Surprised this not posted: End of Giants-Bucs game....

[southwest1]

Although the Giants will argue they are morally right, I think they've made them selves look a bit naive.

Personally if there had been time on the clock and the Bucs had made it clear that they were going to contest the knee than I wouldn't see a problem with this at all...

Sorry no, but that's the point: There wasn't enough time on the play clock to change the final outcome of the game SteelCityColt. That's precisely the point speculation and conjecture aside of course naturally as you point out. It's a moot point in the end.

[SteelCityColt]

Sorry no, but that's the point: There wasn't enough time on the play clock to change the final outcome of the game SteelCityColt. That's precisely the point speculation and conjecture aside of course naturally as you point out. It's a moot point in the end.

Indeed it would have had to been a pretty miraculous fumble recovery to make a difference. Though the debate would be a bit more heated if they had!

[SteelCityColt]

Very well written post! Great job!

Why Thank You, been some very good posts in this thread all round, interesting read.

[Playoffs2013]

One thing that will be interesting is how the 32 teams treat this type of play moving forward...

Look, I respect different viewpoints on this subject. I respect your perspective Oldunclemark and I appreciate both FJC and Gramz presenting alternative perspectives as well. Hypothetical situations are intriguing to debate to a certain point, and even if Eli had fumbled the ball and Tampa Bay would have scooped and scored, my initial reaction and disdain would still remain exactly the same.

i would like to add that at rutgers shiano won 7 games when rushing the victory formation

(i saw that on twitter dont ask for a source i wont be able to find it)

i agree with schiano

[NewColtsFan]

i would like to add that at rutgers shiano won 7 games when rushing the victory formation

(i saw that on twitter dont ask for a source i wont be able to find it)

i agree with schiano

That comment, about winning 7 games when rushing the victory formation implies that they won those games BECAUSE they rushed the victory formation. And that, I'm fairly certain, is false.

Why am I certain? Because Schiano didn't mention it in his post-game presser. If he had had won even ONE game as a result of rushing the victory formation, don't you think he would have said so? I sure do. And he didn't. And if he had said so, don't you think ESPN and every other college show would show the video of Rutgers doing it successfully, forcing a turnover and winning a game?

But it didn't happen.

They didn't win 7 games due to rushing the victory formation. They didn't win one game due to that. And the proof is in what WASN'T said what WASN'T shown.

Not blaming you TEmonster, just noting the information is clearly wrong.

[FireJimCaldwell]

That comment, about winning 7 games when rushing the victory formation implies that they won those games BECAUSE they rushed the victory formation. And that, I'm fairly certain, is false.

Why am I certain? Because Schiano didn't mention it in his post-game presser. If he had had won even ONE game as a result of rushing the victory formation, don't you think he would have said so? I sure do. And he didn't. And if he had said so, don't you think ESPN and every other college show would show the video of Rutgers doing it successfully, forcing a turnover and winning a game?

But it didn't happen.

They didn't win 7 games due to rushing the victory formation. They didn't win one game due to that. And the proof is in what WASN'T said what WASN'T shown.

Not blaming you TEmonster, just noting the information is clearly wrong.

I've seen conflicting reports that Rutgers under Schiano caused anywhere from 2 to 4 fumbles using this method. I would have to agree that if he would have won more than 10% of his games at Rutgers(68-67) using this technique, then it would be used by a ) a lot more teams b ) there would have been tape showing that it worked in a way to prevent his team from losing.

In the Giants example , with 5 seconds left, unless the ball is picked up from the ground cleanly and returned for a touchdown, the clock will expire during the scrum.

I've spent the week trying to whittle away at this subject in my mind, and I still have conflicting views on the right vs. wrong. I can see both sides of the street. Obviously if the score would have been 9 points or more and a win is 100% impossible, then it's a useless effort, but even then you still see teams down by 9+ continue to try to score points.

I look forward to Sunday to see how teams address this on the field, if put in a similar situation(kneeling down with less an 8 point lead or less).

[ColtsBlueFL]

No team has won an NFL game since the Eagles/Giants fiasco in 1978. Giants knelt down and had one more down to go to run out the clock. Since the QB was hit on the kneel down play (V formation wasn't used yet at that time), they called a hand off next play, which was fumbled and returned by opposing defense for a TD. Ever since, teams came up with a two tight end and 3 RB set surrounding the QB to the sides and behind for max protection against losing a fumble or the opponent from returning one for a TD. I have not heard of one success story against that formation in 34 years. Anyone? Or even anyone trying. Even an intense Tampa Bay D versus a relaxed O in the V formation didn't succeed in anything except knocking the lineman into the QB and send him back.

I agree O should have seem the D dig in, and they should have been ready to block. The QB doesn't have to be touched on the kneel down. NFL rules state the official is immediately blow the whistle and the down is ended as soon as the QB begins to take the knee. So if the snap exchange isn't muffed, the down is essentially over, no matter what the D does because he will be making the move to a knee as soon as that ball touches his hands.

[southwest1]

In the Giants example , with 5 seconds left, unless the ball is picked up from the ground cleanly and returned for a touchdown, the clock will expire during the scrum.

I've spent the week trying to whittle away at this subject in my mind, and I still have conflicting views on the right vs. wrong. I can see both sides of the street. Obviously if the score would have been 9 points or more and a win is 100% impossible, then it's a useless effort, but even then you still see teams down by 9+ continue to try to score points.

I look forward to Sunday to see how teams address this on the field, if put in a similar situation(kneeling down with less an 8 point lead or less).

FJC,

I like your reasoning and debating style. You never speak with an absolute authority. You always consider both sides of an issue or perspective and you are always willing to listen to other viewpoints or arguments of persuasion too. Not to mention, you excel at using statistics without overwhelming or drowning people in numbers. This is why you are 1 of my favorite bloggers to read on Colts Forum.

[FireJimCaldwell]

No team has won an NFL game since the Eagles/Giants fiasco in 1978. Giants knelt down and had one more down to go to run out the clock. Since the QB was hit on the kneel down play (V formation wasn't used yet at that time), they called a hand off next play, which was fumbled and returned by opposing defense for a TD. Ever since, teams came up with a two tight end and 3 RB set surrounding the QB to the sides and behind for max protection against losing a fumble or the opponent from returning one for a TD. I have not heard of one success story against that formation in 34 years. Anyone? Or even anyone trying. Even an intense Tampa Bay D versus a relaxed O in the V formation didn't succeed in anything except knocking the lineman into the QB and send him back.

I agree O should have seem the D dig in, and they should have been ready to block. The QB doesn't have to be touched on the kneel down NFL rules state the official is immediately blow the whistle and the down is ended as soon as the QB begins to take the knee. So if the snap exchange isn't muffed, the down is essentially over, no matter what the D does because he will be making the move to a knee as soon as that ball touches his hands.

It's not the NFL, and its a different technique, but one time in a high school game, we were losing by 2 with about a minute & half left(we failed to covert a 2 point conversion). Tried the on-side kick, didn't get it. The team lined up in the V formation. One of our coaches told one of our safeties to time the snap (set hut) 95% of the time, and to dive over the lines and disrupt the QB. He timed it perfectly, the ball goes back and our fg block team was on the field, and had guys crashing the corner who recovered the fumble.. We ran a few plays got down into FG range and kicked the game winning field goal.

Given that was the only time the V formation was run against us in 3 years where the score was close like that. only lost 4 games, and it's not the exact same thing.

Tennessee a year or so after Manning went pro, had a similar situation( for some reason Arkansas) comes to mind but I could be wrong. Raynoch Thompson, an outside linebacker that played for the Cardinals tried the same thing, he didn't time it perfect and was flagged for off-sides and unnecessary roughness, either basically ended the game, I don't remember the score or anything like that.

But like you said, if the QB gets the snap, then the officials are blowing the whistle wants he starts to kneel down... Not much could be accomplished like that.

[FireJimCaldwell]

FJC,

I like your reasoning and debating style. You never speak with an absolute authority. You always consider both sides of an issue or perspective and you are always willing to listen to other viewpoints or arguments of persuasion too. Not to mention, you excel at using statistics without overwhelming or drowning people in numbers. This is why you are 1 of my favorite bloggers to read on Colts Forum.

I appreciate that. I don't think that any one here is the end-all-be-all to football knowledge or life's lessons. I'm sure there are a few people that enjoy my posts, just as there are some that would ban me if they had the power. Just as there are people that I enjoy reading/following/interacting with like yourself, and there are people that I try to avoid for various reasons because the dialog isn't productive, or they are too ignorant to communicate with, or like said various reasons that do not really need to be expanded on.

At times there are right answers and wrong answers to a question and this to me is the type of topic that there really isn't a 100% correct answer or 100% wrong answer. It's a bit like poetry or a short story. 100 people could read it, and there will be some that share an opinion on the meaning, or what they took out of it, but there will be some that don't share that exact opinion and can offer something that might make others look around and ask what are they on?

As I said in another post my answer is a bit hypocritical. I don't want my team to give up, but I don't want this type of thing happening to my team. I know I can't have it both ways, but that is how I feel about it.

[southwest1]

I appreciate that. I don't think that any one here is the end-all-be-all to football knowledge or life's lessons. I'm sure there are a few people that enjoy my posts, just as there are some that would ban me if they had the power. Just as there are people that I enjoy reading/following/interacting with like yourself, and there are people that I try to avoid for various reasons because the dialog isn't productive, or they are too ignorant to communicate with, or like said various reasons that do not really need to be expanded on.

At times there are right answers and wrong answers to a question and this to me is the type of topic that there really isn't a 100% correct answer or 100% wrong answer. It's a bit like poetry or a short story. 100 people could read it, and there will be some that share an opinion on the meaning, or what they took out of it, but there will be some that don't share that exact opinion and can offer something that might make others look around and ask what are they on?

As I said in another post my answer is a bit hypocritical. I don't want my team to give up, but I don't want this type of thing happening to my team. I know I can't have it both ways, but that is how I feel about it.

FJC,

I also respect the fact that you can be neutral, but when you must you never shy away from taking a stand and advocating for what you believe in regardless of the backlash and potential consequences. All my closest friends posses this quality in abundance. Case in point: "Manning doesn't like to get fooled" debate last night. You didn't allow any blogger to devalue #18's contributions or throw dirt on his NFL legacy. You simply said greatness can never trampled on, discarded, or thrown away. Yes, Andrew Luck is the LOS field general, but you never forget INDY's favorite son. Thank you for having that the moxy and courage to say that FJC.

And thank you all for everyone who spoke up last night: Brent, MAC, Susie Q, ruksak, Gramz, Jay Kirk, and anyone else I neglected to mention and praise.You are all people of integrity and I honored to call you all my friends.

My level of expertise is not guru or genius status. Not formation or playbook status. Not roster or trade pick up status. It is locker room chemistry status, front office conduct, and public relations. That is where I shine and what I bring to the table. I pride myself on constantly striving toward objectivity across the board especially among other teams and franchises. The NFL is very cyclical in nature: Just because your team is on top right now, doesn't mean that elite status will last forever and just because a team is at the bottom doesn't mean that can't rise, move up, and shock the world. Think the AZ Cardinals led by QB Kurt Warner.

I respect and value my friendships with bloggers from different teams like Yehoodi, GoPats, Flying Elvis, and QuizBoy. You guys are smart, fair, humble, and devoted to your team just like me and your insights on my Colts will always be respected and sought after. By the same token, I know any opinions that I would offer on your squads would also be respected because I know how talented your clubs are and I would never slam them vindictively or harshly because I respect these clubs as high caliber organizations run perfectly from the top to the bottom.

Thanks everyone for respecting my viewpoint, even if you think I'm off my rocker and full of ____________.

[ColtsBlueFL]

It's not the NFL, and its a different technique, but one time in a high school game, we were losing by 2 with about a minute & half left(we failed to covert a 2 point conversion). Tried the on-side kick, didn't get it. The team lined up in the V formation. One of our coaches told one of our safeties to time the snap (set hut) 95% of the time, and to dive over the lines and disrupt the QB. He timed it perfectly, the ball goes back and our fg block team was on the field, and had guys crashing the corner who recovered the fumble.. We ran a few plays got down into FG range and kicked the game winning field goal.

Given that was the only time the V formation was run against us in 3 years where the score was close like that. only lost 4 games, and it's not the exact same thing.

Tennessee a year or so after Manning went pro, had a similar situation( for some reason Arkansas) comes to mind but I could be wrong. Raynoch Thompson, an outside linebacker that played for the Cardinals tried the same thing, he didn't time it perfect and was flagged for off-sides and unnecessary roughness, either basically ended the game, I don't remember the score or anything like that.

But like you said, if the QB gets the snap, then the officials are blowing the whistle wants he starts to kneel down... Not much could be accomplished like that.

I can see in high school or even college where it could work. Why, overall skill level isn't nearly as high and skill level from player to player much wider and more apparent. A strong skilled player can take advantage of a less skilled and weaker opponent. In the NFL, even the worst player was likely high school super star and a star and BMOC in college. They're the best of the best from college and while there is a difference in skill, it is much closer spread than college. Think how big college rosters are, and the number of colleges. There's a lot of not that good players in that mix. Of all those, only 53 players over 32 teams can get in to the NFL. The number is so small that there are still a few folks that could make a roster and they don't get in (overlooked or incorrectly evaluated). But the majority of the college players need to bank on their degree or at least be good enough to get a Canadian, Arena, or other non NFL league paycheck.

At the professional level, there are unwritten rules of sportsmanship. when those are breached, it tends to bring out unpleasnt emotions. If that is contained, then then players get even in the only place they, next time they meet in between the lines. Same in Baseball too. Likely all sports to some degree. When those are violated, it is called bush league... and for a reason.

bush-league (bshlg)adj.

1. Baseball Of or belonging to a minor league.

2. Slang Of inferior or unprofessional quality; second-rate

So they may be done high school, college, or minor leagues. Maybe even with success once in a rare occasion. But it is generally frowned upon at the professional level. These things somehow appear as sour grapes and attempted only out of desperation and frustration which serves only to invite retaliation later rather than focus on excellent play.

I appreciate effort and hard nosed play. But I also believe in ethics and standards too. But I do see why fans want to see their team fight to the last second... never giving up. Even if it comes down to 'bush league' tactics. ;)

[FireJimCaldwell]

I can see in high school or even college where it could work.

Trying not to quote the whole post even though it was a solid post.

I think the technique that I described from one my old high school games would work better in the pros than what Schiano uses. Obviously there is risk/reward jumping off sides, hurting the opposing QB, etc. I forget the Tampa lineman, but one of them said we were doing what we were coached to do almost in an apologetic way.

Sunday will be interesting...

If I were facing Tampa in the first half and needed to take a knee to end the half, I swear I would have a good mind to send out that formation and then send a 9 route from someone out wide.

[NewColtsFan]

Couple of thoughts to add....

First, I just started another thread called.... "Greg Schiano Bully"... where Michael Silver of YahooSports interviews a dozen NFL-types... GM's, scouts, personnel guys, and coaches who all says Schiano was a world class jerk at Rutgers, a 'bully' and now he's in the NFL trying to continue his bullying ways...

Second, some NFL type said earlier in the week, that while he recognizes that Schiano is trying to change the culture on a losing team, and that's understandable and admirable, it's not like he's the first coach to try and change the culture on his team, to try and toughen them up.

Most every new coach on a new team is trying to change the culture... that's, in part, why you got the job, (perhaps Jim Caldwell would be an exception)... but the point is Schiano is not the first to try and change the culture of his team and you don't see other coaches trying that...

Pete Carroll, among a few other coaches, have come out and said they think what Schiano did was alright. And yet, none of them have had their team do it.... Hmmmmm...........

If a moderator wants to fold my other Schiano-Jerk thread into this -- fine. But I thought it worthy of it's own thread.

[FireJimCaldwell]

2 Giants lineman get fined for what happened following the play.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/21/baas-boothe-fined-for-post-kneeldown-conduct/

This week, two Giants offensive linemen have been fined for their actions after the Bucs treated the kneeldown at the end of the game between the two teams as, shockingly, an actual football play.

According to the league office, center David Baas and guard Kevin Boothe each were fined $7,875. As we explained on Wednesday, Baas bashed his forearm into the head of Bucs linebacker Quincy Black, and Boothe rolled defensive endAdrian Clayborn over, WWE-style, and dropped a knee into his chest.

No fines were issued to the Buccaneers for treating the final play of the football game as, shockingly, an actual football play.

[JSChicago]

Its legal and I hope when the Colts are faced with that same situation Pagano teaches them to play to the final whistle

Agreed. Just because one team has decided to stop playing does not obligate the other team to throw in the towel.

[Playoffs2013]

That comment, about winning 7 games when rushing the victory formation implies that they won those games BECAUSE they rushed the victory formation. And that, I'm fairly certain, is false.

Why am I certain? Because Schiano didn't mention it in his post-game presser. If he had had won even ONE game as a result of rushing the victory formation, don't you think he would have said so? I sure do. And he didn't. And if he had said so, don't you think ESPN and every other college show would show the video of Rutgers doing it successfully, forcing a turnover and winning a game?

But it didn't happen.

They didn't win 7 games due to rushing the victory formation. They didn't win one game due to that. And the proof is in what WASN'T said what WASN'T shown.

Not blaming you TEmonster, just noting the information is clearly wrong.

Look obviously you're never going to believe me and I respect that but I clearly saw one on the nfl insiders say they won 7 like that

[Kenny]

This is not a who'se right or wrong it's more of what you agree with. Coaches out of mutual respect normally just allow the knee and that's the unspoken rule about it that I myself agree with. It's legal to rush the passer obviously but the decision all lies on the coaches morals. It's not wrong, but it's something I can't agree with simply put.

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 Giants lineman get fined for what happened following the play.

http://profootballta...eldown-conduct/

This week, two Giants offensive linemen have been fined for their actions after the Bucs treated the kneeldown at the end of the game between the two teams as, shockingly, an actual football play.

According to the league office, center David Baas and guard Kevin Boothe each were fined $7,875. As we explained on Wednesday, Baas bashed his forearm into the head of Bucs linebacker Quincy Black, and Boothe rolled defensive endAdrian Clayborn over, WWE-style, and dropped a knee into his chest.

No fines were issued to the Buccaneers for treating the final play of the football game as, shockingly, an actual football play.

This is exactly the emotional side coming out that feared would. They should have waited until another time, but maybe that another time would too far away.

Tampa set the tone, and I would not be surprised to see every team go after Tampa, every play. Even if Tampa tries to take a knee with just seconds before halftime.

[ruksak]

The only solution is to bring this issue to task by way of rule.

Have the offense declare their intent to down the ball, inform the defensive captain of this intent and if the defense initiates contact, they receive some form of punitive measure (30 second run-off/fines etc~~~Similar to declaring a player as an eligible receiver).

I actually thought the act of downing was protected by rule until this happened. I thought I knew everything and then this happens.....shattered my whole reality....

[Gramz]

The only solution is to bring this issue to task by way of rule.

Have the offense declare their intent to down the ball, inform the defensive captain of this intent and if the defense initiates contact, they receive some form of punitive measure (30 second run-off/fines etc~~~Similar to declaring a player as an eligible receiver).

I actually thought the act of downing was protected by rule until this happened. I thought I knew everything and then this happens.....shattered my whole reality....

I thought you knew everything too, Ruk. Dang.... :slaphead:

[ruksak]

I thought you knew everything too, Ruk. Dang.... :slaphead:

I know, right?

I hope this doesn't affect my book sales. In case you guys weren't aware, you can buy my self-help book titled "I'm perfect and you can't be too". Available for only $19.99 at most fine book retailers.

[Gramz]

I know, right?

I hope this doesn't affect my book sales. In case you guys weren't aware, you can buy my self-help book titled "I'm perfect and you can't be too". Available for only $19.99 at most fine book retailers.

Here's Mine

[NewColtsFan]

Look obviously you're never going to believe me and I respect that but I clearly saw one on the nfl insiders say they won 7 like that

It's not you I don't believe. I do believe you. I don't believe the insider.

And I think I've made a pretty compelling case for why not. Don't you think Greg Schiano would say.... "Hey, at Rutgers, we won 7 games doing that.... "

The only thing that makes sense is that they TRIED IT 7 times.... fine. But that's completely different than it being successful.

There is no quote from anyone saying Rutgers had any success doing this. And there is no video of this event happening.

I'm a former member of the media for 30 years. If Schiano had ANY success with this at Rutgers it would be all over the place. Media outlets would be writing it, and showing video.

Except that it hasn't happened. No stories about it. No video about it. Schiano not claiming it.

Why? Because if they did it at Rutgers, it never worked. Ever. Sorry.

Again, you I believe. The NFL insider, sorry, no.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't believe the insider either. In fact I hunted and found this-

http://profootballta...-under-schiano/

They recovered the ball twice, in 11 years. At the college level where many players are just average or less. Rutgers was flagged offsides on one of those. and I don't know if the other one even led to a victory.

In these days of the NFL caliber V formation, it would be a super fluke for one to cause a fumble, scoop it and run it in with a RB deep behind the QB and a RB on either side of him to snare a loose ball squirting out from under center. Even if one side wasn't/isn't as prepared as maybe they ought to have been.

In addition, I was surprised to hear Rodney Harrison, of all people, voice an opinion similar to mine.

[JSChicago]

The only solution is to bring this issue to task by way of rule.

Have the offense declare their intent to down the ball, inform the defensive captain of this intent and if the defense initiates contact, they receive some form of punitive measure (30 second run-off/fines etc~~~Similar to declaring a player as an eligible receiver).

I actually thought the act of downing was protected by rule until this happened. I thought I knew everything and then this happens.....shattered my whole reality....

So, basically the offense no longer has to abide by the rules of the game. They can chose to ignore the play clock since this simply allows them to run off time rather than risk some mishap that could result in losing the game... and the defense has accept this or be punished?

I'd rather see the kneel down eliminated or maybe penalized by adding 30 seconds to the clock. After all, this is football - not tennis.

[funktacious2]

It's only "Dangerous" because the O-line sees it as a typical kneel and don't prepare to block. That's they're fault, and maybe coaches should tell their lineman not to go to sleep on a kneel down. A team, or coach for that matter should not be looked down or "lectured" by simply playing aggressively within the rules. Saying it's an "unwritten rule" is a shallow, dated argument. I do not blame Schiano one bit for simply telling his team to play hard til the final seconds. It would have been different if it was more than a 7 point game, but this was a winnable game. I think a lot of people see Coughlin, a respected and veteran coach, and say, "Hey, that guy probably knows what he's talking about!", and then they just want to blame it on Schiano making a "rookie mistake". That's silly, just plain silly...

[Gavin]

Hypothetical question here...

SUPPOSE this was the end of the Colts/Vikings game yesterday...

SUPPOSE Colts got the ball back at the end of a very hard fought physical game.

SUPPOSE it was a "one score game" with time running out and we had the lead and the ball....

SUPPOSE We lined up in the victory position to run the clock down....

AND

SUPPOSE the Vikings "knowing" this decided to not let us do that and rushed our players, which could have quite possibly ended the game in a different way, and quite possibly injured some of our players... Would those of you taking the stance that TB was correct in what they did still be saying the same...??? Just asking, Hypothetically.... :???:

nope I wouldn't because those same players could have gotten injured on any previous play on either side of the ball, theres a chance of injury every play but you play to win the game as long as their is time on that clock especially when you are down by one score

[John Dee]

So... the Giants have the game won. Final seconds, they lead by 7 and have the ball.

They're in victory formation, Eli Manning is going to take the snap and take a knee and that's it. Game over.

Except, Greg Schiano, the Bucs rookie HC tells his defense to plow into the Giants center and guards and blow them up and try to get Manning to fumble so they could recover and have one last shot.

It doesn't work and the game ends.

But the old friendly coaches hand shake at the end is replaced by a long and loud lecture from the Giants Tom Coughlin "you don't do that in this league" to Schiano "I want my players playing hard till the game ends"...

And it continues on with coaches and players... Coughlin saying it's a cheap play and Schiano saying it's legal and not dirty...

Here's a write-up with tape....

http://sports.yahoo....22704--nfl.html

It is legal. To be clear, it is absolutely legal.

Whether it's right or wrong is whole other story. And the league has a way of remembering these moments. Don't be surprised to see other teams trying to run-up the score on the Bucs or do something else that may be legal, but may not be right.

It goes both ways... Schiano may learn this lesson the hard way....

Coughlin is on record as saying to "his team... protect yourself" ...

This is a non issue.. until TB and NYG play again.

[John Dee]

and personally when I see an entire DL "digging in to get after you" ... ummmm something is getting ready to go down.

[Gramz]

nope I wouldn't because those same players could have gotten injured on any previous play on either side of the ball, theres a chance of injury every play but you play to win the game as long as their is time on that clock especially when you are down by one score

Gavin, you confuse me :???: I think you meant to answer, Yes... you would still have the same opinion.

[Gavin]

Gavin, you confuse me :???: I think you meant to answer, Yes... you would still have the same opinion.

I meant I'd still be saying the same, chuckles, oops

[ColtsBlueFL]

The snap (thus beginning of the kneeldown play) is not protected byNFL rules, the actual kneeldown is. Once the QB even simulates a movement toward a kneedown, the play is to be blown dead; by rule. So if the snap isn't fumbled, the play is essentially over. The D essentially cannot 'create a fumble, unless the QB doesn't attempt to kneel as he receives the snap. I just don't see how a D can create contact soon enough to cause it without encroachment, maybe perfect timing. That can easily be averted by hard count, our non-typical snap count.So it appears Schiano has absolved the 'gentlemans agreement' on the kneeldown. And just as the V formation was made to prevent fumbles or retured fumbles for TD's, the formation may be stengthened with snap count changes and motion for crackback blocks, or possible trick/gadget plays to run up the score etc... Game on!

[southwest1]

On ESPN's Mike & Mike, Tampa Bay Head Coach Gregg Schiano addressed the "I'm taking a knee" NY Giants controversy....

http://espn.go.com/e...play?id=8402238