The ineligible package...

manxman2601 said:

Now I just want to see the Swinging Gate formation used to win the SB.

Click to expand...

The Statue of Liberty play would be great to see also, but I'd take the most boring win in SB history.

NYCPatsFan said:

Well, Harbaugh called it 'deception' in his PC 30 minutes back. He also admitted that he had never seen it before.

Click to expand...

He should stop whining; football games are full of deception.

BTW, I wonder if McDaniels had this maneuver up his sleeve (along with the Edleman pass) hoping to use it further in the playoffs but the Ravens forced his hand and he had to show his cards. If the Patriots were not in such a desperate struggle, I suspect that we would have seen these tricks in later games.

mikey m said:

I don't get why its being perpetuated that the pats waited for the last second so that they could gain an advantage.

Click to expand...

Because that's what they did. You can't line up and then have an outside receiver whisper to a linesman "hey, #34 is ineligible" just before the ball's snapped. The refs will flag that as illegal procedure every time. Ineligible/eligible has to be declared at the latest as the players are going to line up, which is when Vereen declared.

In the case of a substitution, the player must declare before he can even join the huddle. I don't have the game on tape, but I assume Vereen was in the game on the previous play, allowing him to legally hold off on declaring until the play was "in," which is the rationale for allowing late reporting for field players vs. the declaration required for subs, who must declare before they can join the huddle.

I believe the Pats carefully managed the reporting requirements so they could gain an advantage through deception, rather than exploiting a matchup advantage. (I.e. the Ravens moving their DE out over Vereen because he's an "OT.")

As is often the case, Matt Chatham has one of the best takes :

http://www.footballbyfootball.com/column/hot-mess-nfl-rulebook-strikes-again

What the Ravens should have done is not focus on who they have, but instead check out of any defensive call that requires them to matchup presnap. In other words, when the formation is confusing, check out of man coverage calls immediately into a zone one where it doesn't matter if you fully understand who's eligible.

stinkypete said:

I'm calling BS on this. Does anyone really think the entire offense was able to draw this up on the fly? Patriots players don't expose their practice details to the media like that. Sounds like LaFell is just playing with the media on this.

Belichick always speaks of "situational football," and last night was the ultimate case of situational football. Down late in the game to a physical team with a dominant front 7 and weak DBs, down one offensive lineman, how are you going to move the chains? Keep the opponent from knowing who is eligible. I bet they've been sitting on this one for some time now.

Yet another reason why Belichick is the GOAT.

Click to expand...

The truth could be somewhere in the middle, by which I mean that (for example) McDaniels thought it up, he and BB and Brady had discussed it, but they decided that it wasn't something to spend actual practice reps on.

By the way, Harbaugh's whining in part sounds like "There SHOULD be a rule against that" rather than that there is, although his initial tantrum on the field surely carried a different message.

BelichickFan said:

As is often the case, Matt Chatham has one of the best takes :

http://www.footballbyfootball.com/column/hot-mess-nfl-rulebook-strikes-again

What the Ravens should have done is not focus on who they have, but instead check out of any defensive call that requires them to matchup presnap. In other words, when the formation is confusing, check out of man coverage calls immediately into a zone one where it doesn't matter if you fully understand who's eligible.

Click to expand...

His article makes me think the Pats had to have at least analyzed and checked the rulebook in advance. I.e., McDaniels is unlikely to have literally thought of this idea mid-game.

But then, I'd guess that a large fraction of the "Never before practiced" in-game adjustments are things that have at least been considered, analyzed and/or discussed in advance by the brain trust.

I guess what these coaches eventually want is to have the other teams gameplan a week in advance so they can prepare (lol).

His complaint is that they couldn't prepare fast enough... where does the line get drawn? I don't even think you should hold up the game to allow the defense to substitute when the offense substitutes... I was fine when Peyton did it to us too.

Harbaugh's always been a whiny sore loser. He's embarrassing himself. Play-action is deception, are we going to ask for that to be illegal, too?

northernpatriot said:

^ In short, Hooman lined up as left tackle, Vereen out wide reported as ineligable to make the formmation legal, Ravens didnt cover Hooman off the snap, he was wide open up the seem.... twice.

Click to expand...

Exactly- they assumed he was ineligible so it totally baffled them when he suddenly went downfield, and of course completely uncovered.

Uncle Rico said:

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN 37s37 seconds ago
Harbaugh was asked if he's every seen a 4-OL alignment: "No. Nobody’s ever seen that before."

Click to expand...

He technically is correct. Confusing the D on who's ineligible and who's not is nothing new, but typically erring towards the heavier side (TE acting like a lineman) but IIRC never the other way (WR acting like a lineman). That was just ****ing ballsy. Love it.

The play is in the Madden or NCAA video games

BSR said:

Can lineman take laterals?

Click to expand...

Yes

unoriginal said:

Because that's what they did. You can't line up and then have an outside receiver whisper to a linesman "hey, #34 is ineligible" just before the ball's snapped. The refs will flag that as illegal procedure every time. Ineligible/eligible has to be declared at the latest as the players are going to line up, which is when Vereen declared.

In the case of a substitution, the player must declare before he can even join the huddle. I don't have the game on tape, but I assume Vereen was in the game on the previous play, allowing him to legally hold off on declaring until the play was "in," which is the rationale for allowing late reporting for field players vs. the declaration required for subs, who must declare before they can join the huddle.

I believe the Pats carefully managed the reporting requirements so they could gain an advantage through deception, rather than exploiting a matchup advantage. (I.e. the Ravens moving their DE out over Vereen because he's an "OT.")

Click to expand...

The ineligible was announced over the pa.
It wouldn't make sense to put a de on vereen who was split out ten yards.

TBR said:

The play is in the Madden or NCAA video games

Click to expand...

NCAA 15, came here to post that same thing

BelichickFan said:

As is often the case, Matt Chatham has one of the best takes :

http://www.footballbyfootball.com/column/hot-mess-nfl-rulebook-strikes-again

What the Ravens should have done is not focus on who they have, but instead check out of any defensive call that requires them to matchup presnap. In other words, when the formation is confusing, check out of man coverage calls immediately into a zone one where it doesn't matter if you fully understand who's eligible.

Click to expand...

Hands down, Chatham's analysis should be the first and last word on this.

That put it square and unambiguous. One of the best analyses I've ever seen.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/201...riots-substitutions-vs-baltimore-ravens-legal

NFL Says Pats' Substitutions Legal

A spokesman for the NFL told ESPN's Chris Mortensen that the New England Patriots' substitutions Saturday night against the Baltimore Ravens were legal from a formation and reporting standpoint.

That's that.

To repeat what Tom said, "Maybe those guys gotta study the rulebook and figure it out."

Rob0729 said:

Several things about this play:

• No it won't be the Wildcat. Going forward, the refs will stand over the ball and let the defense adjust whenever a eligible player reports ineligible taking away the advantage of the play. Odds are good that after the year, the rules committee will close the loophole.
• I love how many in the national media are turning this into the Pats cheating by following the rules. The Pats found a loophole in the rules and exploited it. It is good strategy, not cheating. It isn't the Pats' fault that refs didn't give the Ravens enough time to adjust.

Click to expand...

There is no loophole. If a player with an eligible number will be ineligible you report and alert the defense. If a player with an ineligible number will be eligible you must report and alert the defense.
The refs are not required to ask the defense if they are ready before every play.

TBR said:

I believe it resulted in a piece of cake 3rd down pass to Hoomanowanui

Click to expand...

Which resulted in an unsportsmanlike from Harbaugh (15 yards) which put us on their 5.

Which resulted in the Gronk TD.

So, pretty significant.

.....and the Head Coach whose reputation most indelibly and permanently tarred by a technicality written as an addendum to the NFL rulebook just gave the league and their lawyers a very public F.U. on national television with this.

Well played William!

Karma's a ***** and BB is one wily bastard.