Comments on: Smart Notes 10/27/09 http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709 Analysis and strategy by Chris. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:51:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: jfwells http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1855 jfwells Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:23:16 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1855 Doesn't Sean Canfield's performance in the Oregon State game against USC last week pretty much negate that argument for Clausen's greatness? Canfield was 30 of 43 for 329 yards, 3 touchdowns and no interceptions. Doesn’t Sean Canfield’s performance in the Oregon State game against USC last week pretty much negate that argument for Clausen’s greatness?

Canfield was 30 of 43 for 329 yards, 3 touchdowns and no interceptions.

]]> By: Rob http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1849 Rob Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:16:52 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1849 HokieFan, Here is a quote from your DL coach pregame. It is clear, that 1. D lineman engage the O lineman. 2. Despite the rule I posted, which is very clear in this situation, the VPI staff expect a penalty to be called. You cant argue "point of view" on a clear cut black&white rule. Also, as far as the last question goes, GT cuts their d-lineman in practice without any problems, dont know why he cant figure out how to practice it. “It’s tough. They’re so low. It’s not as much chopping. We see chop stuff from normal teams. But they crab you almost. You’ll be on a guy and there’s another guy down at your legs. Technically, all that stuff is illegal. But it’s like, ‘Who’s engaging who?’ That’s their point of view. Is it the defensive lineman engaging the center, for instance. He’s trying to get up to the next level and the defensive lineman’s engaging him and the guard’s on your legs. So they’re saying, ‘We’re not engaging him. We’re trying to slip to get to the next level and you’re engaging us, so that’s your problem.’ That’s their point of view, which if I’m coaching those guys, I understand that point of view. If you’re on the other side of the ball, you’re like, ‘That’s a high-low.’ But I know they’ve been around and around with that with the officiating. You’re just going to have to battle. It’s going to be one of those deals where you’re going to have people around your legs. It’s hard to practice that. How do you practice that without getting one of your guys nicked?” HokieFan,

Here is a quote from your DL coach pregame. It is clear, that
1. D lineman engage the O lineman.
2. Despite the rule I posted, which is very clear in this situation, the VPI staff expect a penalty to be called. You cant argue “point of view” on a clear cut black&white rule.

Also, as far as the last question goes, GT cuts their d-lineman in practice without any problems, dont know why he cant figure out how to practice it.

“It’s tough. They’re so low. It’s not as much chopping. We see chop stuff from normal teams. But they crab you almost. You’ll be on a guy and there’s another guy down at your legs. Technically, all that stuff is illegal. But it’s like, ‘Who’s engaging who?’ That’s their point of view. Is it the defensive lineman engaging the center, for instance. He’s trying to get up to the next level and the defensive lineman’s engaging him and the guard’s on your legs. So they’re saying, ‘We’re not engaging him. We’re trying to slip to get to the next level and you’re engaging us, so that’s your problem.’ That’s their point of view, which if I’m coaching those guys, I understand that point of view. If you’re on the other side of the ball, you’re like, ‘That’s a high-low.’ But I know they’ve been around and around with that with the officiating. You’re just going to have to battle. It’s going to be one of those deals where you’re going to have people around your legs. It’s hard to practice that. How do you practice that without getting one of your guys nicked?”

]]> By: Tom http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1843 Tom Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:12:12 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1843 "And note that illegal “chop blocks” are not limited to the rule where one guy is engaged while another player hits him, George. The college rule seems centered on the outside-in nature of the block." This is not correct (though both are 15 yard penalties). NCAA rulebook: http://www.oficiales.org/A_2009/ncaa/NCAAINGLES/2009-10%20NCAA%20Footbal%20Rule%20Book.pdf The rule about blocking below the waist from the ouside-in is an illegal block below the waist (not a chop) as defined in Rule 9-1-2-e-1 and 9-1-2-e-2 (page 120 in the pdf) A chop block is a high/low or low/high combination block (see definition on page 43 in the pdf) and is illegal by Rule 9-1-m (page 121 in the pdf) “And note that illegal “chop blocks” are not limited to the rule where one guy is engaged while another player hits him, George. The college rule seems centered on the outside-in nature of the block.”

This is not correct (though both are 15 yard penalties).

NCAA rulebook: http://www.oficiales.org/A_2009/ncaa/NCAAINGLES/2009-10%20NCAA%20Footbal%20Rule%20Book.pdf

The rule about blocking below the waist from the ouside-in is an illegal block below the waist (not a chop) as defined in Rule 9-1-2-e-1 and 9-1-2-e-2 (page 120 in the pdf)

A chop block is a high/low or low/high combination block (see definition on page 43 in the pdf) and is illegal by Rule 9-1-m (page 121 in the pdf)

]]> By: Dan http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1842 Dan Wed, 28 Oct 2009 05:29:49 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1842 Frank needs to learn about knowing his facts before making accusations in the media. He got the play wrong, got owned in the AJC with photographic evidence by a textbook head-on block, and is now having to backtrack and shows one play in the third quarter as justification. If this is truly about player safety, Beamer should have said something after they won in Blacksburg last year. The scheme is exactly the same. My suspicion is that Beamer is trying to game the officials for future matchups, and trying to shift attention away from Kam Chancellor. Frank needs to learn about knowing his facts before making accusations in the media.
He got the play wrong, got owned in the AJC with photographic evidence by a textbook head-on block, and is now having to backtrack and shows one play in the third quarter as justification.
If this is truly about player safety, Beamer should have said something after they won in Blacksburg last year. The scheme is exactly the same. My suspicion is that Beamer is trying to game the officials for future matchups, and trying to shift attention away from Kam Chancellor.

]]> By: Ben http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1838 Ben Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:37:05 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1838 Defensive linement grab and hold the O-Line guys all the time. It's particularly used with a strong LB corps - keep the O-Line off of your big playmakers. I used to play center, and the hardest blocks involved closing off a back side tackle or linebacker when there was a back side 1- or 2-technique in the way. If the nose tackle doesn't get his eyes up to read the backfield, he will try to drive through back side. When he feels the play side guard coming in, he is taught to hold his ground against a double team block. I think the rules are very well defined - no high/low double team in the tackle box, and no crack blocks. Defensive linement grab and hold the O-Line guys all the time. It’s particularly used with a strong LB corps – keep the O-Line off of your big playmakers. I used to play center, and the hardest blocks involved closing off a back side tackle or linebacker when there was a back side 1- or 2-technique in the way. If the nose tackle doesn’t get his eyes up to read the backfield, he will try to drive through back side. When he feels the play side guard coming in, he is taught to hold his ground against a double team block. I think the rules are very well defined – no high/low double team in the tackle box, and no crack blocks.

]]> By: Jimmy the tech fan http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1837 Jimmy the tech fan Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:08:38 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1837 Hokiefan, I agree that it would be stupid for a player to risk their career for a penalty. However, if you know the block is coming, and you are not really being blocked high, then the low block doesn't have the same effect. The reason is that you wouldn't have your weight planted on that leg if you knew it was coming. If your weight is not planted, the chop blocks do not hurt anywhere near as much because the leg will rotate at the hip rather than bend at the knee. Watch the guard and DT in the play in question. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bLErd7xKDQ Do you see that white jersey getting stretched? Are you really gonna say that isn't holding? Also, watch the DT, he has his back to the OT. HIS BACK. He is facing the guard and a VT linebacker. Why on earth would a DT be doing that for? By turning around, he takes the low black much more softly than he would if he was taking it from the side or the front. Hokiefan, I agree that it would be stupid for a player to risk their career for a penalty. However, if you know the block is coming, and you are not really being blocked high, then the low block doesn’t have the same effect. The reason is that you wouldn’t have your weight planted on that leg if you knew it was coming. If your weight is not planted, the chop blocks do not hurt anywhere near as much because the leg will rotate at the hip rather than bend at the knee.

Watch the guard and DT in the play in question. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bLErd7xKDQ Do you see that white jersey getting stretched? Are you really gonna say that isn’t holding? Also, watch the DT, he has his back to the OT. HIS BACK. He is facing the guard and a VT linebacker. Why on earth would a DT be doing that for? By turning around, he takes the low black much more softly than he would if he was taking it from the side or the front.

]]> By: Hokiefan http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1835 Hokiefan Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:39:35 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1835 Rob, thats incorrect. Go back and watch the game and you won't see an instance of Defenders grabbing on offensive lineman. To imply that shows a lack of understanding of the speed of play along the offensive and defensive line. Simply put, a defender doesn't have time to grab a hold of an offensive lineman to impede progress and then get hit by a different lineman. Besides, are you implying that a football player would risk his college career to get a penalty? There was a VT player who was injured in that game, and is out indefinitely with an injured ankle after an illegal block. I'm sure that the coaches on the staff are also encouraging their players to leave their knees and ankles open to 280lbs of man coming crashing down on them. I'm sure. Rob, thats incorrect. Go back and watch the game and you won’t see an instance of Defenders grabbing on offensive lineman. To imply that shows a lack of understanding of the speed of play along the offensive and defensive line. Simply put, a defender doesn’t have time to grab a hold of an offensive lineman to impede progress and then get hit by a different lineman.
Besides, are you implying that a football player would risk his college career to get a penalty? There was a VT player who was injured in that game, and is out indefinitely with an injured ankle after an illegal block. I’m sure that the coaches on the staff are also encouraging their players to leave their knees and ankles open to 280lbs of man coming crashing down on them. I’m sure.

]]> By: Rob http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1833 Rob Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:48:33 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1833 In his "apology", Beamer complained about this part of the rules: "After snapping the ball, snapper A54 brushes by nose guard B62 on his way to block a linebacker. A54 makes slight contact with B62, or B62 reaches out and uses his arm to initiate contact with A54. While B62 and A54 are in contact, right guard A68 blocks B62 at the knee from the front. RULING: Legal. A54 is not blocking B62. The incidental contact or B62’s initiating contact does not constitute part of a combination block, and hence there is no chop block." Basically, VPI was grabbing GT linemen to try to draw chop block flags (or just to prevent them from getting to the LBs). Beamer seemed to admit he was wrong on the "chop" blocks but that is just because the rule is bad and he wants the rule changed to ANY engagement. Allowing defenders to "create" a penalty by grabbing another player is at least as bad as helmet-to-helmet calls on the defense when the offensive player lowers his head and hits the defender (which has been a problem since the emphasis). In his “apology”, Beamer complained about this part of the rules:

“After snapping the ball, snapper A54 brushes by nose guard B62 on his way to block a linebacker. A54 makes slight contact with B62, or B62 reaches out and uses his arm to initiate contact with A54. While B62 and A54 are in contact, right guard A68 blocks B62 at the knee from the front. RULING: Legal. A54 is not blocking B62. The incidental contact or B62’s initiating contact does not constitute part of a combination block, and hence there is no chop block.”

Basically, VPI was grabbing GT linemen to try to draw chop block flags (or just to prevent them from getting to the LBs). Beamer seemed to admit he was wrong on the “chop” blocks but that is just because the rule is bad and he wants the rule changed to ANY engagement. Allowing defenders to “create” a penalty by grabbing another player is at least as bad as helmet-to-helmet calls on the defense when the offensive player lowers his head and hits the defender (which has been a problem since the emphasis).

]]> By: BMarsh07 http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1831 BMarsh07 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:17:05 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1831 Just a note to defend Saint Johnson and his fake field goal vs.Clemson- he notified the refs about the trick play- they approved it during pregame. (Augusta Chronicle, Sept. 17th, page 6C) Just a note to defend Saint Johnson and his fake field goal vs.Clemson- he notified the refs about the trick play- they approved it during pregame. (Augusta Chronicle, Sept. 17th, page 6C)

]]> By: DM http://smartfootball.com/notes/smart-notes-102709/comment-page-1#comment-1830 DM Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:46:24 +0000 http://smartfootball.com/?p=592#comment-1830 Smith had one good half against a lousy defense. Let's not go overboard. Beamer apologized, sort of: "I told Paul that I said the wrong statement yesterday in saying the last touchdown was a low block on our 17 [free safety Kam Chancellor]. It was a similar play, but it wasn’t the last touchdown. It was a play where Nesbitt went out of bounds on about the 2 [a 31-yard run in the third quarter]. I apologized for that. I don’t like giving out wrong information. It shouldn’t have happened. And I apologize for that." http://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-tech/beamer-clarifies-comments-175380.html Smith had one good half against a lousy defense. Let’s not go overboard.

Beamer apologized, sort of:

“I told Paul that I said the wrong statement yesterday in saying the last touchdown was a low block on our 17 [free safety Kam Chancellor]. It was a similar play, but it wasn’t the last touchdown. It was a play where Nesbitt went out of bounds on about the 2 [a 31-yard run in the third quarter]. I apologized for that. I don’t like giving out wrong information. It shouldn’t have happened. And I apologize for that.”

http://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-tech/beamer-clarifies-comments-175380.html

]]>