbling ended up giving Atlanta maybe 6 more seconds (plus all three timeouts), and the ball in the same situation that they probably would have anyway, had he just taken a knee. On the other hand, if he doesn't fumble, or if the fumble goes out of bounds or gets recovered by the Niners, then the Niners worst case consume those seconds and timeouts AND get a FG to go up by 4 instead of 1, and best case gets the TD to ice the game.

169 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

6 seconds? For three plays and a punt? That's some remarkable speed. I would think 20-25 seconds would be more reasonable. 20 fewer seconds and no timeouts make the Atlanta chances for scoring much lower. I don't disagree with the decision to try and score either but I think you may be undervalueing the cost of that fumble. Oh, and a touchdown (assuming they kick the EP) doesn't really ice the game. If he scores Atlanta gets the ball back needing a touchdown and a 2 point conversion to tie (but having all three timeouts and reasonaable time left).

181 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

It was pathetic. He made no attempt whatsoever at ball security. You just have to have holding the ball as some kind of priority, but he was hotdogging it completely, holding it out in his left hand untucked. I suspect this play will be symbolic of the 49ers season. That, and the dropped punt vs. NO that somehow stayed in bounds vs. all laws of physics.

And I know I'm gonna sound like a cranky old man of 42, but frankly, game situation awareness is greatly declined from my youth. I'm pretty sure players of say the 80s, would knock down 4th down passes instead of trying to pick them when the game was in hand with a stop. Nowadays, you're just as likely to see a lateral on the runback.

If Singletary hadn't already overplayed his motivational hand, I would sit the chump (Clements) for a quarter. But he's probably losing the team as is.

10 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Re: Cutler
His play was so bad - not just bad, but weird - that I wonder if he wasn't concussed earlier in the half. I now the announcers said it happened on the play just before halftime where he hit his head, but man...those shots off him staring blankly into the middle distance on the sideline plus his flat-out strange non-decisions on the field - it made me think he might have not been all there for most of the second quarter.

If only the Chicago o-line had that excuse!

I did like Collinsworth's line after a Giants fumble in the first half: "Goodness gracious, somebody get a tent for this circus."

13 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

There obviously isn't a NFC North team without very significant flaws. Yes, the NFL is a passing league. No, that doesn't mean being unable to run, or unwilling to try to run, is insignificant. The Bears have a pretty good defense, although the Vikings, if their corners get back to health, probably will be better. The Vikings passing game is a mess, and we saw the Bears play kill the quarterback last night, with the quarterback's help. I still think the Packers are in danger of giving up massive numbers of yards and points.

Lions fans, know hope. I don't think it is impossible for the Lions to contend for division next year.

15 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

31-7 Jets. Two touchdowns Dustin Keller. Once again, points for Bill Barnwell, who pointed out last week that the Bills defense can't stop tight ends when Paul Posluszny is out.

Posluszny played Sunday.

On an unrelated note, I watched the Giants-Bears game online with SNF Extra. The cable-cam view was pretty sweet, since it was usually zoomed out enough to show the entire secondary pre-snap.

(I also like the Eagles)

16 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Someone with more experience with line play will probably correct everything I saw but it looks like the Titans DL knew the snap count on every play. They were half way across the line before Orton even got out from under center. Half the time, it seemed, the Broncos' center was flying backwards from the rush of the DTs.

The Broncos seems to have problems with Titans stunts. I saw a handful of plays where Clady clocked the DE into the OG only to have scramble as a DT came around him. He had a holding call or two because of that.

138 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

On one of those plays, Clady was held by the DE, so he couldn't get off to get the DT. Of course, the official missed the defensive holding, but called the Clady for holding instead, which he did indeed do.

18 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Last night was classic Martz, no doubt exacerbated by the Bears not having Chris Williams.

26 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Nah, even Martz conceded that his offensive line was completely overmatched. Some of those sacks came with seven guys pass blocking. Classic Martz behaves as if using more than five to pass block is illegal.

45 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I only watched the second half sporadically, but it seemed the protection was better. Did Coughlin call off the dogs, or did the Bears finally try something that worked? If the latter, it's still an indictment of the coaching staff for not making those changes when the franchise was still under center.

50 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I may be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure the Bears were using seven man protection schemes, against four rushers, on some of the first half Cutler sacks. When seven are blocking four, the qb should not be getting concussed, which either means the blocking was horrible, or the qb is holding the ball too long. It'd be interesting to see the all 22 tape with a stopwatch.

69 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

In this day and age where their are websites that chart the speed of every pitch including it's movement in fractions of inches, you would think there would be a site that listed every sack and key stats like:

- how long it took
- how many blockers
- how many rushers

73 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Yeah, football is still just light years, or parsecs, behind baseball, in terms of easy to find measurements of what the teams are doing. Unless one is observing swaggerness, of course. Then, football rulz, man.

147 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I do chart each sack and how long it took and how many rushers for the season. I posted over at fanhouse (see link above) about the Bears' problems. By my count the sacks came at 3, 2.7, 3.3, 3.2, 3.4, 6.5, 4.7. 2.3 and 2.5 seconds. The median sack in the NFL comes at 2.7 seconds, so the majority of sacks came when Cutler held the ball longer than normal. That's not a surprise--11 of his 17 sacks this season have come when he holds the ball for 3 seconds or more. And he was third in the NFL in sack of 3+ seconds last year.

82 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I think at halftime they decided their primary goal in the 2nd half was to not get sacked. Actually moving the ball and scoring points appeared to be a secondary consideration.

In all seriousness, of course they had to change their game plan but I don't think they took more than a three-step drop or threw the ball more a few yards in the air until Hanie came in down two touchdowns in garbage time. While the first half was comical, the second half wasn't better--just less obviously embarrassing. It felt like they had about a 2% chance to mount a TD drive.

22 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

"Oh but wait, there's more. Baltimore lines up for the play now, to go for it. And PITTSBURGH takes a timeout. You know, a timeout that they might need if Baltimore scores, so that they have the time to come back down the field for a game-winning drive. Let's see... they saw Baltimore line up and decided they wanted a defense to counter that formation. OK, sure, but what if Baltimore comes out in a different formation?

AAARRGGGHHHH. This kind of timeout wasting silliness MAKES ME SO ANGRY.


You do realize its much more important that you pick the right play, and actually score, than that you conserve the timeout, right? (in Baltimore's case... in Pitt, the opposite)

89 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

No it isn't, they should have used 40 seconds figuring out their play because it's more important to be able to stop the other team from using 40 seconds than using 40 seconds yourself. Right? I mean, what sort of crazy notion are you believing, that time is fungible?

27 Commercials

Also a big fan of the DirecTV opulence commercial.

I am running out of invective to describe to describe how OFFENSIVELY AWFUL the new Burger King campaign is, but it cannot be understated. It's an apocalypse of bad taste. A crime against nature. A holocaust of kitsch. It is Anti-Life.

36 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

Couldn't agree more. Needs. To. Be. Stopped.

Also, what's with the Coors Light aluminum pint thing? In no way does the advert explain to me what is good about an aluminium bottle. Anyone care to enlighten me?

81 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mr Shush

Aluminum Bottles are lighter than glass bottles, which reduces the cost to ship packaged beer to market. I think they're also cheaper to make than glass bottles. Aluminum bottles can be sold in stadiums and arenas, where glass is prohibited. Of course, aluminum cans have all of these advantages over glass bottles, too. Not many advantages for consumers, but my experience leads me to believe that the typical consumer of Coors Light doesn't care very much about whether the packaging improves his overall experience.

97 Re: Commercials

Those who actually choose to drink their beer at 34 degrees aren't going to be concerned with taste. You can't taste anythign at that temperature. Even Miller isn't quite as wretched if you serve it cold enough that you can't taste it.

100 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Tracy

Light causes beer to skunk, so beer in glass bottles goes bad much faster than beer in cans or kegs or aluminum bottles.

102 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Wikitorix (not verified)

Yes, but if your beer is skunky, you can just mount an ad campaign where you claim that your beer has "more" taste, without ever stating that "more" does not necessarily coincide with "good."

153 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Wikitorix (not verified)

Not strictly light, but UV radiation, and brown glass does a pretty good job of filtering it out. Is it as good as aluminum? No, but to say beer in glass will skunk "much" faster than beer in a can is overstating the point a bit. In either package, the beer will undergo a lot more flavor changes than skunking in pretty much any condition besides direct sunlight.

Clear and green glass now, all bets are off.

168 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Overrated (not verified)

Miller uses tetra hops, which are chemically modified to prevent skunkage. So you can leave it on a sunny windowsill and it will still taste terrible.

(I also like the Eagles)

108 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Tracy

You left out the most important thing. An aluminum bottle is capable of launching itself into space. Although now that I think about it, the commercial does cover that point.

132 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified)

You guys are all my heroes. Since the Colts D sucked, reading other poeople's musings about bad beer is what passes for fun in my life.

143 Re: Commercials

you could have chosen the colts D over the chargers D in fantasy. terrible decision, I changed my mind on sunday on a hunch. terrible decision. -1 versus somewhere in the 20 range.

38 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

I like when the guy celebrates over his flaming flute after the solo, though.

I think the insurance commercials where the guy represents random, stupid things destroying your stuff are annoying. They don't quite work. And who wants to pay more for insurance that covers you destroying your own stuff because you're a moron? Terrible.

49 Re: Commercials

In reply to by peterplaysbass

I think the insurance commercials are highly effective. They say that there are other insane people doing stupid things that will leave you with the bill. The teenage girl one was particulary well done. It's funny, but it also scares the viewer into thinking any one of a million stupid teenage drivers could hit their car anytime they park it.

72 Re: Commercials

In reply to by tgt2 (not verified)

Yeah, the one about the teenage girl is a good example of others costing you money, but the one about they guy trying to fix his own satelite dish, doing a bad job, then being covered by insurance when it falls off his roof and hits is car? That's dumb. If I'm underwriting insurance and someone asks for a claim based on that scenario, I'd say "No, it's your own dumb fault. Why should everyone pay to cover a few who break their own stuff through negligence? That's what savings accounts are for."

But perhaps I'm taking it a tad too seriously.

87 Re: Commercials

In reply to by peterplaysbass

Well, you pay for that extra coverage. If you want coverage for your own dumb mistakes, you will pay a higher premium, as will everyone else who chooses that level of coverage.

44 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

A few notes on "Opulence", which I agree is brilliant.

Behind him at the start are dogs playing poker. One of them has an ace of spades.

The movie he has on screen - Twilight.

Music at the end - Tetris theme music.

58 Re: Commercials

Best understated part of "Opulence" - when female companion #2 casually passes - one-handed - the plate stacked with gold bars (with remote on top). Nice touch.

109 Re: Commercials

See, that part made me laugh the first time, but after that, I couldn't stop thinking "wait a second, there's no way she could hold a plate with gold bars like that! way too heavy!!"

110 Re: Commercials

In reply to by JS

Yeah, that always cracks me up too. She's deceptively strong.

118 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified)

De Russian vimin...strong like bull!!!

133 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Kevin from Philly

A bull reinforced with... what's Wolverine's skeleton made of? Adamantium?

59 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

Sidenote: Amusing that I have to go to youtube to watch this Burger King ad, and youtube makes me watch a Cheese-its ad in order to then watch the Burger King ad.

Oh, American advertising. You're so good at what you do.

63 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

I can't stand the new Miller-Lite campaign with the obnoxious bartenders. I will gladly watch two BK commercials in a row if I can get rid of the Miller-Lite crap.

112 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

Notice in the very beginning of the DirecTV commercial that there are dogs playing poker in the background. I lol'd.

113 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

The best commercial is the phone commercial (verizon?), where the Doctor is telling the player about his blown out knee.

142 Re: Commercials

In reply to by tuluse

Sadly, the first time I saw that commercial was the first commercial break after Connor Barwin blew out his knee in week 1. I didn't exactly care for it.

156 Re: Commercials

In reply to by theshadowj

re: offensiveness of Verizon knee ad: Agreed...

155 Re: Commercials

In reply to by Mark S. (not verified)

Burger King has ALWAYS had offensive commercials...syndrome goes back decades...I think their ad agency strives for obnoxiousness because the client demands it...

29 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Re: Bills-Jets:

Poz played yesterday, he was just invisible. We can't stop tight ends no matter who's playing, it's just more egregious when we're without Poz. Do the Bills have the worst Front Seven in the league?

Nobody circles the wagons like the Buffalo Bills.

30 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

BAL-PITT: Steelers final punt - isn't holding in the endzone a safety? There was absolutely no discussion about it by the referees or commentators.

42 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Began at the half yard line? Everytime a team is punting out of the endzone, they should hold everybody right off the line. What's the worst that can happen? Give up 10 yards on the return to guarantee no block and let the punter take his time and make a good kick.

I'd also like to see this 1/2 yard line. he looked to be in the endzone on tv. I liked how the announcers had no idea what Harbaugh was upset about.

p.s. captcha errors are exposing the underlying database structure. Something your webhost should probably fix.

47 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Thanks for the confirmation. On replay it looked to me like #57 committed said penalty while in the endzone. In any case, there was absolutely no discussion about it at all. Fortunately, it did not appear to affect the overall outcome of the game.

62 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

As a Steelers fan, I actually kind of wish it were a safety. A free kick from the 20, let's say it goes 60 yards (like the punt from the end zone did), but with much lower chance of penalty. Sepulveda can get a 60-yarder with enough hang-time for the coverage team to get downfield (again, like the actual punt), so let's give a 10-yard return to the 40. The Steelers are then only up by 2, which means they have to play aggressive defense and not the soft, "make them chew the clock" defense they settled on in the actual game.

I'm not saying it's a sure-fire win, but a safety may have actually been a better solution than what Steelers came up with.

32 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

"Bill Barnwell: But then the Eagles fans booed when McNabb took the field."

Oh please, this is trying to make something out of nothing. Any other fan base would have done the same thing, and no one would care.

41 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Yea and so it was that on the third day of the tenth month, 2010 years after the year of our Lord, the 49ers of San Francisco did indeed run outside to the left and saw that it was good. (gained about 7 yards)

43 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Wow Vince isn't impressed with the Texans, what else is new?

Seriously, I like how when they are called unimpressive there isn't a single comment about how they are playing without their top LT Duane Brown, WR AJohnson & OLB Cushing...all of which should be available in the next 1-3 weeks.

60 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Saints score is posted as 18-14, it was 16-14.

Comments on the Saints-Panthers game:
1. The Saints' play is regressing, even if the W-L record doesn't show it (if it weren't for Hartley's yips, they'd be 4-0). A major factor in this is POSITION-specific injuries. At RB, both Bush & Thomas were out, and they already lost Hamilton before the season--they were the top 3 backs at the start of camp. (Ivory was injured the first 2 games too.) In the secondary, Sharper is on PUP, Harper was out, Gay is out, and the backup S's Prioleau (sp?) and Reis were injured during the game. At LB, Ingram is on PUP, and Casillas was lost for the year in the 4th preseason game. I think only ONE OTHER PLAYER has actually missed time from an injury. As has been noted of other teams, a number of injuries can be overcome (I mean, last year the Saints were something like 23rd in AGL, and it didn't affect them much)--but multiple injuries to the same position group is VERY difficult to overcome.
2. Their O-line is playing at a B+ level this year. While other teams would LOVE to have this quality (cough-Bears-cough), it's definitely not up to par for this O-line. It has been most notable in more pressure on Brees and in short yardage situations.
3. Clausen looks like a rookie who didn't get much time in camp. I agree that Bradford in STL looks like a budding star, but I wonder if Clausen dropped for a reason. His TD throw on busted coverage was perfect, but he missed a lot of throws and had several batted down at the line. I'm not saying he won't be good, just that he isn't now. However, it's good of John Fox to play the rookie, let him develop on the field in what looks like a lost/rebuilding year, because the 2011 and 2012 Panthers will need a decent QB.
4. What has happened to the Saints punt coverage team? That makes THREE straight games that they have gotten a TO (I know, sample size alert--but isn't that at least one YEAR worth??).
5. The Saints, overall, look like a team with SB champion syndrome. #1, their play looks sluggish, like they didn't get enough down time in the offseason. #2, at least the 49ers & Panthers have played their BEST game of the season against the champs. Everybody gives it their all against the SB winners. Only a handful of times have the Saints been one of the "hunted," and when you're the champs, it's magnified. I think they may still be adjusting to that.

Having said all this, a 3-1 record for the 1st Q is very good, and with improvement from the Saints offense, this team could go far, as the defense has been better than last year overall, even if they haven't had any TD's.

90 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

More on NO/CAR. Clausen's radio was screwed up, that's why Carolina burned 2 early time outs. After the 2nd one, Moore was signaling the plays in. That sure doesn't excuse away the trainwreck ending though.

91 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

ad 3: I don't think Clausen's TD throw on busted coverage was 'perfect'. In fact, I'd say it was pretty bad as far as touchdown passes go. He saw it late, and when he saw it he underthrew Stewart. It forced Stewart to stand still for a couple seconds, which would have allowed an alert coverage unit to catch up. Thankfully for the Panthers the Saints secondary was completely absent on that play. He did do a good job of moving around in the pocket and keeping his eyes downfield though. It's pretty obvious that he isn't near the level of Sam Bradford, and I think the consensus pre-draft was that the only area where he might trump Bradford was pro-readiness. So yeah, that doesn't seem to be the case either.

ad 4: I don't know if their punt coverage team was ever that good, I don't remember it being any good last year anyway. That ugly (or awesome, from the Bucs perspective) loss to the Bucs last year was keyed by a punt return for a TD and excellent field position for the Bucs for most of the game.

114 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Re: Clausen, I noticed on the replay of one of the batted passes that his body position when he released the ball was low to the ground with a wide front foot. Like a pitcher's release. I'm no expert on mechanics, but that looked clearly wrong to me. Also on said play, he was looking for an underneath receiver, and it appeared he was throwing the heater. Ugh. Lord knows we need a competent QB, but I'm afraid he ain't it.

61 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Mike Perreira is saying people should take a look at DPI penalties since it results in a 49-yard penalty on behalf of the Broncos, just before the game-winning touchdown. He's saying it should be a 15-yard max, perhaps with a spot-of-foul enhancement for "intentional" fouls.

I don't get it, does anyone actually think this is a good idea? You make it a 15-yard, then every safety will look to commit "accidental" DPI more than 15 yards downfield if the catch looks likely. Heck, I thought getting DPI was good for the Titans there, since Gaffney almost certainly would have made the catch and given the Broncos' red zone struggles.

70 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I don't know if it's a league wide thing but the Broncos seem to be using PI as a play call at lot more than I've seen in the past. "Throw it up and try for PI. An actual reception is just a bonus." It makes perfect sense given the rules but it seems cheap to me.

Shortening the incidental contact type calls to 15 yards and the flagrant fouls as 15 or spot-of-foul might help put an end to that sort of play calling. Consistency would be an issue though.

84 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I agree about the cheapness. Too many awful underthrows are getting rewarded because the receiver has to come back to a position the DB has already established. The rule the talking heads cite every time is that it's an obvious DPI flag if the CB doesn't look for the ball, but if the CB is simply running with the receiver and not interfering, I think an argument could be made that he has a right to that positioning. The receiver is there only because the throw is poor.

Now, the obvious thing to say in that case is that the DB needs to be looking, and that it's his own stupid fault for not doing so, especially since an underthrown ball when he's in that position should be an easy pick. And I guess the other argument is that the DB shouldn't get any credit there (in the form of a pass defense or non-call) if he got beat, regardless of the throw.

Still, it's sickening to see bad throws rewarded with huge chunks of game-changing yardage.

But there are too many issues that come up as a result of the 15 yard judgment call. It's a problem either way.

71 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I think this is a great idea. One of the worst things in today's NFL (not counting the chronic brain trauma) is a 40-yard DPI on an underthrown go route when the defender is in perfect position. The penalty is intended to stop defendners from unfairly preventing completed passes, not to permit the offense to gain a massive field position advantage on bad passes. I'm not to worried about defenders getting away with "accidental" penalties. It's not easy to do something and not look like you're trying to do it when running full speed in the open field with NFL caliber receivers.

139 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

This has been the rule in college football for a long time (15 yards max) and you don't have teams mugging players right and left as an epidemic. I'd honestly rather have that than the horrible example of play we're seeing nowadays where bad throws get awarded 50 yards because someone drew a foul ala basketball.

145 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

To follow up on this, I think it will not cause any significant increase in DPIs for a few reasons:

- Players think they can make the play. DBs who would regularly try to cut their losses on deep pass plays probably do not have the ability or confidence to last in the NFL.

- Need to make snap decisions. A DB would have to decide in an instant that they are beat, that the throw is likely to be on target and in bounds, and that the guaranteed 15+ yards they will give up is better than just the chance of a longer gain.

- Lack of opportunity. There aren't that many deep pass plays in an NFL game. And this rule change would only effect passes deeper than 15 yards, where the DB feels fairly sure they are beat yet are close enough to actually grab the receiver. That's not many plays in any one game.

- It's still a severe penalty. No one is going to congratulate a player who commits the equivalent of a major facemask. That player will have to answer for why he got beat badly enough to think that giving up 15 yards and an automatic first down was a good deal.

A very few players, probably most notably Charles Woodson, will intentionally hold or commit DPI intentionally to prevent larger gains. However even in his case the foul is almost alwasy committed fairly close to the line of scrimmage, usually because Woodson tries for a pick and grabs the WR after he sees that he guessed wrong, maybe 5-10 yards downfield. This rule might rarely be taken advantage of by players like him, but very few other DBs play with a style that would allow this to work.

159 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

And assuming the DB is close enough to the receiver to deliberately interfere and prevent a completion, wouldn't it be more productive to try and defend the pass legally rather than give up a guaranteed 15 yards?

160 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I'd think usually, yes, but I'm thinking there are quite a few cases where the DB is a step or two behind and knows they can't make the play but IS close enough to dive at the receivers legs. Would they actually do it? I wouldn't think it would happen often - more likely they'd push to try to catch up.

162 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Arena Football. DPI is a set 15, and it's not at all unusual to see a receiver farther downfield than that simply get tackled before the ball gets there-I think it happened 4-5 times in this year's Arena Bowl alone. Coaches would absolutely coach it, and players would absolutely do it.

171 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

Apparently you missed my point that making it 15 in all but the most major circumstances will result in DPI after DPI, and we have empirical evidence from the AFL that tells us that. I'd actually be fine with a 15 yard penalty for incidental pass interference to give the refs a better option than the current (i) no penalty, (ii) call illegal contact even though the ball was already in the year, or (iii) 35 yard spot DPI.

172 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

I don't see why Arena Football is stronger evidence that DBs will commit intentional DPI than college football is that they won't.

The NFL is a lot closer to college football than to Arena League. It uses the same field, the same number of players, and the same motion rules, and is much closer in overall scoring, turnover rates, passing efficiency, etc.

176 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

College football players tend to be poorly coached, which is amply demonstrated every weekend by the ignorance of the collegiate touchback rule.* Professional coaches, who succeed because of their abilities as a coach and because of their training and development of players rather than by simply recruiting the best athletes, do a much, much better job of educating their players on specific game situations and how they should respond, and professional players execute better than college players in specific game situations.

I fail to see how AFL is interestingly different than the NFL in terms of an incentive to commit a shorter penalty to prevent a gain of longer length.

*-The collegiate touchback rule is that as soon as the ball breaks the plane of the goalline, it is a touchback. Yet, you see players (try to) make the NFL-style touchback save where they leap into the end zone and bat a ball back into the field of play.

180 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

If I were a college player I would absolutely try to make the touchback save every time I had the opportunity even if it didn't matter, just like I would always try to get my second food down on sideline catches even if I'd already dragged my first.

Practice makes perfect.

179 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

In the NFL a 15 yard penalty is a very big deal. What is the average score of an Arena League game? On what percentage of drives do teams score? What percentage of the field does the average play in the Arena league gain? Have you factored that at all into the cost/benefit analysis of intentionally taking a 15 yard penalty? Makes more sense to me than Arena League players being better coached than players at major Division I football factories.

65 Re: Dominant teams discussion under Texans Raiders recap

This does seem to be a year where parity is run rampant a bit. The Chiefs and Bucs were both 3-0. It seems like last year these teams would lose every game until the met up with a similar chump team (i.e. Rams, Seahawks, Browns, etc.) Seahawks have won some surprising games at home as well. On the other hand, maybe we do not have a good concept of which teams are good yet. Teams like Chargers, 49ers that were perceived to be good have major holes and teams that are up and coming (Chiefs, Bucs, Rams, Seahawks) may be better than perceived and have taken advantage of opportunities they would have squandered in years past.

I suppose the way to determine this would be to look at the distribution of VOA (DVOA once defensive adjustments are added) and compare it to previous years.

66 Re: Dominant teams discussion under Texans Raiders recap

This does seem to be a year where parity is run rampant a bit. The Chiefs and Bucs were both 3-0. It seems like last year these teams would lose every game until the met up with a similar chump team (i.e. Rams, Seahawks, Browns, etc.) Seahawks have won some surprising games at home as well. On the other hand, maybe we do not have a good concept of which teams are good yet. Teams like Chargers, 49ers that were perceived to be good have major holes and teams that are up and coming (Chiefs, Bucs, Rams, Seahawks) may be better than perceived and have taken advantage of opportunities they would have squandered in years past.

I suppose the way to determine this would be to look at the distribution of VOA (DVOA once defensive adjustments are added) and compare it to previous years.

67 Re: Audibles at the Line: Week 4

"Ben Muth: The Cardinals strategy of manning linebackers up with Antonio Gates hasn't been great so far. But it's still early, maybe Paris Lenon will get significantly better in pass coverage as the game goes on.

Aaron Schatz: I don't know if there's one linebacker in the league who can man up with Antonio Gates, but there certainly isn't one on Arizona."

Putting Adrian Wilson on him man to man later didn't work either. You need to double/bracket him unless you put Revis or Asomugha on him.

On the other hand, their strategy did keep the ball away from the Chargers WR's.

My guess is the biggest VOA game of the week was this one. The defense was nearly as dominant as the Giants, the offense was extremely efficient, and the ST's look fixed.

FWIW, the chargers coverage teams had about 50% turnover this week bringing in new players and putting vets on coverage.