Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

[RamWraith]

By Jim Thomas
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Friday, Oct. 20 2006

Seattle coach Mike Holmgren can feel Scott Linehan's pain. But he still thinks
the NFL rule on 10-second runoffs is a good one.

"If I was Scott, I'd be saying the same (things)," Holmgren told reporters
Wednesday. "I'd be upset. But the simple fact is, it's different. The two
things are different. Taking the penalty when you're trying to run a play, as
opposed to when you're trying to stop the clock."

It's the difference between deliberately taking a penalty to stop the clock,
which Holmgren agrees should merit a 10-second runoff. Or being called for a
penalty on a play in which your team is trying to stop the clock with a spike.
That was the case for Seattle in Sunday's 30-28 victory over Linehan's Rams.

"I can understand his emotion," Holmgren said. "Absolutely, I can understand
his emotion. But we talked about that very ruling, and the 10-second runoff,
and all those things for hours and hours on the (competition) committee. And
the simple fact is, the kill-the-clock play is different than when you're
trying to run a play down the field. It is different."

"This type of play might happen once a year, once every two years, and
typically that wasn't enough to change rules. I don't think you want to change
every rule that comes up kind of quirky like that."

Of course, Linehan could argue that "quirky" helped cost his team a victory.
Linehan questioned the integrity of the 10-second runoff, because there are
exceptions to the rule and loopholes that he feels teams could exploit in the
future.

"The example that (Linehan) used, to have two receivers run down there and one
snap the ball like you're on the playground, you can't do it," Holmgren said.
"The official's holding the ball. He's holding the ball. You're not going to
grab the ball from the official ... and nothing can be done till he sets the
ball down."

In the larger scheme, Linehan feels there are too many rules in the NFL that
are situational or subject to interpretation. In other words, rules that seem
to apply in some circumstances, but not in others.

Holmgren expects the competition committee to discuss the 10-second runoff in
the offseason. "I will vote (to) leave it be," he said. "It's an unusual
situation, yes. Painful, yes. But the rule is the rule, and there's a reason."

Tinoisamoa's contract

Linebacker Pisa Tinoisamoa's five-year contract extension is worth $24.7
million, according to information filed with the NFL Players Association.
Tinoisamoa received a $5 million signing bonus and will receive a $2.5 million
roster bonus before the 2007 season.

Tinoisamoa receives base salaries of $1.92 million this season; $1.5 million in
'07; $3 million in '08; $3.25 million in '09; $3.5 million in '10; and $4
million in '11.

No progress on Little

Monday's meeting between president of football operations Jay Zygmunt and Chad
Speck, the agent for Leonard Little, did not result in a contract extension for
the Rams' defensive end.

It's looking more and more as if Little will not get a contract extension
before the end of this season. Currently tied for eighth in the NFL with five
sacks, Little is scheduled for unrestricted free agency after this season. The
Rams may use a franchise tag on Little if the parties can't agree on a new
contract.

By the numbers

Quarterback Marc Bulger has moved up to third in the NFL in passer rating
(99.8). As a team, the Rams have moved up to eighth in total offense and fourth
in passing offense, both season highs.

Running back Steven Jackson is second in the NFL in rushing (521 yards), second
in first downs gained (34), and leads the league in yards from scrimmage (745).

[general counsel]

Right up there with denny green as the most overated coach in the nfl. His play calling stinks. His clock management stinks. Way to burn your last timeout on a stupid challenge last week you idiot.

Ramming speed to all

general counsel

[r8rh8rmike]

Right up there with denny green as the most overated coach in the nfl. His play calling stinks. His clock management stinks. Way to burn your last timeout on a stupid challenge last week you idiot.

Ramming speed to all

general counsel

How do you really feel GC?!

[UtterBlitz]

Spending time on the competition committee can provide some benefits to Holmgrem since he knows about the ticky tacky rules that really don't make sense.

[RamFan_Til_I_Die]

It's also very easy for him to say when he was on the winning side of the stupid rule. Ask any Raider fan/organization member about other lame rules, and they will go crazy and kill people in their tirade about the famous "tuck" rule. Ask any Patriot fan/organization member and they will justify that stealing of a win to the end. Stupid rules can be overlooked (even though they shouldn't be) when the don't literally change the outcome of the game. When they do have a direct effect on the game, even if they only come into play once a year, they need to be perfected. This rule needs to be better defined and implemented before someone loses another game involving it or worse yet a playoff or Superbowl game.

[Fat Pang]

As Mandy Rice-Davies once very famously said, "Well he would, wouldn't he"

[RamOfDenmark]

I agree with Linehan that the rules are often too situational, and too complex, not even the refs or the coaches are always entirely sure and it causes massive debates on the field week in and week out. This is just one example, there are many others (like all the stuff that came into play at the end of the Cardinals game etc.). The game isn't meant to be played with a lawyer by your side, I would be in favor of a thorough clean-up of the rules. The basic rules are fine, the more esoteric stuff should be simplified and slimmed down to the essentials. It would be a cleaner game with less confusion and less bickering about what is 'fair' and what isn't. The complete rulebook should be relatively short and readable by anyone familiar with the game. Cut down on the bureaucracy and let the players play.

(On a sidenote I hold the same opinion on law in general.)

[ramsplaya16]

Of course holmgren will agree with the rule, until it happens to his team, then he will complain about it

[MonaLisaOverdrive]

I don't think you guys noticed what really happened. The Seahawks didn't use some "loophole" and take advantage of it. Because of their penalty it and peoples lack of knowledge on the play (around the country), they simply shined light on a POSSIBLE loophole situation. The Hawks had everyone on the line and legally snapped the ball @ 5 seconds left in the game. Nate Burleson was set too far off the line, so they got pushed back 5 yards for illegal formation.

Where was the loophole they took advantage of? All 11 people were up to the line (Burleson was a couple feet back) and set, then ball snapped... so what loophole? They had 5 seconds left; the spike would have stopped the clock at 4 seconds.

What loophole did they take advantage of? Are you saying they "cheated" so they could kick an extra long field goal? How is that logical?

They simply shined light on a POSSIBLE loophole; the Hawks themselves did not actually use the loophole. This is the point a LOT of people do not understand right now.



I hope this clears up some of the confusion over the play, take care and I look forward to the rematch!

[Sweets]

If you don't want ONE rule to win or lose a game for you, then score more points and make the calls that some of you call situational or too complex moot. The Raiders can cry all they want about the tuck rule but it's there in black and white and if they had scored a few more points that rule wouldn't have made a difference one way or the other.

[Guam rammer]

If you don't want ONE rule to win or lose a game for you, then score more points and make the calls that some of you call situational or too complex moot. The Raiders can cry all they want about the tuck rule but it's there in black and white and if they had scored a few more points that rule wouldn't have made a difference one way or the other.

oh yeah thats the best way to take care of a rule that doesnt make any sense. Score more points and forget that the rule exists and doesnt have flaws. *edit for content*

[RamFan_Til_I_Die]

blah blah blah...lots of words to argue against a point not even being made here.....blah blah blah

I'm not saying we loss because of this rule, and I'm not saying the Seahawks did it on purpose. I'm say the rule is funky and needs to be look at in more depth.

[jkramsfan]

Of course holmgren will agree with the rule, until it happens to his team, then he will complain about it

agreed, what the hell does everyone think he's going to say,even if he knows its a bad rule,he has to go along until of course it happens to his fat a##.

[jkramsfan]

Right up there with denny green as the most overated coach in the nfl. His play calling stinks. His clock management stinks. Way to burn your last timeout on a stupid challenge last week you idiot.

Ramming speed to all

general counsel

GC,i guess you won't be putting dennis green or holmgren on your favorite coaches of all time list.

[Brain Daddy]

The Rams have another game against the Seahawks. If Linehan wants to make a point, he should do it in Seattle if he can. Take advantage of the rule against the Seahawks and then ask the Walrus feels about it