Illegal formations

[bap1331]

They beat us no doubt but the nfl needs to look into these formations in the offseason. I dont see why we didnt do the same.

[oldunclemark]

Those are not illegal formations...They are ttricks and stunts

..but you are right....we should out a couple of those

'ineligible receiver' or 'lineman eligible' formations in our offense

[ReMeDy]

I don't think it's right, either. I want my football teams making plays, not deciphering jersey #'s. Defenses have enough to worry about in today's NFL with the tackling changes and extreme flags. Wins should come as a result of talent, not exposing wrinkles in rule books. Whether it's legal or not, there is something unethically wrong about having to listen for eligible/ineligibility on EVERY single snap.

[IcEWoLF]

I am sure they will make announcements about eligible/ineligible players better next year, but I don't see this rule changing, all i see honestly is more improvements so it makes it easier for defenses to see who is eligible/ineligible. 

[Dan'l Boom]

It's no different than any other strategy that attempts to confuse the defense. 

[amfootball]

I was surprised the Colts were not more prepared to handle the formations given the Pats had done it with success vs the Ravens. They also only ran three plays vs the Ravens. Appeared they ran a lot more than that vs the Colts. Anyone have the number of plays?

[BlacknGold77]

They beat us no doubt but the nfl needs to look into these formations in the offseason. I dont see why we didnt do the same.

 

unusual <> illegal

[da_pats_troll]

Dances by tackles should be outlawed.

 

http://www.colts.com/news/article-1/The-Story-Behind-Colts-LT-Anthony-Castonzos-TD-Dance/0615c72f-1204-4259-9e40-9a51e98479e5

[DougDew]

The tactic of using trick formations is a strategy that is based upon the refs and league not wanting playoff games slowed down...not giving time for the defense to see the formation.

The refs could easily stop the clock, walk to a clear spot, and announce to the stadium who is eligible and who is not (out of the ordinary), then in the time taken for the ref to walk back to his position and start the clock, the defense could communicate. But that would take too much TV time.

The BelliKraft style of play looks to take advantage ..not of the rules...but of the fact the game is televised. Knowing that the game still has to fit within a prescribed time slot. They look to take advantage of the reality of the situation..beyond the rules of the game..in order to win the game. Its bush league.

[Superman]

Those are not illegal formations...They are ttricks and stunts

..but you are right....we should out a couple of those

'ineligible receiver' or 'lineman eligible' formations in our offense

 

They stole one directly from us.

[Superman]

I was surprised the Colts were not more prepared to handle the formations given the Pats had done it with success vs the Ravens. They also only ran three plays vs the Ravens. Appeared they ran a lot more than that vs the Colts. Anyone have the number of plays?

 

They didn't have a whole lot of success with them. The TD was the only successful play I remember, and that's more of a standard tackle-eligible play. They took that from the Colts directly.

 

As a matter of fact, I'd say the funky formations were more of a problem for the Pats than the Colts, given the penalty. 

[amfootball]

They didn't have a whole lot of success with them. The TD was the only successful play I remember, and that's more of a standard tackle-eligible play. They took that from the Colts directly.

 

As a matter of fact, I'd say the funky formations were more of a problem for the Pats than the Colts, given the penalty. 

I remember Pagano saying at half time that his defense was confused. He burned two time outs in the first half because his defense was not ready. I believe even Simms commented on how disorganized the Colts defense looked. Perhaps that was more on the regular plays and not the funky formations. I thought it was the latter.

[-JJ-]

They didn't have a whole lot of success with them. The TD was the only successful play I remember, and that's more of a standard tackle-eligible play. They took that from the Colts directly.

 

As a matter of fact, I'd say the funky formations were more of a problem for the Pats than the Colts, given the penalty. 

Colts were ready and stopped one. Another was a penalty for the 2nd guy not reporting in.

The lineman catching for a TD is pretty standard these days.-  Vrabel, JJWatt, Colts Castano.

 

Then that line up everyone to the right was a disaster lol that didn't fool the colts.

[GoPats]

I don't think it's right, either. I want my football teams making plays, not deciphering jersey #'s. Defenses have enough to worry about in today's NFL with the tackling changes and extreme flags. Wins should come as a result of talent, not exposing wrinkles in rule books. Whether it's legal or not, there is something unethically wrong about having to listen for eligible/ineligibility on EVERY single snap.

 

The statement in bold...

 

If you believe that, then you must believe that ANY play designed to "fool" the defense should be illegal because apparently using your mind in sports is not as noble somehow as using your body and your God-given talent.

 

So play-action? Outlawed. Reverses? Off the books. Pump fakes? Immediate change of possession. Those are all plays where a team that's less talented can actually make something happen, right? 

 

Personnel changes and eligibility/ineligibility are part of the evolution of the game. Ironically the only "trick" play that went in the Pats' favor last night was the throw to Solder. They had a penalty on one and Brady was sacked on another. There is risk/reward to this strategy if the defense is good enough to figure it out on the fly. 

[-JJ-]

I remember Pagano saying at half time that his defense was confused. He burned two time outs in the first half because his defense was not ready. I believe even Simms commented on how disorganized the Colts defense looked. Perhaps that was more on the regular plays and not the funky formations. I thought it was the latter.

The regular Pats plays are extremely confusing- a lot of motion. Its not just the colts got confused- a lot of teams do.

You don't often see a highly complicated offense like that which is the Pats MO.  It's one thing to draw up a complicated play- its another to consistently execute them and that is probably the Pats biggest asset.

[amfootball]

The regular Pats plays are extremely confusing- a lot of motion. Its not just the colts got confused- a lot of teams do.

You don't often see a highly complicated offense like that which is the Pats MO.  It's one thing to draw up a complicated play- its another to consistently execute them and that is probably the Pats biggest asset.

Yeah and we will need all of it to slow down that Seattle D. I love this match up. Complete chess match.

[Slayer dude]

In all honesty I believe Belichick has known this for years but was not ready to use this style of play until he had all the key players in place. The last 4 years our defense wasn't as good as the one we have now and I think he thought now would be the right time to use it. If he had used this prior to this season it would have all been a waste and all other teams and coaches would have picked up on this. The way the Pats executed those plays flawlessly shows that they have been practicing this for quite some time.

 

Now I bet playoff teams have been scrambling to catch up to Belichick, scanning the rule books and looking for other ways and means to improve their game plan.

[Superman]

I remember Pagano saying at half time that his defense was confused. He burned two time outs in the first half because his defense was not ready. I believe even Simms commented on how disorganized the Colts defense looked. Perhaps that was more on the regular plays and not the funky formations. I thought it was the latter.

 

I only remember one timeout due to formation issues. The other timeout down near the goal line was due to a receiver in motion, and the safety didn't go across to pick him up. More than the eligible/ineligible stuff, which I think we handled fine for the most part, was the motion and crosses and stuff.

 

I said earlier that this was the old Moore/Manning Indy stuff. It was, plus a lot of motion. Killed our press coverage underneath, then they ran and ran and ran. Death by a thousand paper cuts. 

[Superman]

The statement in bold...

 

If you believe that, then you must believe that ANY play designed to "fool" the defense should be illegal because apparently using your mind in sports is not as noble somehow as using your body and your God-given talent.

 

So play-action? Outlawed. Reverses? Off the books. Pump fakes? Immediate change of possession. Those are all plays where a team that's less talented can actually make something happen, right? 

 

Personnel changes and eligibility/ineligibility are part of the evolution of the game. Ironically the only "trick" play that went in the Pats' favor last night was the throw to Solder. They had a penalty on one and Brady was sacked on another. There is risk/reward to this strategy if the defense is good enough to figure it out on the fly. 

 

I think there's a huge difference between disguising your eligible receivers and a play action pass.

 

Again, I have no problem with what the Pats are doing. I just don't think it's keeping with the spirit of the rule, specifically when you have only four player with ineligible numbers on the field.

[amfootball]

I only remember one timeout due to formation issues. The other timeout down near the goal line was due to a receiver in motion, and the safety didn't go across to pick him up. More than the eligible/ineligible stuff, which I think we handled fine for the most part, was the motion and crosses and stuff.

 

I said earlier that this was the old Moore/Manning Indy stuff. It was, plus a lot of motion. Killed our press coverage underneath, then they ran and ran and ran. Death by a thousand paper cuts. 

It's funny we can talk scheme, formations and coaching but I really saw one team that was just better than the other team. That is how you get such a lopsided score. This is what folks predicted given the recent history between these two teams. What did you expect the Colts to address first this off-season? The lines?

[Superman]

It's funny we can talk scheme, formations and coaching but I really saw one team that was just better than the other team. That is how you get such a lopsided score. This is what folks predicted given the recent history between these two teams. What did you expect the Colts to address first this off-season? The lines?

 

I'm talking about all that in the Football Talk thread in the Colts section. I don't think there's any "first." There are a lot of things we need to address, not just because we keep getting whooped by the Pats, but because we have to avoid a costly plateau. 

 

Also, yes, the Pats were just better last night. Has nothing to do with the formations.

[Superman]

In all honesty I believe Belichick has known this for years but was not ready to use this style of play until he had all the key players in place. The last 4 years our defense wasn't as good as the one we have now and I think he thought now would be the right time to use it. If he had used this prior to this season it would have all been a waste and all other teams and coaches would have picked up on this. The way the Pats executed those plays flawlessly shows that they have been practicing this for quite some time.

 

Now I bet playoff teams have been scrambling to catch up to Belichick, scanning the rule books and looking for other ways and means to improve their game plan.

 

Two procedural penalties and a couple non-eventful plays last night. One success, which was a traditional tackle-eligible. They didn't execute those plays flawlessly, at all.

[amfootball]

I'm talking about all that in the Football Talk thread in the Colts section. I don't think there's any "first." There are a lot of things we need to address, not just because we keep getting whooped by the Pats, but because we have to avoid a costly plateau. 

 

Also, yes, the Pats were just better last night. Has nothing to do with the formations.

I had read that thread yesterday. Good stuff. I will visit again today and read your thoughts. Do you think Colts should built in effort to beat Pats? Not sure that is a good strategy.

[Superman]

I had read that thread yesterday. Good stuff. I will visit again today and read your thoughts. Do you think Colts should built in effort to beat Pats? Not sure that is a good strategy.

 

No. That's a bad strategy.

[GoPats]

Two procedural penalties and a couple non-eventful plays last night. One success, which was a traditional tackle-eligible. They didn't execute those plays flawlessly, at all.

 

I agree. It cost them a sack and a penalty. The throw to Solder was far more of a traditional "tackle eligible" play we've seen 100 times with Vrabel, Watt, etc.

[GoPats]

I think there's a huge difference between disguising your eligible receivers and a play action pass.

 

 

 

On the surface I'd agree, but in the context of RMD's statement? I'm not so sure. All of the elements of deceit within the game go counter to the concept of "let talent match up against talent." 

[Superman]

On the surface I'd agree, but in the context of RMD's statement? I'm not so sure. All of the elements of deceit within the game go counter to the concept of "let talent match up against talent." 

 

Sure. Just sayin...

[Slayer dude]

Two procedural penalties and a couple non-eventful plays last night. One success, which was a traditional tackle-eligible. They didn't execute those plays flawlessly, at all.

 

Tell that to the Ravens.

[Superman]

Tell that to the Ravens.

 

Welcome to February. We're glad you could join us.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Welcome to February. We're glad you could join us.

 

For real.

 

And for the record, since this is re-opened, if we weren't in the process of getting shellacked, it would have been a major talking point about how Cameron Fleming was eligible on the previous play, and stayed in as ineligible on the Solder TD play.  Since there was no stoppage in play, he has to exit and sit out a play or that's illegal substitution and the play should have been flagged and called back.

 

Like deflated balls, not an excuse for our huge loss.  OTOH, it is something like this (and better logging and guarding of game balls, LOL)  the league has to address so that further officials missing calls doesn't slide by based upon rushing the play (TV time) and funny business formations at the same time.  Officials need to remember the substitution rule has 'reasonable time' verbiage built in.  The league needs to further define/refine that portion and were good to go.

[JerodMayo51]

The tactic of using trick formations is a strategy that is based upon the refs and league not wanting playoff games slowed down...not giving time for the defense to see the formation.

The refs could easily stop the clock, walk to a clear spot, and announce to the stadium who is eligible and who is not (out of the ordinary), then in the time taken for the ref to walk back to his position and start the clock, the defense could communicate. But that would take too much TV time.

The BelliKraft style of play looks to take advantage ..not of the rules...but of the fact the game is televised. Knowing that the game still has to fit within a prescribed time slot. They look to take advantage of the reality of the situation..beyond the rules of the game..in order to win the game. Its bush league.

They ran thus formation 4 times against the Ravens and 2 times against the colts. That is hardly an amount that would slow down the game in your scenario

The league I guarantee will not change anything about the legality of these formations, it's good for the league and the fans to see some unorthodox trick plays.

Teams will need to be smarter and prepare for these formations, or risk them coming up in a game and hurting them.

I stopped trying to wrap my brain around why people think this is some dirty, unethical move by the Patriots because it's down right laughable at this point

[JerodMayo51]

For real.

And for the record, since this is re-opened, if we weren't in the process of getting shellacked, it would have been a major talking point about how Cameron Fleming was eligible on the previous play, and stayed in as ineligible on the Solder TD play. Since there was no stoppage in play, he has to exit and sit out a play or that's illegal substitution and the play should have been flagged and called back.

Like deflated balls, not an excuse for our huge loss. OTOH, it is something like this (and better logging and guarding of game balls, LOL) the league has to address so that further officials missing calls doesn't slide by based upon rushing the play (TV time) and funny business formations at the same time. Officials need to remember the substitution rule has 'reasonable time' verbiage built in. The league needs to further define/refine that portion and were good to go.

I'm sure they'll review the rules and language with the competition committee to determine the proper protocol to deal with these types of substitutions but they won't make them illegal

Also the ref missing that call on Solder has nothing to do with the Patriots. they were called for a penalty against the Colts and tooK a sack on another play, so it cost them.

They could just allow coaches to challenge those types of plays if they think a call was missed, similar to 12 men on the field which is missed sometimes by the refs

[ColtsBlueFL]

I'm sure they'll review the rules and language with the competition committee to determine the proper protocol to deal with these types of substitutions but they won't make them illegal

Also the ref missing that call on Solder has nothing to do with the Patriots. they were called for a penalty against the Colts and tooK a sack on another play, so it cost them.

They could just allow coaches to challenge those types of plays if they think a call was missed, similar to 12 men on the field which is missed sometimes by the refs

 

I think they will just allow the officials (and thus the defense) adequate time to identify all of the eligible and ineligible players before allowing the ball to be snapped.  There doesn't even have to be a rule change, nor making those type plays illegal.  The rule (substitution) already has verbiage that states ' reasonable time' in it.  The league can make it a point of emphasis the officials themselves have taken 'reasonable time to determine all players eligibility and ineligibility and designate so.  And then if a eligible player reverts to ineligible the next play without either a timeout, play stoppage, or sitting a play out has occurred, then an illegal substitution flag will be thrown.

[Superman]

I'm sure they'll review the rules and language with the competition committee to determine the proper protocol to deal with these types of substitutions but they won't make them illegal

Also the ref missing that call on Solder has nothing to do with the Patriots. they were called for a penalty against the Colts and tooK a sack on another play, so it cost them.

They could just allow coaches to challenge those types of plays if they think a call was missed, similar to 12 men on the field which is missed sometimes by the refs

 

I don't understand the bolded. The Pats committed an illegal substitution. How does it have nothing to do with them?

[JerodMayo51]

I don't understand the bolded. The Pats committed an illegal substitution. How does it have nothing to do with them?

They made a mistake and committed a penalty which happens countless times in a game, so it has to do with them only in the sense that they made the mistake but it's the responsibility of the refs to identify mistakes/fouls and flag them

No different than them missing a holding call, or PI, or 12 men on the field

[Superman]

They made a mistake and committed a penalty which happens countless times in a game, so it has to do with them only in the sense that they made the mistake but it's the responsibility of the refs to identify mistakes/fouls and flag them

No different than them missing a holding call, or PI, or 12 men on the field

 

Yeah, that's fine. I said earlier that the refs are mostly to blame for that play. I'm just saying, they committed the penalty. It's kind of a stretch to say it had nothing to do with them. 

 

In no way do I think they should be placed on probation for an illegal substitution. But the rules can be emphasized and paid closer attention to so that this kind of thing doesn't happen anymore. The Pats were far and away the better team that day, so don't take this as me being petty or bitter, but the score at the time was 17-7. It was 3rd and 1. Instead of a five yard penalty and a replayed down, they got 7 points, and the rout was on. 

[JerodMayo51]

Yeah, that's fine. I said earlier that the refs are mostly to blame for that play. I'm just saying, they committed the penalty. It's kind of a stretch to say it had nothing to do with them.

In no way do I think they should be placed on probation for an illegal substitution. But the rules can be emphasized and paid closer attention to so that this kind of thing doesn't happen anymore. The Pats were far and away the better team that day, so don't take this as me being petty or bitter, but the score at the time was 17-7. It was 3rd and 1. Instead of a five yard penalty and a replayed down, they got 7 points, and the rout was on.

I can see it from your perspective as being a point of frustration, and I do believe in the "snowball" effect in games where they can get out of control in a hurry

ultimately I don't think it would have changed anything because they were being outmatched physcially all game long at all 3 Levels of defense, but certainly can understand the frustration

[Superman]

I can see it from your perspective as being a point of frustration, and I do believe in the "snowball" effect in games where they can get out of control in a hurry

ultimately I don't think it would have changed anything because they were being outmatched physcially all game long at all 3 Levels of defense, but certainly can understand the frustration

 

It's not even a point of frustration. I'm just saying that a team shouldn't get 7 points on a play where they committed an illegal substitution. It wouldn't have mattered, I don't think (and I'm a big 'butterfly effect" guy, also, but I don't think we were going to win that game no matter what), but the refs still blew it.

 

I think we're on the same page there.

 

What I don't understand is why we've come back to this discussion after three weeks. I'm very over this.

[ColtsBlueFL]

It's not even a point of frustration. I'm just saying that a team shouldn't get 7 points on a play where they committed an illegal substitution. It wouldn't have mattered, I don't think (and I'm a big 'butterfly effect" guy, also, but I don't think we were going to win that game no matter what), but the refs still blew it.

 

I think we're on the same page there.

 

What I don't understand is why we've come back to this discussion after three weeks. I'm very over this.

 

Agree! someone revived the thread, and we all know things happened, but wouldn't have affected the outcome of the game. Those 'things' have their own threads.  And everything on this thread has already been laid bare.  Closing.