Packers Huddle

Labrev wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:31

BF004 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:24

Hurts has some tree trunks

What I'm hearing is we need to put have AJ Dillon take the snap.

We’d still have a Josh Myers problem.

But if it works with Dillon taking the snap and it’s essentially unblockable, then please do it!

BF004 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:34

Labrev wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:31

BF004 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:24

Hurts has some tree trunks

What I'm hearing is we need to put have AJ Dillon take the snap.

We’d still have a Josh Myers problem.

But if it works with Dillon taking the snap and it’s essentially unblockable, then please do it!

We are 4 for 4 with the Love Shove this season!

it's impossible to officiate, on a sneak it's impossible to say that a player did it by accident or intentionally push the QB, however what we are seeing now with multiple pushers is that it is obviously intentional, I don't see this lasting, that Philly has a great oline to do it doesn't take away that it gives the offense a unfair advantage.

About 10 years ago or so... The NFL emphasized penalizing OL jumping on the pile or pushing the pile for player safety. If that was dangerous then, what is different about adding more bulk to this play and possibly making someone go crunch?

BF004 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 10:24

I think the Eagles are just really good at doing it, why no one else has done this in 18 years.

Hurts has some tree trunks and Kelce is the best center in the league.

Other teams try it and are no where near as successful.

Eagles are simply better, no reason to change any rules around it I don't think. Not sure why the rule was changed in 2005, would like to hear the for and against arguments then. But I wouldn't change it now just because 1 team and only 1 team has exceptional personnel and execution to take advantage of it.

The Eagles perfected it a bit, but as other teams start doing it the same, they'll start having the same success. Did we really look so different in our attempt last night? Not really. the QB sneak historically didn't have 2-3 guys lined up behind and shoving as well. Why teams didn't? who knows. But it's definitely different now.

I don't like it because in an already tilted field towards the offense, it makes it almost undefensible. I'm fine letting them do it, then they have to declare it and anything outside of tackles and downfield becomes moot and off the table.

Otherwise, it's not mano y mano as my Eagles fan BIL likes to tell me. It's mano y 4-5 mano's. Even if the Dline holds initially, you put enough bodies close together between ball carrier and defenders they can't get him and then add 2-3 more behind him and can basically carry and push him over the pile it is such an advantage I hope they get rid of it.

aiding a runner behind the LOS, 15 yards.

Why create yet another subjective rule on something so innocuous?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:09

Why create yet another subjective rule on something so innocuous?

There's nothing subjective about it. All your blockers are in front of you at the LOS, you have nothing but skill players to your left right or behind. and in those situations there's nothing innocuous about it. It's an absolute competitive advantage. If your QB is big and strong and your Oline so dominant. Fine. Add 2-3 TE's and RB's behind to push and carry a QB over a pile of bodies, go play rugby.

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:23

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:09

Why create yet another subjective rule on something so innocuous?

There's nothing subjective about it. All your blockers are in front of you at the LOS, you have nothing but skill players to your left right or behind. and in those situations there's nothing innocuous about it. It's an absolute competitive advantage. If your QB is big and strong and your Oline so dominant. Fine. Add 2-3 TE's and RB's behind to push and carry a QB over a pile of bodies, go play rugby.

So should all competitive advantages be banned now? Should we ban the option? Should we ban TE delay pass? What happens when we do ban this and a blocker makes contact with the runner accidentally?

everyone knows it's a unfair advantage for the offense, few seem to care.

Should we ban snap counts because they are an unfair advantage?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:26

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:23

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:09

Why create yet another subjective rule on something so innocuous?

There's nothing subjective about it. All your blockers are in front of you at the LOS, you have nothing but skill players to your left right or behind. and in those situations there's nothing innocuous about it. It's an absolute competitive advantage. If your QB is big and strong and your Oline so dominant. Fine. Add 2-3 TE's and RB's behind to push and carry a QB over a pile of bodies, go play rugby.

So should all competitive advantages be banned now? Should we ban the option? Should we ban TE delay pass? What happens when we do ban this and a blocker makes contact with the runner accidentally?

No, I said this one. a TE delay isn't a competitive advantage IMO. Putting a wall of defenders between you and ball carrier and then running 3 more guys at a spot where defenders can't defend that and the rest of the field it absolutely is.

the odds of a blocker "accidentally" making contact with the QB behind the LOS in this instance is well, it's not accidental LOL. They are literally lining up 6 inches off his ass and push/carrying him. Blockers don't line up behind a ball carrier in any other play in football.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:26

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:23

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:09

Why create yet another subjective rule on something so innocuous?

There's nothing subjective about it. All your blockers are in front of you at the LOS, you have nothing but skill players to your left right or behind. and in those situations there's nothing innocuous about it. It's an absolute competitive advantage. If your QB is big and strong and your Oline so dominant. Fine. Add 2-3 TE's and RB's behind to push and carry a QB over a pile of bodies, go play rugby.

So should all competitive advantages be banned now? Should we ban the option? Should we ban TE delay pass? What happens when we do ban this and a blocker makes contact with the runner accidentally?

if you can't tell what is intentional (3 guys lined up behind QB) and what happens accidently by a guard being pushed into the QB, then you'd have to be in a comma. and adding in other offensive plays to make your point is being purposely ignorant, are you looking for a fight?

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:34

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:26

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:23

There's nothing subjective about it. All your blockers are in front of you at the LOS, you have nothing but skill players to your left right or behind. and in those situations there's nothing innocuous about it. It's an absolute competitive advantage. If your QB is big and strong and your Oline so dominant. Fine. Add 2-3 TE's and RB's behind to push and carry a QB over a pile of bodies, go play rugby.

So should all competitive advantages be banned now? Should we ban the option? Should we ban TE delay pass? What happens when we do ban this and a blocker makes contact with the runner accidentally?

No, I said this one. a TE delay isn't a competitive advantage IMO. Putting a wall of defenders between you and ball carrier and then running 3 more guys at a spot where defenders can't defend that and the rest of the field it absolutely is.

the odds of a blocker "accidentally" making contact with the QB behind the LOS in this instance is well, it's not accidental LOL. They are literally lining up 6 inches off his ass and push/carrying him. Blockers don't line up behind a ball carrier in any other play in football.

How about defenders line up behind the defensive linemen and push?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:38

How about defenders line up behind the defensive linemen and push?

I have been wondering this myself. Get an LB up there and have the other LBs push him, same thing on D in reverse.

That's another reason why I lean opposed to having the execs legislating it out. At some level, football is a constant back-and-forth between teams coming up with new ways to beat their opponents, and opponents figuring out how to stop it. New trends are set, then they fade once teams figure out how to beat it, then new trends emerge, and the cycle goes on ad infinitum.

I rather task opposing defenses with being the ones to put a stop to it.

Labrev wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:53

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:38

How about defenders line up behind the defensive linemen and push?

I have been wondering this myself. Get an LB up there and have the other LBs push him, same thing on D in reverse.

That's another reason why I lean opposed to having the execs legislating it out. At some level, football is a constant back-and-forth between teams coming up with new ways to beat their opponents, and opponents figuring out how to stop it. New trends are set, then they fade once teams figure out how to beat it, then new trends emerge, and the cycle goes on ad infinitum.

I rather task opposing defenses with being the ones to put a stop to it.

100%

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:51

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:38

musclestang wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:34

No, I said this one. a TE delay isn't a competitive advantage IMO. Putting a wall of defenders between you and ball carrier and then running 3 more guys at a spot where defenders can't defend that and the rest of the field it absolutely is.

the odds of a blocker "accidentally" making contact with the QB behind the LOS in this instance is well, it's not accidental LOL. They are literally lining up 6 inches off his ass and push/carrying him. Blockers don't line up behind a ball carrier in any other play in football.

How about defenders line up behind the defensive linemen and push?

<snip>

<snip>

I didn't lie at all. I was wrong and admitted my mistake. I said so, TWICE.

You are trying to add more rules that must be officiated. You have it backward.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:59

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:51

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:38

How about defenders line up behind the defensive linemen and push?

just insult everyone who disagrees with your insanity, it's no wonder posters who actually do make sense don't hang around.

you endorse cheap football simply because we've had success doing it, and call me a child, you sat here and lied that it 's always been legal to cheat like this, when it never was till 2005, officiating has and will destroy this game and you accept it, who's the child here.

There was no insult until you started for no reason what so ever. You deserve what you are getting now.

I didn't lie at all. I was wrong and admitted my mistake. I said so, TWICE.

You are trying to add more rules that must be officiated. You have it backward.

BS, again there is no way that a defense can defend between the tackles and also defend anything else, while a offense has the option to sneak or throw in that set, so your just acting disingenuous when you the defense can do the same thing, because to do so leaves them open to PA.
so to say that to Muscle imho is the same as a insult, why, because you know what he and I just said is true.

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:59

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:51

just insult everyone who disagrees with your insanity, it's no wonder posters who actually do make sense don't hang around.

you endorse cheap football simply because we've had success doing it, and call me a child, you sat here and lied that it 's always been legal to cheat like this, when it never was till 2005, officiating has and will destroy this game and you accept it, who's the child here.

There was no insult until you started for no reason what so ever. You deserve what you are getting now.

I didn't lie at all. I was wrong and admitted my mistake. I said so, TWICE.

You are trying to add more rules that must be officiated. You have it backward.

BS, again there is no way that a defense can defend between the tackles and also defend anything else, while a offense has the option to sneak or throw in that set, so your just acting disingenuous when you the defense can do the same thing, because to do so leaves them open to PA.
so to say that to Muscle imho is the same as a insult, why, because you know what he and I just said is true.

So someone having an opposite opinion from you is an insult to you? You might want to stop conversing on the internet, or with anyone for that matter.

Play action in this scenario is no different than any of the other cat and mouse games defenses and offenses play.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:11

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 11:59

There was no insult until you started for no reason what so ever. You deserve what you are getting now.

I didn't lie at all. I was wrong and admitted my mistake. I said so, TWICE.

You are trying to add more rules that must be officiated. You have it backward.

BS, again there is no way that a defense can defend between the tackles and also defend anything else, while a offense has the option to sneak or throw in that set, so your just acting disingenuous when you the defense can do the same thing, because to do so leaves them open to PA.
so to say that to Muscle imho is the same as a insult, why, because you know what he and I just said is true.

So someone having an opposite opinion from you is an insult to you? You might want to stop conversing on the internet, or with anyone for that matter.

Play action in this scenario is no different than any of the other cat and mouse games defenses and offenses play.

when they use game situations that are wrong to make there point which you have, there is no way a defense can defend a sneak of the magnitude that philly uses, and also cover, if they could donate everyone to just stopping it, coverage would be impossible, if not, then defenses would do so and stop these sneaks.

seriously rather then be honest concerning this, you told me to shut up and go away.

I just received a PM to cool it with you, so I will, again though why act like your the only authority here? you did act as though this &%$@ was always legal, only till you where called on it did you admit to being wrong, and it was from a poster you had respect for, if it had been me I'am sure we'd still be arguing that point.

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:23

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:11

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2023 12:08

BS, again there is no way that a defense can defend between the tackles and also defend anything else, while a offense has the option to sneak or throw in that set, so your just acting disingenuous when you the defense can do the same thing, because to do so leaves them open to PA.
so to say that to Muscle imho is the same as a insult, why, because you know what he and I just said is true.

So someone having an opposite opinion from you is an insult to you? You might want to stop conversing on the internet, or with anyone for that matter.

Play action in this scenario is no different than any of the other cat and mouse games defenses and offenses play.

when they use game situations that are wrong to make there point which you have, there is no way a defense can defend a sneak of the magnitude that philly uses, and also cover, if they could donate everyone to just stopping it, coverage would be impossible, if not, then defenses would do so and stop these sneaks.

It's the game teams must play. It wouldn't make coverage impossible, but it would be harder. If teams want to stop it, it's what they need to do. No reason at this point to ban the play. It would open up a can of worms that isn't necessary. There are risks to it for the QB. It's the main reason why we almost never snuck the ball with Rodgers.

seriously rather then be honest concerning this, you told me to shut up and go away.

No. I told you that in response to your personal remarks that were out of nowhere. Nothing to do with your opinion on the matter.

you did act as though this &%$@ was always legal, only till you where called on it did you admit to being wrong, and it was from a poster you had respect for, if it had been me I'am sure we'd still be arguing that point.

I didn't act like it was always legal. I said it has always been legal. I was wrong. I admitted I was wrong, TWICE. I emphasized my wrongness so that my mistake did not perpetuate.