wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
13 years ago

So what happens when this acting enters the WWE sphere, a.k.a. some guy is willing to play hurt enough to be carted off, just to not have his team docked a timeout?

Originally Posted by: Packers_Finland 



I know. It is not perfect. There is always some way for cheaters to figure out a way around the rules. Perhaps add a mandatory 1 game off, not a suspension, for safety's sake.

Even then a team could get a 3rd stringer out on the field for one play and then have him fall down. He would be the DF- designated flopper. "come on Timmy, fall down and take it for the team!"
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
I like the way they do it in professional rugby: If someone goes down with an injury, the game continues as though nothing had happened. Medics rush out onto the field to examine and protect the player, while the action proceeds apace. No timeouts are lost and no advantage is gained. Of course, that means that while a player is being checked out, his team is playing 14-on-15, but overall, that seems fair to me. It's certainly a strong disincentive to faking.

I think this system is the best of all worlds and would translate well to American football.
UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago

That doesn’t take away its status as complete and utter bullshit. I also think that if they’re going to do it they should be a little less obvious about it. Finally, I am sorry you have to be a bears fan.

Originally Posted by: Silentio 


Teams like the Bengals were doing that against the the Bills and Jim Kelly decades ago. I remember the linemen talking about "trick knees" and other things during interviews.

Everyone knew it was happening. The announcers even said, there is another "injury" to slow down the no huddle. They even showed a lineman getting up and I think it was Krumrie telling the other one to stay down. The announcers even said that is what they were doing.

They have done it for years, it was completely obvious.

Why is this an issue now? Nobody was fooled then and didn't care, why is this a revelation? Why is it even an issue?

If people were unaware that it happened they are so lacking in the powers of observation that I am surprised they can cross the street without getting hit by a buss.

Let them fake injuries, it won't slow Rodgers down.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
mi_keys
13 years ago
I like where you're going Non, I would just be worried about part of the field being blocked off, especially if the injury happened down field. That's an issue you are not as likely to run into with no forward pass. What if you took the player off and didn't let the team replace them for a play? Yeah the defense could slow the offense down but playing a man down should be incentive enough to not cheat like the Giants just did.
Born and bred a cheesehead
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
A similar thought occurred to me, but I think offenses could adapt pretty easily, just as they do when they are awarded a free play. They could simply line up more receivers on the other side of the field and either stack them downfield or have them do crossing patterns beyond the obstruction. I could see how it ultimately might favor offenses even more, especially since it wouldn't be a formation defenses were used to seeing on film.
UserPostedImage
Greg C.
13 years ago

They have done it for years, it was completely obvious.

Why is this an issue now? Nobody was fooled then and didn't care, why is this a revelation? Why is it even an issue?

If people were unaware that it happened they are so lacking in the powers of observation that I am surprised they can cross the street without getting hit by a buss.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



Well, you can count me as one of the blind and/or ignorant, because in all the years I've been watching football, this is not something I've noticed very often. I do see defensive players get injured while the opposing offense is in hurry-up mode, but I haven't noticed an increased amount of injuries at these times, and I can't tell if the injuries are real or fake. How are you able to tell the difference?

What made it different in the Giants game was the fact that it was obvious. That's why it's being questioned so much. I've never been satisfied with explanations (for any kind of behavior) that rely on the statement, "Everybody does it, so that makes it okay." If it's crappy behavior, it should be punished. Then maybe "everybody" (it's never everybody anyway) would stop doing it. In this case, unfortunately, I don't think there's a reliable way to enforce it. But I do think it was good for the league to at least put a warning out there.
blank
Greg C.
13 years ago

A similar thought occurred to me, but I think offenses could adapt pretty easily, just as they do when they are awarded a free play. They could simply line up more receivers on the other side of the field and either stack them downfield or have them do crossing patterns beyond the obstruction. I could see how it ultimately might favor offenses even more, especially since it wouldn't be a formation defenses were used to seeing on film.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 


Do you guys really think this is a viable solution? How do you think this would go over with the viewing public? Don't you think it would be maybe just a little bit controversial, not to mention just plain weird, for an offense to be running plays while a defender is lying on the ground injured? You can argue the pros and cons of it, but the reality is that it's not going to happen in a million years, because most fans would think it was unsportsmanlike and downright absurd.

blank
mi_keys
13 years ago

Do you guys really think this is a viable solution? How do you think this would go over with the viewing public? Don't you think it would be maybe just a little bit controversial, not to mention just plain weird, for an offense to be running plays while a defender is lying on the ground injured? You can argue the pros and cons of it, but the reality is that it's not going to happen in a million years, because most fans would think it was unsportsmanlike and downright absurd.

Originally Posted by: Greg C. 



I certainly don't think this will ever happen and I'm sure Non is the same way. However, we personally would both prefer a system that deters what the Giants do, regardless of whether or not that will ever happen.
Born and bred a cheesehead
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
Mucky Tundra (15h) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
packerfanoutwest (21h) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.