Serious question, because I don't really understand the arcana of football rules:
How was OT Gilliam, #79, an eligible receiver?
Normally a player wearing #79 would be ineligible. Normally a tackle would be ineligible. According to Wikipedia, there are "tackle eligible receivers" on certain plays, but the article is confusing on exactly when. It seems to say that if #79 wants to be eligible, he has to tell the ref beforehand, and the ref has to tell the other team and the crowd, neither of which happened.
I understand that Gilliam lined up as an end instead of a tackle, and was off the line of scrimmage; is that enough? Does it make a difference that the play was a busted field goal play? All of the previous fake field goals I've heard about involved a more typical receiver, like a running back. or wide receiver.
I'm also curious how punter Ryan was on the field at all, and how that didn't tip off GB that something unusual was up.
I'm not being snarky or suggesting it shouldn't have been allowed. I'm just asking for someone with a better grasp of the rules to explain it to me, or gimme a link that breaks down the play in detail. It really was astonishing.
Agree about criticizing Packers' coaching. Why does McCarthy stop throwing the ball? That was a huge mistake, and not testing Sherman is a big miss. Why is GB in zero cover on the last play? Not sure he takes the blame for the onside kick.
On the other side, the fake field goal was beautifully executed and the timing was right. The read option was used later than expected, but that seemed to throw off GB. The onside kick was a bit more of a gamble than probably necessary. The two point conversion was the right choice but they should have run or kept the ball with Wilson. The play was a disaster, and the game depended on it. Not a good call there.
How could a fan leave early? You stay and cheer your team for a great season. Even if the Hawks had lost, they put in an amazing effort since being 3-3. Beating traffic or showing your appreciation?
I can forgive any fan of any PNW team for leaving a game early; decades of crappy teams and almost exclusively being on the losing side of spectacular comeback efforts has conditioned them to expect the worst and act accordingly. I say this with confidence as a WSU graduate watching my team "Coug it" on a regular basis.
@5 - Ineligible receivers can declare eligible by notifying the official, and they become "eligible" for one play only. Another player that is normally eligible has to then go to the official and declare themselves "ineligible", otherwise the offense is penalized for illegal formation. The officials announce to the stadium that "player #xx reports as eligible".
Also, eligible is a weird fuckin' word to look at.
@7: Congratulations on having more virtuous hobbies and interests than the rest of us, and not being afraid to say it. I wouldn't even be surprised to learn you don't even own a TV.
@11, fair enough. It is a billionaires boys' club, and this town is a little over the top. Even living in Boston, the town wasn't this devoted to everything Pats.
@14, the siren song of the Seattle malcontent who logs 3-4 hours per day on Hulu.
@15, This town has gotten very over the top with the Seahawks. But I suspect a lot of people around here are like a co-worker I know: She said that she wasn't a football fan, but said in so many words that it was a civic duty of sorts to be very supportive of the Seahawks. Front runner itis is so wide spread around here.
Hopefully the Mariners will receive similar treatment if they get into the ALCS.
I don't know how they announce it at the game. I realized it after the catch the Hawks had taken Bellichuck's idea. It'll make another appearance in two weeks. One or both coaches is going to want to use it again.
#5, #13 is partially correct. The Tackle must report, but he becomes eligible by being the last person on the end of the line. If a receiver was lined up outside of him (to his left) he would not have been eligible reporting or not.
@16 I think its actually pretty common, to the point of routine. The kicking team always wants a good blocker on the kick, so they send in a lineman instead of a receiver. And the lineman habitually reports as eligibile, just to keep the defense on their toes, but 99.9% of the time, the team just kicks the ball. So the defense probably doesn't think about it too much.
Still, one of the responsibilities of the defense is to watch for the fake. The end rusher, especially, is supposed to be paying attention. When Ryan got outside the first rusher, the play had already succeeded.
The GB collapse was Bears vs Tebow levels of "magic".
@8: They had just over 2 minutes left, with only 1 time out. I don't think you can give the ball back to Rodgers in that situation. Even if you force the 3 and out to not lose, you get the ball with worse field position, with no time outs, and with just over 1 minute left. It narrows your options considerably. Admittedly an onside kick is low percentage, but if you get it, you're in good shape.
I hope Sherman says some incredibly offensive things to Tom Brady on the field. Referencing Gisele while grabbing his crotch on a pick six would be fantastic.
@20, I got that part -- he was on the outside. But as #79 he has to also report as eligible, which I didn't hear happen. But obviously it did. I didn't realize that linemen report as eligible so often, as @21 reports. Still, a very funky play.
I'm going to be sending a bill to the Seahawks to pay for the pants I crapped in several times at the end there.
@1: I don't get how ball-tampering can be an advantage to only one team, when they both play on the same pitch in the same weather. Surely sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
@26 Historical note: shenanigans with balls (footballs, you dirty minds) are the reason there is a special kicker ball. Teams used to soften up one ball more than all the others, then try to get that ball on kicks. So the league designated certain balls, which are actually stiffer and thus harder to kick, to be used only on kicking plays.
@22, Rodgers was having a great day. It was McCarthy not trusting him and not keeping the foot on the pedal. Maybe if Seattle had four picks, I'd agree about GB running the ball in that situation.
Carroll made a good point that kicking it deep would have just meant the Hawks had to stop them on three downs deeper in the GB zone. With only one timeout, the onside kick is probably best even with the two minute warning. One GB first down, and the Hawks lose.
On the ball deflating issue: If true, goddammit, I'm going to be super pissed, and I'll root for you guys during the Super Bowl. The thing about it is, this is stupid. The people in control of the balls should be paid by the NFL, not by a specific team. Just like the refs are paid by the NFL so as to remove improper influences. In college, the NCAA is a complete joke, so I can see how this would happen, but to have something like this possible at the professional level is an indictment of the NFL, not just any team that does it.
Hey Spike — thanks for chronicling the Seahawks' Insufferable Journey to Rewinnining the Super Bowl™" so far. It's been a pleasure, and truly insufferable.
@38: Nowhere in that article does it say the Packers ran the ball 12 times in the final 6 minutes. They ran 5 times in two possessions late in the game and up by 12 points. Considering the situation, I don't think that's bad play calling.
The Seahawks' biggest opponent at that point was the clock, and eating it up by running the ball was the right call (in my opinion).
Did it work out? No. But that's because of a fucking miracle ending on the Seahawks' part, not because of McCarthy's play calling.
@33 You have managed to make clear you don't understand what/who is the subject of the satire, while at the same time making yourself the subject. But continue the self-affirming (and apparently almost five year old) slow pat on your back. Maybe one day you'll get a burp.
My stomach still hurts today, because I didn't breathe once in several hours. I am not sure I can actually watch the Superbowl. I might go to the ocean instead, and have somebody tell me what happened afterwards.
GO HAWKS ! I am so proud you for coming back like you did ! You deserve the win and the advancement to the Superbowl ! Let's make history and get this year's Superbowl win ! You can do it ! GO HAWKS :)
Hmm, front page says there are 44 comments yet only 43 are displayed, no matter how many times you reload the page. Let's see if this is comment 44 or 45...
Keep in mind when discussing the "magic" of the Seahawks, that their win depended on several unforced errors by the Packers at the end (Bostick watching the onside kick go right through his hands, Clinton-Dix's bizarre decision not to attempt to stop the two point conversion attempt, GB going to soft zone prevent way early).
Not that these kinds of things are out of the ordinary, but it is not like it is some mystical "wanting it more" Disney magic that won the game.
@35: But Wilson's stat line is 14/29, 209 yards and 4 ints with a 44.3 passer rating (majority against the prevent), does that mean you will have to admit he is not a golden god of perfection, or is that an awesome/mistake free day when Wilson does it?
At the risk of sounding like I'm affirming DOUG.'s opinion, Wilson is a winner. Flawed to be sure, but you can't deny his poise. It wasn't quite Elwayesque clutch, but it was damned impressive.
That said, Green Bay failed to close it out and let the Seahawks have that chance. The lucky breaks continue. It's really uncanny at this point.
BEST article I have ever read on a Seahawk win. Includes past Super Bowl. This from a Seahawk Fan since 1978. A long time coming Baby and enjoying every minute of it from Savannah, GA. Gooooooo Seahawks!
BEST article I've ever read on a Seahawk win, includes the past Super Bowl. I've been a Seahawk fan since 1978 when SAFECO Ins. transferred me from Atlanta, Ga. to Seattle. This is a long time coming Baby. And I'm enjoying every minute of it from Savannah,GA. Gooooo Seahawks!
The league needs to assign a permanent Tom Brady ball feeler.
made of magic is right.
How was OT Gilliam, #79, an eligible receiver?
Normally a player wearing #79 would be ineligible. Normally a tackle would be ineligible. According to Wikipedia, there are "tackle eligible receivers" on certain plays, but the article is confusing on exactly when. It seems to say that if #79 wants to be eligible, he has to tell the ref beforehand, and the ref has to tell the other team and the crowd, neither of which happened.
I understand that Gilliam lined up as an end instead of a tackle, and was off the line of scrimmage; is that enough? Does it make a difference that the play was a busted field goal play? All of the previous fake field goals I've heard about involved a more typical receiver, like a running back. or wide receiver.
I'm also curious how punter Ryan was on the field at all, and how that didn't tip off GB that something unusual was up.
I'm not being snarky or suggesting it shouldn't have been allowed. I'm just asking for someone with a better grasp of the rules to explain it to me, or gimme a link that breaks down the play in detail. It really was astonishing.
On the other side, the fake field goal was beautifully executed and the timing was right. The read option was used later than expected, but that seemed to throw off GB. The onside kick was a bit more of a gamble than probably necessary. The two point conversion was the right choice but they should have run or kept the ball with Wilson. The play was a disaster, and the game depended on it. Not a good call there.
How could a fan leave early? You stay and cheer your team for a great season. Even if the Hawks had lost, they put in an amazing effort since being 3-3. Beating traffic or showing your appreciation?
*sigh*
Also, eligible is a weird fuckin' word to look at.
Eligible. Eligible.
@14, the siren song of the Seattle malcontent who logs 3-4 hours per day on Hulu.
You'd think that the GB coach would have perked up his ears at the announcement and wondered if we were going to try something.
Hopefully the Mariners will receive similar treatment if they get into the ALCS.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201…
I don't know how they announce it at the game. I realized it after the catch the Hawks had taken Bellichuck's idea. It'll make another appearance in two weeks. One or both coaches is going to want to use it again.
Still, one of the responsibilities of the defense is to watch for the fake. The end rusher, especially, is supposed to be paying attention. When Ryan got outside the first rusher, the play had already succeeded.
@8: They had just over 2 minutes left, with only 1 time out. I don't think you can give the ball back to Rodgers in that situation. Even if you force the 3 and out to not lose, you get the ball with worse field position, with no time outs, and with just over 1 minute left. It narrows your options considerably. Admittedly an onside kick is low percentage, but if you get it, you're in good shape.
I'm going to be sending a bill to the Seahawks to pay for the pants I crapped in several times at the end there.
I love feeling FEELINGS with all of you, Seattle!
Carroll made a good point that kicking it deep would have just meant the Hawks had to stop them on three downs deeper in the GB zone. With only one timeout, the onside kick is probably best even with the two minute warning. One GB first down, and the Hawks lose.
Your bold and incisive joke has been on display on Facebook after every major sporting event for at least the last five years.
The last time it was bold or incisive was about four years and three hundred sixty four days ago.
Were we watching the same game?
Also, they don't show the eligible reportings on TV usually. They opt instead to make us listen to Troy Aikman spew garbage.
@ 30, that kinda takes the air out of tweaking you over the possibility that your boys still cheat.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foot…
The Seahawks' biggest opponent at that point was the clock, and eating it up by running the ball was the right call (in my opinion).
Did it work out? No. But that's because of a fucking miracle ending on the Seahawks' part, not because of McCarthy's play calling.
Best worst game ever.
http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/19/nfc-champi…
Not that these kinds of things are out of the ordinary, but it is not like it is some mystical "wanting it more" Disney magic that won the game.
@35: But Wilson's stat line is 14/29, 209 yards and 4 ints with a 44.3 passer rating (majority against the prevent), does that mean you will have to admit he is not a golden god of perfection, or is that an awesome/mistake free day when Wilson does it?
That said, Green Bay failed to close it out and let the Seahawks have that chance. The lucky breaks continue. It's really uncanny at this point.