Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Blandino: "It wasnt a foul"
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
BirdsWinBaby
LINK

as we talked about in the other thread...this could go good for us or bad for us

this is disastrous for us

im not a screenshot guy but somebody can dig up that split second shot of Suggs FACING Bradford with no ball in his hands right before the hit

Blandino says that its illegal to hit a QB if he "clearly doesnt have the football"....the point to make clear here is that SLOOOOWING IT DOOOOWN to show Bradford has empty hands is NOT going to be a protection for him. refs are being told that at GAME SPEED if it looks like a read-option? let it go. no flag, no penalty, no fine. if chip runs that play? its his own fault

every single HC and DC in the league who plays us will say the same thing. 'hand-off, draw play, zone-read, etc.... none of that matters! when the Eagles snap the ball HIT BRADFORD!...if the coach is stupid enough to allow you to run free because its a read-option? HIT....HIM .....HARDER!'

Blandino is making a statement....and its bad news for Bradford's knees
nephillymike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_J3a795oeA

If you watch the replay, Bradford has both hands on the ball facing the DL in a posture that he can easily pull the ball back out. Furthermore, he is ball free for a split second before Suggs arrival.

Legal hit.

Going at his knees, I guess they're saying is legal also.

However, the Eagles should have jacked Suggs up the next play, typical high -low and fucked his ass up.

Or, we could have always resorted to the longest yard tactic of letting him through and throwing a bullet right at his balls, or the close line move and ponder if we broke his freakin' neck!! biggrin.gif
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Aug 24 2015, 08:28 PM) *
Going at his knees, I guess they're saying is legal also.


due to your description above (apparently shared by the league office)...yep
nephillymike
That being the case, I wonder how important that is to our offense.

My guess is a lot since we do it all the time and rarely run it.
D Rock
As I saw it, the ball and the ball carrier were clearly gone. The penalty should have been "unecessary roughness" not "roughing he passer." But it was a late hit and a dirty play IMO.
nephillymike
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Aug 24 2015, 07:05 PM) *
LINK

as we talked about in the other thread...this could go good for us or bad for us

this is disastrous for us

im not a screenshot guy but somebody can dig up that split second shot of Suggs FACING Bradford with no ball in his hands right before the hit

Blandino says that its illegal to hit a QB if he "clearly doesnt have the football"....the point to make clear here is that SLOOOOWING IT DOOOOWN to show Bradford has empty hands is NOT going to be a protection for him. refs are being told that at GAME SPEED if it looks like a read-option? let it go. no flag, no penalty, no fine. if chip runs that play? its his own fault

every single HC and DC in the league who plays us will say the same thing. 'hand-off, draw play, zone-read, etc.... none of that matters! when the Eagles snap the ball HIT BRADFORD!...if the coach is stupid enough to allow you to run free because its a read-option? HIT....HIM .....HARDER!'

Blandino is making a statement....and its bad news for Bradford's knees


Did you see the hit on Mariota last night?

It was high, not at the knees, but the defender had three long strides after he handed the ball off and they still popped him.

Does anyone doubt that if they hit Brady or P. Manning that Suggs would be in jail?
Reality Fan
easy solution...make it clear using the locker room rumor mill.....go after our QB's knees we will go after your QB's arm...as in break it off....
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Aug 24 2015, 10:57 PM) *
Did you see the hit on Mariota last night?

It was high, not at the knees, but the defender had three long strides after he handed the ball off and they still popped him.

Does anyone doubt that if they hit Brady or P. Manning that Suggs would be in jail?


didnt watch that whole game so i missed the Mariota hit but what you describe is the way it will be apparently. i remember saying the same thing about how Vick used to get hit....if you are mobile, the refs give a couple steps to the defenders

as for other QBs around the league, i think its gonna come down to how the team runs its offense. when Manning or Brady snap the ball they either drop and fire or hand off. they dont run plays to fool the defender after the ball is snapped. so they (and any other teams who play that way) will be protected with chain mail and armed guards.

if you try to pull any post-snap peek-a-boo stuff, your QB pays the price. as you said before, i dont know if Chip is (or can afford to be) married to this style. Bradford isnt very mobile and with his knee history its a guarantee that he will hand off no matter what they try to show.
Zero
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Aug 25 2015, 07:05 AM) *
didnt watch that whole game so i missed the Mariota hit but what you describe is the way it will be apparently. i remember saying the same thing about how Vick used to get hit....if you are mobile, the refs give a couple steps to the defenders

as for other QBs around the league, i think its gonna come down to how the team runs its offense. when Manning or Brady snap the ball they either drop and fire or hand off. they dont run plays to fool the defender after the ball is snapped. so they (and any other teams who play that way) will be protected with chain mail and armed guards.

if you try to pull any post-snap peek-a-boo stuff, your QB pays the price. as you said before, i dont know if Chip is (or can afford to be) married to this style. Bradford isnt very mobile and with his knee history its a guarantee that he will hand off no matter what they try to show.

Do those other guys run the shotgun as much as the Eagles do?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Aug 24 2015, 09:43 PM) *
As I saw it, the ball and the ball carrier were clearly gone. The penalty should have been "unecessary roughness" not "roughing he passer." But it was a late hit and a dirty play IMO.

100% agree.
nd9kel
Playing devil's advocate here, but Suggs was unblocked on the play. Doesn't that qualify it for "read-option"?

Would Suggs read be to stay with the qb if he's unblocked?

HOWEVER, I will readily agree that the low aim was deliberate effort to inflict damage on knees, no matter how much he "let up."
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nd9kel @ Aug 25 2015, 11:54 AM) *
Playing devil's advocate here, but Suggs was unblocked on the play. Doesn't that qualify it for "read-option"?

No. There are lots of running plays where an edge defender goes unblocked.

QUOTE
Would Suggs read be to stay with the qb if he's unblocked?

That would depend on what defense is called.

QUOTE
HOWEVER, I will readily agree that the low aim was deliberate effort to inflict damage on knees, no matter how much he "let up."

This is the part that is without debate, as far as I'm concerned.
Eyrie
QUOTE (D Rock @ Aug 25 2015, 03:43 AM) *
As I saw it, the ball and the ball carrier were clearly gone. The penalty should have been "unecessary roughness" not "roughing he passer." But it was a late hit and a dirty play IMO.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 25 2015, 03:52 PM) *
100% agree.


I'll second that 100% agreement.

QUOTE (nd9kel @ Aug 25 2015, 05:54 PM) *
HOWEVER, I will readily agree that the low aim was deliberate effort to inflict damage on knees, no matter how much he "let up."

There was no need for Suggs to deliberately target Bradford's knees in a pre-season game, yet he admits he did just that which should be a fine in itself.

QUOTE
If you want to run the read option with your starting quarterback that's had two knee surgeries, that's on you


Guy's a piece of shit and if he tries that again I suspect the opposing OL will give him a similar treatment.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.