uncle flap

The rules are publicly available: http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2012%20-%20Rule%20Book.pdf However, there is no mention of facemask guidelines, except to indicate a maximum diameter for the bars. Either the printed version of 2013's rules are not out yet, or there are phantom rules. I think most likely, any rule changes have yet to be published.

Well done, OC! I really enjoyed these breakdowns. I got Game Rewind this year, so perhaps I'll take a stab at some breakdowns, although this is certainly one hard act to follow. Anyway, just wanted to chime in re: the weird play action thingy. That is play action meant to simulate the QB read option. Think of it like the Dolphins Wildcat with no motion, and the QB is the QB. The Bills did it a few times in practice. Or another way to put it is that it's almost double play action. The fake handoff, and Vick faking his own run. I didn't watch the Eagles game, but it could also just be that you're describing play action meant to appear as a draw. I've noticed a lot of fake draws out of the spread in college, so that could be emphasized in Chip Kelly's offense. My apologies if to what you're referring was obviously none of the above; Like I said, I didn't watch, so I could be way off here.

Yeah I was less than impressed with their effort. They didn't get a lot of push in the run game, and pass protection was hit or miss. Some plays the QBs would have all the time in the world, and on others they might as well have been standing behind turnstiles. Wood and Urbik seemed to be the only ones playing well overall, although they were far from perfect. Pears got beat a few times. I think it would help to have the backs in a weak I formation, so one can chip behind Glenn. Glenn seems fine against the bull rush, but is susceptible to the likes of Hughes who can use his speed and bend around Glenn. Having Fred or a FB might be able to neutralize that. Or if they're running that 20 set, which I didn't notice them run once, definitely keep the guy on the left in to block. I didn't mean to paint to bleak a picture. I'm definitely concerned, but there's no need to panic at this point. Colin Brown was playing with the ones, and it just seemed like if the D overloaded the left side, those two had no chance. As Chan showed us, there are ways to compensate for a lack of protection. And if they plan on running as much as they say they are, Glenn and the others won't be so much of a liability.

Justin Rogers wasn't playing last night (at least I don't think he was), so Robey was lined up outside with the ones. He looks very small, but not out of place. I'd have to say he was "adequate" filling in because I didn't notice any big mistakes or anything. I noticed him more in the one on one drills vs the WRs; He had a few pass breakups, and stuck with his man for the most part. I don't remember him giving up any "easy" catches, but some of the WRs were able to outmuscle him for position. I saw Brooks on the outside too, tho now I'm not sure if it was with the ones or not. Also saw him covering slot guys. Like Gilmore, he uses his hands quite a bit. Bordering on too much, IMO.

Yes they had refs spotting the ball. 11 seconds was the fastest snap I timed, but they were routinely lined up at around 8-10 seconds, and snapping the ball at 13-15 seconds. Regarding the refs dictating the pace, I think that's just an acknowledgement that they have the ultimate control. What I saw at practice, and what I'm sure you've seen in real games in hurry up situations, is that the refs follow the lead of the players. If and when the players run to the line, the ref better make damn sure he's running, too. There would be and has been outrage when refs are slow to spot the ball. 8 seconds seems fast, but it only takes about 2-3 seconds to spot a ball regardless of where it's at on the field. They weren't snapping the ball at 8 seconds, although if it was a spike to kill the clock, they certainly could've. I should've been more clear: There were more than a few times where the offense was maybe not 100% set at 8 seconds, but at the line and could have been set in an instant. Anyway, I just used that example to show how quickly the offense was getting to the line. What's more important and also more indicative of the pace, is that they would string together at least 4-5 plays in a row, snapping the ball with at least 25 seconds left on the play clock each time.

I'm happy that EJ is starting, although I think I would've preferred to see Kolb run about 10-15 plays then EJ get the bulk of the game with second and third stringers. Perhaps that would build his confidence more than just running a few scripted plays and then getting on the bus ASAP. Obviously the positives are we get to see him mostly with the ones against most of Indy's first team, and that starting usually means he'll be out of there quickly and limit the opportunities to be injured. With Kolb playing an emergency role, I don't think there is as much pressure on EJ, since whatever he does won't be compared to whatever Kolb would've done. I do expect that if Tuel makes any positive plays and no major boneheaded ones, that there will be a handful of posters and whiner line callers advocating for Tuel as the #1.

Sorry to hear that, it was a beautiful night. You and all who expressed thanks are very welcome!

Overall, both the first and second team D lines were pretty good at clogging the middle against the run. There were only a couple big runs, most were a yard or two and a cloud of dust. Spiller had a 25+ yd TD after bouncing one outside on what looked to be a designed run up the middle. I think it was Fred who had another big gainer after he side stepped an unblocked blitzing CB who had him in his sights 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I didn't pay too much attention to the d line play as I was mostly watching the ball, but there was plenty of pre-snap shifting causing the QBs to call out protections. Even when doing so, the offense still would snap the ball with around 25 left on the play clock. Tough to tell how well the d line as a whole was playing when there seemed to be constant pressure from the the RE and/or ROLB. Didn't really notice Branch good or bad, but wasn't really looking out for him either.

I didn't bother taking many mental notes since I figured Astro, Mike, or mrags would've had this covered, but since I don't see a thread about last night's practice, I thought I'd share a few thoughts and observations. Holy hell the offense moves at an astonishing clip. There were times when the QB was under center ready for the snap in 8 seconds. I'd say they averaged about 13 seconds between snaps in 11-on-11s. The left side of the oline seems to be a big problem. Glenn wasn't that bad but he was getting no help from the guard spot. That isn't to say Glenn was great, but judging by last night's performance, he seems to have regressed from his impressive start last year. Let's hope this isn't a Tyler Myers 2.0 situation. I was hoping to see a lot more out of Da'Rick Rogers. That isn't to say I was disappointed exactly, I'd just been wishing there was a young Randy Moss flying under the radar. He looked pretty good overall; He made a sick one handed grab, turned the corner, and extended the ball to the pylon for a TD to close out the Red Zone drills. He also shows pretty good body control for his size. Marquise Goodwin is INSANELY fast. Lots of speedy guys out there, but Goodwin and Spiller just seem to get to that next gear that much quicker. And it's not just straight line speed. Obviously we know about Spiller, but Goodwin seemed just as fast, if not faster, while cutting/ getting in and out of breaks/ and in full fledged stops and starts in another direction. Tuel was rather inconsistent, but still makes enough good plays to earn a spot on the roster. I think they'll keep 3 QBs rather than try to stash him on the PS. Manuel faced a good amount of pressure. I noticed him staring down receivers quite a bit. It didn't seem to negatively affect him that much, as there was only one play that I recall where the pass was so telegraphed so that the safety could cheat enough that EJ threw into double coverage. Despite all that, he still looked the part of an NFL QB, not like a rookie trying to make the team. Now on to the Defense: Mario will be fine. He was limited, but when he was participating, the guy was a beast. Looks 100% to me. Looks very fast and showcased plenty of strength in both team and individual drills. Hughes looked pretty good too. Perhaps the change of scenery has invigorated him, or perhaps Mathis and Freeney cast such a big shadow in Indy that Hughes didn't get a proper opportunity to shine. We'll find out soon enough. Alonso was very strong and fast. Like Manuel, he doesn't look out of place with the ones. Aaron Williams might've been the most enthusiastic player out there. Constantly running his mouth, and celebrating with the D, whether or not he was with the unit making the play. He and Da'Rick jawed for a bit after Rogers caught a long TD on Butler (I think). Rogers may have pushed off- I couldn't tell from my angle - but it looked like Butler (or whoever) said something to Rogers in the endzone and Rogers turned to him and looked to have some words of his own. At that point AW, who was standing behind the endzone, jumps in and he and Rogers are nearly face mask to face mask. Williams and Rogers were jawing again after Rogers made a catch out of bounds in 11-on-11s, but it seemed to be good natured as I had a better view of that instance. But back to football, Aaron Williams has been reborn at safety, and it seems to be a natural transition. Gilmore is still excellent. Still very hands-on. At least two no calls could easily have been called as holding or illegal contact. Very borderline, and perhaps he should make a point of not pushing the envelope there. In a league emphasizing passing, I wonder how often he'll get the benefit of the doubt on those close calls. Plenty of blitzes overall, but even more "fake" blitzes. It's said the "illusion" of pressure can be just as problematic as actual pressure, and I think Pettine subscribes to this theory. The D showed blitz from a variety of angles on nearly every play, but they didn't actually blitz as often as they threatened to. Still, it creates confusion for the offense, especially the offensive line. Nickel Robey made a few plays, and I think he makes the team. They had him working with the special teams as well. Speaking of special teams: Lindell banked one in during the two minute drill as time was expiring. I didn't pay close attention to the kicker drills, so I don't know who "won," but Hopkins has a live leg. Powell looked very, very good. Looks much more consistent than I remember from last year. Easley looks like a solid KR. But Goodwin honestly looks like he can take every one to the house. Don't be surprised if he does so Sunday. Any ?s, lay em on me!

See for yourself: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2013/8/8/4602664/buffalo-bills-53-man-roster-projection-preseason-week-1

Maybe, but that's merely a reflection of simple math- more people in an area will have more babies. Then consider that throughout the south and the midwest, suburban poverty levels are climbing at an exponential rate. Those poor people having babies have limited social mobility. Those areas may be growing in size, but I would argue they are shrinking or stagnant in "quality." So I don't think the argument that more people necessarily equals better city/metro area is really valid. To make a more pertinent comparison, while most rustbelt metro areas have steadily declined in population for decades, Buffalo's has remained the same for 30 years. The city's population is still shrinking, but Erie and Niagara counties have maintained a combined pop of about 1.1 million since 1980. Like I said upthread, Chicago and a few other mega cities are not the standard for pro sport cities, or cities in general. That's like saying a Ford Fusion is a POS because it's not a Ferrari. You can compare a Fusion to a Camry or a Maxima or even a Benz or a Beemer and it might mean something, but to me there's no sense in deeming a car or a city as subpar when one defines "par" as a hole in one.

I'm interested. Winning Awwufelloff's league last year wasn't as satisfying since people starting dropping like flies. [/humblebrag] lol Is it thru yahoo?

San Diego: Language NSFW

I don't think the history over the past decade plays such a huge part in what's happening now. I do agree it's valid to be skeptical and adopt an "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude. What many here are criticizing is not your right to remain skeptical or pessimistic, they/we are criticizing that you and others have taken it upon yourselves to deem those who choose to be optimistic as naive, misinformed, or somehow less intelligent as those who choose to be skeptical. The main point that you're missing is that all of the objective facts do NOT point to one conclusion. You may feel that they do, and others may feel that they don't. It's fine to think that people should curb their enthusiasm, but it's not your job to do it for them. Although I don't see you using inflammatory language, I think it's fairly clear that you imply that those of us who disagree with you are simply incapable of reading the writing on the wall. While one camp will be "right" in the end, why do some feel the need to take issue any and all seemingly positive developments related to the Bills? I alluded to this upthread, but I'll ask here: Is there anything that could happen prior to the games being played to make you optimistic? If the answer is, "No," because you're basing your stance on the past, why bother discussing events in the preseason? Just to knock those who form a different opinion? Or to "go on the record" so you can say you were right all along? Different strokes...

The thing with which I take issue is that Chicago is presented as the standard. Chicago, NY, LA, Miami, etc., are NOT the standard. Buffalo is clearly among the smallest, but has much more in common with most pro sport cities. Furthermore, is there some list of players who decided against playing for Buffalo citing "lifestyle" reasons? That doesn't being and end with Jim Kelly? Oh, right there's McGahee whose judgement is obviously beyond reproach. While there may be a valid conversation along these lines, I read that article as a snobbish humblebrag by a "Buffalonian" who thinks he's somehow more enlightened than the rest of us.

He's on the Colts.

I totally get where you're coming from. I don't think celebrations are necessary at all. I take issue with a league that actively promotes showmanship- and owes much of its current standing as the most popular sport in the country to doing so- all of a sudden choosing to overreact to... well, I'm not exactly sure. Is it an effort to distance themselves from the likes of Aaron Hernandez, who made a spectacle of every TD? Is it an effort to establish a more "professional" standard for players? It's still a game. I realize that college football is also a game, but I can live with the strict rules with 19 year olds perhaps not deserving as much leeway. They are amateurs representing an academic institution. I actually do think both you and I would enjoy CFB more if players were allowed to express themselves a little bit. Perhaps not substantially, but I don't see any harm in a quick "gyration" after a TD. Excessive celebration and taunting were already fouls. Why is there a need to more strictly enforce the rules? And add a bunch of examples of what many consider typical actions in typical games?

I'm replying to a PM, so I'm not including the poster's name in case he wishes to remain anonymous. Well, it seems to me that they are treating most, if not all, celebrations as taunting. I think it's clear most fans, players, and refs can discern between celebrating and taunting. I'll admit sometimes the line is blurred, but 99.9% of the time we know which is which. I also think it is hypocritical of the league to actively pursue players likely to violate their rules. Their commercials highlight players celebrating and showboating- they even hyped Deion Sanders as Leon Sandcastle- just to turn around and say, "Hey, let's keep it professional here." Even the NFL knows that nobody wants to watch a bunch of big guys going through the motions. The Marvin Harrisons and Larry Fitzgeralds don't get the rating that the Randy Mosses and TOs do. If you were to poll the average/casual Bills fan, I'm willing to bet that Stevie would be the overwhelming fan favorite. Why? Because he's flamboyant. He's a character. He doesn't "just play football." The NFL isn't worried about the purists or maintaining the integrity of the game. "Real" football fans are going to watch and buy tickets regardless. They are using this a PR move to counter the prevalence of a "thug" culture, much like the NBA has made a point of doing. Not as a means to an end, but rather so they can retrospectively say "we won't tolerate this" while closing their eyes and plugging their ears.

More here: http://nfl.si.com/20...g-off-the-snap/ What a crock. I get that the NFL has to draw a line somewhere, but I think this goes too far. No, I don't want the WWE or XFL or whatever. But I do want guys to be able to celebrate. Football is a man's game, not some corporate diversion. In my book, there's nothing wrong with showing emotion. It helps the fans relate, and make it clear that it is, after all, just a game. I do take issue with excessive celebration and taunting, but that is an entirely different topic. To me, this referendum reeks of the suits trying to sanitize the game and maintain a double standard. The game is predicated on violence and emotion. To deny that is to deny the very thing that attracts the masses to the stadiums and TV screens each week.

I think we can consider Snow the 3rd string center. Both Legursky and Colin Brown can play center, so I think whoever loses the starting LG spot will be the 1st backup for the interior line positions. I'm also happy to see Carrington be recognized as a starter. Since he stopped playing OLB, I can't recall him making a mistake. I do suspect we will see a lot more Hughes, perhaps at the expense of Lawson. He seems to be making strides in camp. I'm looking for Rogers to leapfrog a bunch of those WRs, as I imagine from a talent standpoint, Rogers, Woods, and SJ are the top 3.

Yeah, Marcellus sure knows how to get out of camp: Just kidding. I think you're right that it's a probably not a major injury, and that Mario is milking it to stay fresh for the season. I also wonder if the "controversy" might have stemmed from Marrone himself being totally on board with Mario taking it easy, but not wanting to appear as a coach who lets players "slack." I mentioned in another thread that I do believe it's tough to walk the fine line between transparency and not wanting to cause a panic, and although the Bills may have botched this situation (and others, in the recent past), I still don't think it's a big deal. I think Marrone was being honest, but perhaps "lied" by omission. That is to say, he didn't know the all the specifics surrounding Mario's status, but knew that it wasn't worth worrying about. However, his fault lies in not anticipating that everything with Mario is a big deal, and downplaying the importance would make Marrone appear out of the loop. Oh well, not a big deal in my book. I'm not going to hit the panic button, like I did early last year. I was livid with Mario, but once it became clear what dominating force he was, and came to understand his aloofness, I'm now a big fan. I even wrote something like, "I don't even care if he starts producing, I still will think he's a chump." I guess talent/production trumps all. Hope that doesn't make me shallow.

I'm not a doctor, but from what I understand, one can develop scar tissue on his ligaments through numerous injuries, small and big. Once there is some scar tissue, that scar tissue begets more scar tissue. It seems to be the case that he probably had some scar tissue (he is a football player after all), and whatever happened in the final preseason game was the straw that broke the camel's back. It is also entirely possible that Mario's hand/wrist was in tip-top shape, but by "playing through" the alleged injury sustained in the final preseason game, scar tissue developed over those few weeks and his injury became worse as a result. So, while I don't *know* that either of the above scenarios are 100% true, I have no reason to doubt that they aren't. Just like you probably have no reason to doubt Stevie's hamstring injury. Or Kolb suffering a freak injury when the FO "wants" EJ to win the job. Or why no one questioned the beloved Fred Jackson or CJ Spiller when they missed practices throughout last year. I get that Mario is under the microscope, but I feel like there's nothing that suspicious about his injuries. Perhaps some poor handling by the PR dept. and/or the FO/coaching staff as far as how these things were presented/hidden from the press, but there seems to be a fine line between satisfying the public's thirst for information, and not creating a panic, nor providing anything that might give the competition an edge. The Bills were less than graceful navigating this territory, but I don't fault Mario for that.

I wonder if those chronically negative posters even bothered to read this. Sure, the "promises" and intentions may not come to fruition, but it's plain to see there have been drastic changes at OBD. Drastic changes that can justify a reasonable person's optimism. It's fine to say, "I'll believe it when I see it." But first, you have to open your eyes. Things are changing. This is not the same ol' stuff that many pessimistic posters claim is some indication that the Bills are destined to fail. Like I said, it may not work out, but it's patently unfair to cite a history unrelated to the present as proof the Bills will suck. If EJ/Whaley/Marrone don't pan out, it's not because of Ralph or Littman or Nix or Donahoe or whomever broke your heart many moons ago. And as OC pointed out, if one's satisfaction hinges on being "right" in the end, and not enjoying the ebbs and flows of the journey, why even bother? Nobody is congratulating anyone for predicting the Bills will suck. You don't win a prize. If there is some internal satisfaction, that's cool. I'm not trying to judge anyone's fanhood, but it seems that there is a contingency of posters on this board who want to imply that if another poster is optimistic, that optimist must not be grounded in reality. It's fine to interpret facts however you like, that's how opinions are formed. I'm not mad a pessimists, and I don't think they're stupid, but I resent the implication by many of these pessimists that the optimists are delusional.

Nope. Try again: But he still finished number 1 in the league overall. https://www.profootb...elusive-rating/