NEW ARTICLE: New Patriots LB Judon on Tom Brady: “He intentionally grounds the ball every time”

[bresna]

uhh i dont think thats true

If that is no longer true, then they recently changed the rule because that's how it used to work. If they did change it, it was probably at the request of the centers who got sick of that spiked ball bouncing back up into a sensitive area.

 

[XLIX]

I do realize there is a rule that says spiking the ball at the line is not intentional grounding.

What I don't understand is the pretzel logic that makes one intentional grounding okay, but other intentional grounding not okay.

If intentional grounding is a penalty, shouldn't the most blatantly obvious of all intentional grounding plays be a penalty?

Because when a QB spikes the ball, he is doing it for the purpose of stopping the clock. He is not doing it for the purpose of avoiding a sack.

That’s why the spike rule is very specific in that you have to line up under center and spike it immediately. Any in-between step and it *is* grounding.

 

[XLIX]

If that is no longer true, then they recently changed the rule because that's how is used to work.

I have to agree with A Defiant Goose. It is - and always has been - an incomplete pass and has been returned to the line of scrimmage (with loss of down).

 

[woolster22]

RLKAG. We know the ratbirds give BB and TB free rent in their heads...this just further confirms what we already knew.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I think looking at the intended purpose of the rule, the difference is that on a traditional intentional grounding play, you're robbing the defense of what should have been a chance at a big play (sack, fumble, flutter pass that could be picked, etc). On a spike play, you're basically declaring from the onset that this is a non-play. You're conceding a down immediately, as opposed to seeing if you can get some yards and then conceding the down after it's clear you're doomed.

For intentional grounding, the QB has to be under pressure. it is rule against throwing the ball to no one just to avoid a sack. In the spike play, the QB grounds it before the pass rush can materialize. The distinction is logical if you consider the purpose behind those plays.

 

[sb1]

Intentional Grounding Ruled A Saftey - YouTube

If this is grounding by rule then the rule is flawed and needs to be updated. So a receiver that peels off their route which on a deep pass is now IG. No evidence either that Brady did it to avoid a sack by Tuck and he didn't just get the ball away in time in like he's done so many times.

And there wasn't an immediate flag so this wasn't clear and obvious IG. Ridiculous that would get called in a Super Bowl.

 

[upstater1]

It was a stupid play.

I say not only is that never called, but it wasn't even grounding. Deion Branch was within 10 yards and it was 30 yards downfield.

 

[upstater1]

That was always the case with Brady and why QB's that play behind the same line get sacked more than Brady. Cam this year, Winston last year, etc etc. Brady gets rid of the ball fast. I funny video is where that DE for the chargers was getting mad when Brady kept getting rid of the ball and he came up to brady and said, stop throwing the ball so fast, and Brady said stop getting here so quick.

And Bosa was on the sidelines talking to the Chargers about it and he was saying, "It's so impressive."

 

[upstater1]

The rule is clear:

"It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion."



Brady's an innovator.

What's a realistic chance of completion? I mean, if your WR runs the wrong route on a timing pattern, you have absolutely no chance of completion.

In order to decide this properly, the refs need to be given each team's playbook before the game, they need to memorize the plays, and the signals, so they know when a WR broke off his route improperly rather than the QB throwing the ball away.

 

[upstater1]

Honestly, if Judon was still a Raven, I would laugh at this comment as being absurd. I know he probably meant "Brady throws the ball away" but the use of "intentionally grounding" makes it specific. It is the kind of thing that opposing defenders have always said and that we have ridiculed here for over a decade.

 

[Steve102]

Typical off season, non-story with a cool headline to get clicks. Brady is impossible to sack because he gets rid of the ball is not a headline to garner clicks.

 

[sb1]

The rule is clear:

"It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion."



Brady's an innovator.

Sounds like throwing a ball into the stands from close to the goal line is grounding by the letter of this rule but there’s a good reason why it’s not called. This shouldn’t have been either IMO.

 

[Pats1971]

Honestly, if Judon was still a Raven, I would laugh at this comment as being absurd. I know he probably meant "Brady throws the ball away" but the use of "intentionally grounding" makes it specific. It is the kind of thing that opposing defenders have always said and that we have ridiculed here for over a decade.

Yeah that is how I saw it too.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

Sounds like throwing a ball into the stands from close to the goal line is grounding by the letter of this rule

But remember the exception for when the passer is outside (or has been outside) the tackle box and the ball passes the line of scrimmage.

 

[Pats1971]

For intentional grounding, the QB has to be under pressure. it is rule against throwing the ball to no one just to avoid a sack. In the spike play, the QB grounds it before the pass rush can materialize. The distinction is logical if you consider the purpose behind those plays.

The funny thing about this, is I have seen QB's under pressure and throwing the ball away, and we all know they are throwing the ball away, but if its within a certain amount of yards from the receiver its fine and it has to get past the line, etc etc, which confuses me about the Brady superbowl grounding, it was a long pass, it was not to the other side of the field where nobody was, it was over the head of the receiver. I have never seen that called grounding and I see that all the time. I do not know the exact yardage the ball was past the receiver but it was in fact thrown toward a receiver and not in an empty spot.

 

[Pats1971]

But remember the exception for when the passer is outside (or has been outside) the tackle box and the ball passes the line of scrimmage.

Right, but I have seen plenty of QB's throw the ball through the endzone about 30 feet high when under pressure and not out of the tackle box.

 

[p8ryts]

I say not only is that never called, but it wasn't even grounding. Deion Branch was within 10 yards and it was 30 yards downfield.

more like 30 yards away,, thrown to the middle of the field, no receivers in the middle. I thought it was intentional grounding right away. That 2 points made it impossible to try a late game field goal.

 

[BTTA]

I mean he used the word. Grounds, as if Brady is doing something against the rules. I mean he might not have meant it that way, but I could see where someone could take it bad.

Yep basically he said I can’t sack him because he grounds the ball and gets away everytime. Basically implying that he avoid sack by breaking the rule.

The word means something else when a defensive player uses it - simply that the QB has found a way to get rid of the ball when in danger of being sacked. It doesn't reflect the judgment an official has to make as to whether it is obvious that there was no intent to attempt to complete the pass. Defenders always see this situation as them being ripped off, even if the QB is very accomplished at doing it within the rules (like Brady).

The officials aren't allowed to rule about a QB's competence - they can't for example say, "Well, Brady is better than that overthrow therefore it is grounding." That would mean the better the QB, the tighter the rule.

 

[50-yard-line]

Spiking the ball to stop the clock is a unique play. It not only avoids "intentional grounding", it's the only incomplete pass where the ball is spotted where it hits the ground.

Does it count against the QB as an incomplete pass? It can't, right?

 

[50-yard-line]

No. No they really shouldn’t.

Could you imagine the cluster**** of arguments that would ensue every time a ball was thrown at some guy’s feet? The refs sitting there figuring out if it was “catchable”?

You realize how many flags Cam would have been hit with if that had been the rule?