Now here is the first measure from the Owners meeting that I am really glad passed. The coin toss will now be treated as a coin toss is in college football. Head Coaches have been given the option to defer. Previously, by winning the coin toss, the coach almost had to choose to receive. Because either way the other team was given the choice to begin the second half. Now, with the option to defer added, the coach can opt to make the decision in the second half. TO CONTINUE...
Why does this matter, you may be asking? Well, I have long been a supporter of the Seahawks LOSING the coin toss when at home. I thought it was much better for the team. Putting the opposing teams offense on the field to start a game at Qwest is just cruel and unusual punishment. In theory, that is when the crowd is the rowdiest.
Conversely to that, however, is the beginning of the 2nd half, where often, fans are still making their way back to their seats from the bathrooms and beer runs. It is an advantage for the visitor to get the ball then, it is a respite from the crowd.
Will Holmgren ever choose to defer?? I doubt it. He seems like an old school, I want the ball, just in case I get an extra possession out of it, guy. But Mora might? Either way, now this strategy, which I think is an effective one, is actually available for the Hawks to use.
Also, as an FYI, other rule changes at the owners meetings...
- The 5 yard face mask has been eliminated, it will be 15 yards or nothing
- The force out rule has been removed. A receiver will have to have two feet down regardless
- Field goals are now subject to review
- A direct snap that goes untouched is no longer a false start, it is now a fumble
All of this info is being reported here, by The Professor, John Clayton.
According to PFT, the force-out rule is gone, as is the 5-yard face mask.
ReplyDeleteThe certainly needs to be a point of emphasis for Mora and the secondary THIS YEAR: At the sidelines, push that bastard OUT! Get physical and don't let him get two feet in bounds.
I'm a little concerned about how this might affect our passing attack, but hopefully it's a net positive for us if the secondary adapts quickly to the new rules.
Thanks DKSB, I just added some of the other rule changes to the post
ReplyDeleteOther than changing the force-out rule, everything they did looks good. The Force-out rule change sucks, but the problem in recent years is different refs seemed to interpret the rule in thier own special way. My thoughts are that the refs should have been sat down and shown film of force outs that should have been called, force-out s that shouldnt have been, and tweeners, so everyone would be on the same page. I thought they did that every year? must not have been working..
ReplyDeleteThis gives a huge advantage to CB's in the red-zone, and encourages them to wait for the reciever to go up, the blast him. WHich could lead to some bad bad injuries...but it might help mighty-mites like Jennings...
Personally, I think they should have left the force-out rule as-is, and allowed all DB's to play handsy like they allowed GB in the playoffs to do last year...
-SlaveToTheBusinessman
"He seems like an old school, I want
ReplyDeletethe ball, just in case I get an extra
possession out of it, guy."
As opposed to a new school, we want the ball, and we're going to score, guy.
Sorry. Had to.
Nixing the Force Out rule is kind of a bummer, I imagine a lot less highlight reel footage of tippy toe sideline catches.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that is why TR let Hackett go, he saw this coming and new he'd get hurt on a sideline big hit. He's got 3 young guys to spread around on that.
I see what you're saying SlaveToTheBusinessman. Instead of going for the ball, the DB can just get all spring-loaded and at the right time shoulder-launch the receiver out of bounds. A good hit could probably knock a guy out from five yards in bounds.
ReplyDeleteI think the opposite will be true. Now the receivers know they MUST get their feet in, no matter what hit they take. We'll see WR's struggle to get their feet in at all costs.
ReplyDeleteNow, What I want to see is a Safety CATCH a WR between the hashes and CARRY them out of bounds. With no force-outs, as long as his forward progess isn't impeded, it would be incomplete!
Robert
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you are evaluating Holmgren's Old-skoolness correctly. The first and second halves are the same period of time, and most coaches would want the possibility of an extra possession in the second half of a game to run out the clock or try to score. The other nice thing about deferring (if the new rule follows HS and college rules) is that the team that is deferred to still gets to choose whether they want to make a choice between receiving and kicking or choosing what goal to defend (choosing the wind). Since the rule will still be to switch ends of the field every quarter, the team that wins the coin flip can choose to defer to the second half and start the 3rd Q receiving the ball and also choose which end to defend in the first quarter. In a windy game they could choose to go against the wind in the first quarter and would have the wind at their back in the fourth quarter.
ReplyDeleteI do think the rules comittee will regret getting rid of the force out rule. It makes the playing field much smaller and we will likely see less productive offense (or 'better' defense) across the board this year.
Better defense, did I just hear that? YEAH!
ReplyDeleteWe will definitely be priding ourselves in our Defense next year, and how great of strides our offense makes next year will depend on how well we do in the playoffs.
I am looking forward to seeing Tatupu throw Larry Fitz 10 yards and out of bounds. Trufant will have fun with this rule, although the Packers will benefit the most from this.
I just remembered: This is great news for Russell. This rule could easily make him a pro-bowler next year. His specialties are big hits, just ask Chad Johnson among others. He will be hounding the lines this season.
The coin toss rule change will not amount to that many deferrals. Deferring is a great tool in college because if you have a clearly dominant defense and a run first offense than starting with the ball in the second half gives an advantage in terms of game management down the stretch. The only NFL teams in recent history that come to mind who would potentially benefit from deferring are the old Ravens and Bucs, the recent Bears, and maybe the old Schottenheimer coached Chargers or Vick lead Falcons. Since the first three teams are far past their prime and the last two don't exist, I would argue that deferring will be nothing more than a parlor trick. Like the double timeout before a field goal.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't eliminating the force-out
ReplyDeletesort of go against the current NFL philosophy
of having high scoring, exiting games-
by narrowing the playing field, opening up the window for more injuries (granted those hits will be fun to watch)and giving the Defense
more opportunites to stop scoring.
Why don't they just give the judges the ability to review the plays?
I like the change on the force out rule. Anything that takes away ambiguity in football is good. I was hoping (although didn't think it would happen) that maybe to counteract the affect on the offense they would also require only one foot in bounds, like college football. That has always seemed like a fair trade off... it probably helps the offense more, but gets rid of the ambiguity.
ReplyDeleteNow to be a hypocrite, all facemasks as 15 yards is absurd... even though the difference between a 5 and 15 is another ambiguous call.
not sure which rule change is stupider, removing the force-out or making all facemasks 15 yards.
ReplyDeleteObviously like steffes metioned, it seems like the League is taking some of the "grey area" out of the refs hands. Also mentioned was the interpretation of a rule could change from crew to crew, now a face mask is a black and white issue and a force out is a black and white issue.
ReplyDeleteI like it, I think allowing refs to interpret things to make a call is a bad thing in the NFL with so much riding on every play!!
Truehawk
Hey Michael--any news on the Pro Day at USC?
ReplyDeleteI suppose you are there now? How long do those things go and when would you put the information up?
Sorry, getting a little ansy-pansy (?) myself!
The force-out rule was little-used anyway. More often than not, teams felt that it was underused by the officials, so it's absence will hardly make a difference. Most highlight reel sideline catches are made out of the range of the defender, or, if the defender is close, he's usually out of position to really force the receiver anywhere. So I don't expect a huge difference in games this season. This will likely make a subtle difference in how DB's react to a deep out, etc. Rather than deeply impact game scores and such. If a receiver beats a DB to the sideline, there is little the DB can do about it.
ReplyDeleteAs for the face-mask rule, I'll wait until I see how ref's handle this. Essentially, the rule change should dictate that minor face masks are now ignored and only potentially injury-causing grabs are penalized. Basically, if you use the face mask to bring a player down or slow him down, then you should be penalized, which is as it should be. Being penalized for momentarily touching a players mask while bringing him down shouldn't be penalized. Players are usually very conscious about what they're grabbing and do a good job of readjusting their hands to make a clean tackle. I just hope that that's how the refs interperet the rule change.
wait...
ReplyDeletei didn't think that ALL facemasks were 15 yards....i thought they just eliminated the 5 yard incidental facemask penalties.
so basically, if a guy grabs a facemask and lets go and nothing happens....no 5 yard penalty...no penalty at all. there will only be a penalty if it is grabbed and twisted.
isn't that what the new rule is?
Did somebody say Brian Russell and Pro Bowl in the same sentence? Put the dooby down dude.
ReplyDeleteBig Seahawk Loser wrote:
ReplyDelete>Basically, if you use the face mask to bring a player down or slow him down, then you should be penalized, which is as it should be.<
I realize I'm a girl and therefore, my view is different, but sheesh, fifteen yards for an injury that could end a career?
There's a BIG difference between a momentary touch or accidental contact and some of the wrenching around I saw last season.
Blatant, injury causing face mask? Ejection. More than one in a season? You're sitting. Period.
Of course, I suppose it could be argued that there is potential for season or career ending injury on each play, but I just don't think fifteen yards is enough for that kind of crap.
IMHO, YMMV, feel free to argue...
-S
p.s. Michael, this blog is more addictive than CHOCOLATE!
Hey Michael, and all you people, I just wanted to mention that I have started a blog myself called:
ReplyDelete"The Seahawk Analyst"
I don't know where it will go or how much I will actually work on it, but we'll see.
I thought it would be fun.
I mentioned your blog in my first entry Michael, maybe you'll stop by.
I don't want to take your fame away, because I myself love this blog, but I thought I would give a second opinion on some things, give my scoop on some things you might not be mentioning or all that interested in as I might be.
So check it out everyone!
Try seahawkanalyst.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteI just realized I used the same 2 letters you use: S and A. I should probably look for a better name, I need to think some. Any ideas people?
I don't know where it will go or how much I will actually work on it
ReplyDeletemy advice, don't do it unless you're really committed. between this blog and Field Gulls and some other forums, there's a lot of good analysis going on. if you decide you want to anyway, cross-post everything your more trenchant posts as comments in other forums.
bottom line, hawk fans are spoiled right now and I think are unlikely to go to a site that only updates once a week or so. do you have special knowledge you can bring to the table? Field Gulls does great game breakdowns, Michael Steffes knows finances and insider stuff pretty well. Me, I just watch the games and throw around half-baked opinions. :)
True Shams. That is good advice.
ReplyDeleteIf I would have a blog that I constantly updated, it would not be about football, but about soccer or poetry. Those are my other hobbies that I am bigger into.
So, I may consider doing that instead of adding to the pile of good sites that already exist. It would be smarter.
Note, foreouts are not completely eliminated, only the questionable ones where maybe one foot was in, but was the other "forced out", or did the reciever just not get his foot down.
ReplyDelete"... A receiver now must get two feet inbounds unless he actually is carried out of bounds by a defender after catching the ball."
In other words, if you grab the reciever and hold on riding him out of bounds without the opportunity to get his feet down, it's still a forceout. That is from the ESPN article.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3325273
and from foxsports on the facemask change:
"The five-yard face mask penalty for incidental contact with the facemask was eliminated. Any twisting, grabbing or illegal use of a facemask will result in a 15-yard penalty.
Impact: This change also takes the heat off referees from having to make what can be a tough judgment call. Pereira said there will also be greater emphasis placed on ensuring offensive players also aren't breaking the facemask rule when trying to avoid tackles. This could greatly affect the rushing style of Dallas running back Marion Barber, who has the NFL's fiercest stiff-arm."
So even an "incedental" grab of the facemask will be called, but as a 15 yarder. The 5 yard penalty was eliminated, but the conduct for it is now transferred to the 15 yard penalty.
Chris Mattix... I am totally in favor of you starting a blog. Do it man!!! I started this because I read all the different Seahawk blogs and felt they were missing something. If you have something to offer the Seahawk community, than put it out there.
ReplyDeleteIf you do a good job, i will link to your site, just as you linked to mine.
PS..It looks like you deleted your blog, I was looking forward to checking it out. Tell me when you start another one up.
christopher.r.mattix hmm, you're still wanting a blog name that doesn't create namespace conflict.
ReplyDeleteI have a couple silly suggestions: "Beak Peek" (hey, I said they were silly)
"The Aviary" (see note above)
"Like Stout Cortez" (a nod to Cortez Kennedy-- you did say you liked poetry...)
"Something Wicked This Way Comes to Hurt" ("We're coming to hurt" -- J. Peterson?)
ok, now they're just getting retarded.
Hey Michael, thanks for the "up-lift", good to hear you are in favor. I will see what I conjure up this weekend, maybe I can get it going again.
ReplyDeleteI will think over what I want to talk about in it so I give it a different view-point than yours so Hawk fans can have a lot of information about this Super Bowl bound team. Because this is the year!
Shams, I answered u'r name comment in the Pro Day 1 entry. Sry.
ReplyDelete