2 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I’d rather get the ball second. That way you know what you need. Same principle as in baseball when the home team bats last.

It depends on game flow too.

Ex: In soccer, you want to go first so you put pressure on the 2nd team. So if it's an offensive game, I absolutely want the ball first to put pressure on the 2nd team to screw up. If it's a defensive game, I'd rather play field position.

13 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Holy F, I thought you were joking about being in jail.

Lol nah, its been almost 20 years now, did a year, it was definite learning experience, my parents would send me newspaper clippings so I could keep up on the eagles, 2005 was a really rough year for them so I didn't really miss much.

There's going to be some big time in game decisions with that OT rule. If you have the ball first, do you take a FG or go for it on 4th and short? If you score a TD first do you go for 2? If you score a TD after the first team scores a TD, do you go for 2 to end it?

I'm guessing it would be more conservative in the playoffs. If they adopt this to the regular season I think some coaches would be more ballsy. 

F! Looks like Gannon is coming back then. Even the Texans aren’t idiotic enough to pick Gannon over Demeco.

 

36 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

With a wr at right tackle? 

The WR wasn't at RT.  

 

The play is pretty straight forward... they have a plan to go with a quick line up and sneak look to run the wrinkle off of it.  The plan is to run it with whatever personnel grouping is on the field prior to the short yardage lineup.  They decide to go with an unbalanced line to the side where they will run the wrinkle, and the "RT" position, as you are referring to it is actually to the backside of the play.  He doesn't actually have to block anyone at all, just sort of get in the way ever so slightly to the backside pursuit and that's enough to spring this play.   Watkins is not the RT.  He's the Right End, he's wearing an eligible number, and lined up in an eligible position.  If not, he'd have to have reported as ineligible, as Elliott did for the final moronic play against the 49ers.  

The line has to have 7 players on it.  The outside 2 players are eligible.  There is no rule that says that the 'center' (aka, the guy who snaps the ball) has to be the middle player of that group.  So, they lined up with Watkins as the edge guy, in an eligible position, on the end of the line, lined up tight just to extend that side of the line a bit and make it a slightly longer trip for the back side pursuit.   Meanwhile, the players that they WANT to utilize on that play, are all lined up to Kelce's left... Mailata, Johnson, Goedert, Brown...   and the lighter players are to the right... Watkins and Smith.

 

In the picture below, you can see all 11 Giants (the last Giants player's feet are just visible).   Note that there's only 5 Giants to the left side of the formation.  Dickerson has the position on the NT to pin.  Johnson has outside leverage on the DT to pin, and likely pin the MLB as well, especially if the MLB overcommits to the sneak, which he is already leaning into, essentially taking himself out of the play.  That leaves Mailata to handle the LB who has walked up, Brown to handle the CB, and Goedert pulling to the left to pick up whatever white jersey he sees first... Gainwell just has to run to the green and its an easy conversion and big chunk play.  Meanwhile, Smith and Watkins can do basically nothing, and its easily successful.   Great design, great execution.   Absolutely nothing 'wrong' with this at all.  Actually sheer genius, and I have to believe that Stoutland was the mastermind behind this.

With a different personnel package on the field on the play before, maybe it's Pascal or Stoll lined up on the right side on the end of the line.  Or maybe its Brown and Pascal is the lead blocker WR.  It just HAS to be an eligible number player, and that position is the least important player to blocking success.   Having him lined up there extends the line just a hair, AND still keeps the defense honest with a DB at the hash mark to defend him running a pattern to the right flat.  The LB would likely be in the same position as he currently is, even if Watkins had lined up at the numbers... but still on the LOS, to make it a legal formation.     (Please note: Brown is ALSO on the end of the line... but is flexed a little wider, but still lined up on the LOS to give 7 on the line... Brown, Mailata, Johnson, Dickerson, Kelce, Seumalo, Watkins.). 

 

Goedert even gave this play away with his last second motion to his left and the Giants were still massively outflanked and had no shot at securing the edge.

40 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

But does rest and what not do anything for ligaments? I don’t remember exactly how the routine was in 2017, although Doug at some point started the rest days.  But we had:

Sproles: ACL

Wentz: ACL

Peters: ACL

Hicks: Achilles

Maragos: PCL or MCL

The fact the only guy who seriously tore anything being Barnett feels like extremely good luck. 

And with the options we have on the Dline, one could argue Barnett being out improved our pass rush

35 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

But does rest and what not do anything for ligaments? I don’t remember exactly how the routine was in 2017, although Doug at some point started the rest days.  But we had:

Sproles: ACL

Wentz: ACL

Peters: ACL

Hicks: Achilles

Maragos: PCL or MCL

The fact the only guy who seriously tore anything being Barnett feels like extremely good luck. 

Sure there’s some luck involved because injuries can be a freak thing. Wentz had an incredibly freaky injury that probably had nothing to do with rest and recovery. 

But there’s zero doubt that strong, non-fatigued muscles will help limit muscle strains and help protect joints from ligament tears. 

There is no bullet proof vest for injuries. You can’t avoid them, but you can minimize risk on the edges. 

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The WR wasn't at RT.  

 

The play is pretty straight forward... they have a plan to go with a quick line up and sneak look to run the wrinkle off of it.  The plan is to do with with whatever personnel grouping is on the field prior to the short yardage lineup.  They decide to go with an unbalanced line to the side where they will run the wrinkle, and the "RT" position, as you are referring to it is actually to the backside of the play.  He doesn't actually have to block anyone at all, just sort of get in the way ever so slightly to the backside pursuit and that's enough to spring this play.   Watkins is not the RT.  He's the Right End, he's wearing an eligible number, and lined up in an eligible position.  If not, he'd have to have reported as ineligible, as Elliott did for the final moronic play against the 49ers.  

The line has to have 7 players on it.  The outside 2 players are eligible.  There is no rule that says that the 'center' (aka, the guy who snaps the ball) has to be the middle player of that group.  So, they lined up with Watkins as the edge guy, in an eligible position, on the end of the line, lined up tight just to extend that side of the line a bit and make it a slightly longer trip for the back side pursuit.   Meanwhile, the players that they WANT to utilize on that play, are all lined up to Kelce's left... Mailata, Johnson, Goedert, Brown...   and the lighter players are to the right... Watkins and Smith.

 

In the picture below, you can see all 11 Giants (the last Giants player's feet are just visible.   Note that there's only 5 Giants to the left side of the formation.  Dickerson has the position on the NT to pin.  Johnson has outside leverage on the DT to pin, and likely pin the MLB as well, especially if the MLB overcommits to the sneak, which he is already leaning into, essentially taking himself out of the play.  That leaves Mailata to handle the LB who has walked up, Brown to handle the CB, and Goedert pulling to the left to pick up whatever white jersey he sees first... Gainwell just has to run to the green and its an easy conversion and big chunk play.  Meanwhile, Smith and Watkins can do basically nothing, and its easily successful.   Great design, great execution.   Absolutely nothing 'wrong' with this at all.  Actually sheer genius, and I have to believe that Stoutland was the mastermind behind this.

With a different personnel package on the field on the play before, maybe it's Pascal or Stoll lined up on the right side on the end of the line.  Or maybe its Brown and Pascal is the lead blocker WR.  It just HAS to be an eligible number player, and that position is the least important player to blocking success.   Having him lined up there extends the line just a hair, AND still keeps the defense honest with a DB at the hash mark to defend him running a pattern to the right flat.  The LB would likely be in the same position as he currently is, even if Watkins had lined up at the numbers... but still on the LOS, to make it a legal formation.     (Please note: Brown is ALSO on the end of the line... but is flexed a little wider, but still lined up on the LOS to give 7 on the line... Brown, Mailata, Johnson, Dickerson, Kelce, Seumalo, Watkins.). 

 

Goedert even gave this play away with his last second motion to his left and the Giants were still massively outflanked and had no shot at securing the edge.

Thought the refs might call goedert for a false start on that but glad they didn't.👍

OMG, NFC Championship Standing Room tickets is staring at 900 dollars.   Is this going to be the most expensive NFC Championship ever?   

Not even sure what this means? This isn't player free agency, you don't just "jump in" for coaches like you do players. You're either interested and ask to interview them or you aren't interested.

Bummer. 

2 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Not even sure what this means? This isn't player free agency, you don't just "jump in" for coaches like you do players. You're either interested and ask to interview them or you aren't interested.

Guessing she means a team like Cowboys. "Get their ducks in a row" meaning it would have to be very tight lipped, under the radar etc because you don't want to make it known to the current coach you are looking at someone else incase you can't seal the deal. 

Even if they aren't really seriously pursuing him, it would be a very Jerry Jones thing to leak. Even last year he said something like "If I wanted to replace McCarthy, I could with whoever I wanted". 

2 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Not even sure what this means? This isn't player free agency, you don't just "jump in" for coaches like you do players. You're either interested and ask to interview them or you aren't interested.

Who else could that be if not Dallas?

1 minute ago, RLC said:

Who else could that be if not Dallas?

Chargers.  If defies reason for Staley to be there.

Just now, Alphagrand said:

Chargers.  If defies reason for Staley to be there.

I thought it was reported they're sticking with Staley? They're looking for OC and a passing game coordinator I think. I doubt Payton would do that

Just now, Mike030270 said:

I thought it was reported they're sticking with Staley? They're looking for OC and a passing game coordinator I think. I doubt Payton would do that

Believe that’s right. Hilarious too because Staley was supposed to be a defensive mind and yet the Chargers defense has been unimpressive these last 2 seasons. Why is he still there?

7 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Not even sure what this means? This isn't player free agency, you don't just "jump in" for coaches like you do players. You're either interested and ask to interview them or you aren't interested.

 

 

Could be Dallas or some other team that is considering firing their coach to make a move for Payton. 

4 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Possibly because our society has become too ignorant of more descriptive words to properly convey their meaning and just use the same words to describe all situations... and use the same words as every part of speech, in rapid succession.

But what about the studies that show that people who cuss may be more intelligent on average? 

 

3 minutes ago, Thrive said:

Believe that’s right. Hilarious too because Staley was supposed to be a defensive mind and yet the Chargers defense has been unimpressive these last 2 seasons. Why is he still there?

Didn't know he was a defensive coach. I've been putting the offensive problems on him this entire time lol

Though as you said their defense hasn't really been impressive with him either

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

 

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Also cool facts 

 

my 2 cents on the swearing topic.

Nobody is leaving this site because they can't see swear words, but I would imagine its going to discourage some from using it if there are swear words visible, especially in a work setting. I don't care for more minor swear words appearing, but I don't think it would be great to open it up for a lot of them.

I believe everyone would like to increase membership to this site, especially since more members leads to more views, more potential ad revenue, etc.

I also think on the old boards you couldn't view TATE without being logged in, where with this new one you can view all content without being logged in. Maybe locking TATE to members only would help increase membership, but I don't know if that would have an impact on SEO and general searchability for the site.

14 minutes ago, twistr said:

But what about the studies that show that people who cuss may be more intelligent on average? 

I'd like to see the full study.   The blurb from CNN does NOT say that people who USE more cuss words are more intelligent, it said that the people came up with more words that start with F, S and A in one minute ALSO came up with more cuss words starting with F, S, and A in one minute.   It has nothing to do with usage.  Knowledge is different from doing it.  

Let's just say I find it extremely unlikely that people who limit their adjectives to include only Fing this or Fing that are more intelligent than people who can actually find a more descriptive term.

 

"This is a big F-ing deal". vs.  "This is a colossal achievement with massive implications and dramatic impact."     Which one requires more intelligence and a great grasp of language?