All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26 AM.
Home Contact Us FAQ

ClanRam
bash08
bash08

Go Back   The ClanRam Forums > THE 2007 SEASON > RAM TALK

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
RamWraith's Avatar
RamWraith
Status: Online
Pinball Wizard
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Minnesota
Age: 38
Posts: 7,407
Rep Power: 31
RamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant futureRamWraith has a brilliant future
Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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).
__________________

"I would much rather have a bottle in front of me than a
frontal lobotomy"!!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
general counsel's Avatar
general counsel
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: atlanta, georgia
Age: 46
Posts: 4,829
Rep Power: 23
general counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant futuregeneral counsel has a brilliant future
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
r8rh8rmike's Avatar
r8rh8rmike
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Beach, Ca.
Age: 49
Posts: 4,313
Rep Power: 26
r8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant future
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
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?!
Reply With Quote
Remove advertisements
Advertisement
Sponsored links

  #4 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
UtterBlitz's Avatar
UtterBlitz
Status: Offline
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,113
Rep Power: 15
UtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to beholdUtterBlitz is a splendid one to behold
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
RamFan_Til_I_Die's Avatar
RamFan_Til_I_Die
Status: Online
Ram MVP
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Age: 31
Posts: 1,372
Rep Power: 13
RamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud of
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old -20-10-2006
Fat Pang's Avatar
Fat Pang
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,518
Rep Power: 17
Fat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud ofFat Pang has much to be proud of
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

As Mandy Rice-Davies once very famously said, "Well he would, wouldn't he"
__________________
"If a man does not know to what port he is sailing, no wind is favourable" Lucius Seneca 4BC-AD65
Reply With Quote
Remove advertisements
Advertisement
Sponsored links

  #7 (permalink)  
Old -21-10-2006
RamOfDenmark's Avatar
RamOfDenmark
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Denmark
Age: 24
Posts: 672
Rep Power: 7
RamOfDenmark is a glorious beacon of lightRamOfDenmark is a glorious beacon of lightRamOfDenmark is a glorious beacon of lightRamOfDenmark is a glorious beacon of lightRamOfDenmark is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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.)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old -21-10-2006
ramsplaya16's Avatar
ramsplaya16
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: coral springs. Florida
Age: 16
Posts: 939
Rep Power: 5
ramsplaya16 has a spectacular aura aboutramsplaya16 has a spectacular aura aboutramsplaya16 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Of course holmgren will agree with the rule, until it happens to his team, then he will complain about it
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
MonaLisaOverdrive's Avatar
MonaLisaOverdrive
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21
Rep Power: 0
MonaLisaOverdrive - is sitting in the middle of the road
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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!
Reply With Quote
Remove advertisements
Advertisement
Sponsored links

  #10 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
Guam rammer's Avatar
Guam rammer
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Guam
Age: 39
Posts: 306
Rep Power: 2
Guam rammer - will become famous soon enough
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweets View Post
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*

Last edited by RamWraith; -22-10-2006 at 03:56 PM. Reason: not necessary
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
RamFan_Til_I_Die's Avatar
RamFan_Til_I_Die
Status: Online
Ram MVP
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Age: 31
Posts: 1,372
Rep Power: 13
RamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud ofRamFan_Til_I_Die has much to be proud of
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonaLisaOverdrive View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
jkramsfan's Avatar
jkramsfan
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Clifton Park,N.Y.
Age: 43
Posts: 2,401
Rep Power: 14
jkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to behold
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramsplaya16 View Post
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##.
Reply With Quote
Remove advertisements
Advertisement
Sponsored links

  #13 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
jkramsfan's Avatar
jkramsfan
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Clifton Park,N.Y.
Age: 43
Posts: 2,401
Rep Power: 14
jkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to beholdjkramsfan is a splendid one to behold
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old -22-10-2006
Brain Daddy's Avatar
Brain Daddy
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia
Age: 25
Posts: 230
Rep Power: 3
Brain Daddy has a spectacular aura aboutBrain Daddy has a spectacular aura about
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

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
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old -23-10-2006
SavageRam's Avatar
SavageRam
Status: Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ME
Posts: 80
Rep Power: 2
SavageRam - will become famous soon enough
Re: Holmgren supports runoff rule as is

Quote:
Originally Posted by RamWraith View Post
Mike Holmgren:
"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."
True, until teams start exploiting it. I wonder if he'll still think it's "quirky."

Quote:
Mike Holmgren:
"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."
Everyone knows you can't snap the ball until the officials set the ball down, but that "playground" play would still take a lot less time than waiting for a lumbering, tired offensive line to run down there.

And if the ball was caught down the middle of the field for say 20 or 30 yards -- which is easier to do against a prevent defense that's protecting the sidelines -- it would take three or four seconds for the official to set the ball down and have one receiver snap it to another receiver while the rest of the team stands still. That would result in an offensive illegal formation penalty and defensive encroachment penalty... offsetting penalties... and it would stop the clock with no 10 second runoff.

Now, that's a play I wouldn't hesitate putting in my playbook after last weekend.

Last edited by SavageRam; -23-10-2006 at 12:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
Remove advertisements
Advertisement
Sponsored links

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26 AM.