NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

At a time when the NFL is otherwise trying to reduce the number and severity of collisions on the field, Schiano’s approach to kneel-downs — and the NFL’s endorsement of that approach — could lead to some violent collisions on a play that has traditionally been treated by players on both teams as nothing more than a formality before shaking hands and heading to the locker room.

NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy | ProFootballTalk

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

im with schiano on this too. i think the kneel down is one of the most unsportsman like plays in all of sports. just because in the past teams lay down and die and accept defeat when teams kneel doesnt mean you should. i like that the bucs tried to catch the giants off guard and somehow get posession of the ball so they could win.
i find it hard to believe that coughlin is crying because a coach wants his team to play to final whistle. only two things to say to coughlin.
1 if you dont want a player hurt, play someone else
2 there is no crying in football

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I agree, Kosoma. It pains me to defend any coach in our division, but I can't help this one. Since when has this been considered bad etiquette? I've always wondered why more teams don't try to disrupt the Center to see if they can cause a fumble.

I thought for sure Coughlin would be called a baby by everyone, but the media - including all of their former players who like to call themselves analysts - were all whining and saying "the game is over, just shake hands and accept it"... WHAT? The game is NOT over until the clock runs out, so why should anyone accept defeat? Is Herman Edwards gonna start saying "You play the game to lose!"? It's bad enough the league office has almost turned the game into touch football, and now players and coaches are going to cry about contact?

Soon the feminists will have their wish and be allowed to play football at every level, if this doesn't stop.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I agree, you never know. Games have been won on something you never expected. Manning could have dropped back and laid down.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

The headline is misleading. The NFL didn't side with Schiano, the NFL simply stated no rule was broken.

As for the play itself, stupid of the Bucs. If they really wanted to get to the ball, they should've sent players to jump over the line, not dive at the knees-feet of the center and guards.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Yep, and this type of play can come back on you too.

Its funny that Josh Freeman got his panties twisted when Harper tried to tackle him (legally) as he was going out of bounds.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

There's no time to get to the quarterback on a kneel down. That's why you have to try to disrupt the center to try to cause a fumble. It would take absolutely perfect timing, but you have to try anything you can to win the game. It's funny how these guys maul each other the entire game, but on the last play, they think it's bad form to be physical. I hate the Bucs, but this isn't something I can hold against them.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

If there were a decent amount of time left then I could see trying something like this.

But there were FIVE SECONDS left. If the Bucs managed to cause a fumble and recover it, the time would have expired.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Agreed. If there was 1:30 left on the clock then I would have understood. When there's 5 seconds though... Come on.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

... but with 1:30 left on the clock, NYG wouldn't have been 'kneeling' either. This is kinda' like 'Handshake-gate' last year between the Lions/49ers ... WTF?!?!? ... I'm gonna' refer to it from here on out as 'Kneeling-gate', :lol:.

My understanding of the whole 'kneeling-to-end-a-game' thing is that it's a sportsmanly way of ending a game where there is no possible way for your opponent to come back and win. You've kicked their ass and don't want to inflict further embarrassment upon your opponent. It does kinda' suck to be on the opposite side of the 'kneel' because you do get the feeling that you are being slightly dissed in that the kneeling team doesn't even have the respect for you to run one more play ...

... but therein lies the rub ... it was only a 7pt game. Technically, TB could have caused a fumble, recovered and ran it in for a TD ... stranger things have happened in an NFL game, eh?

New York thought the game was over, Tampa Bay didn't ... I really can't fault the Buccaneers for doing what they did. It may have been bad manners, but if there is even the slightest chance at winning a game, don't we expect our teams to take it?

And if I'm a NYG offensive lineman, don't I look across the line of scrimmage and see that Tampa Bay is coming? IDK, I think they should have just brawled after the game if they all had that much energy left over, :mrgreen:.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

"If there were a decent amount of time left then I could see trying something like this.

But there were FIVE SECONDS left. If the Bucs managed to cause a fumble and recover it, the time would have expired."


The clock stops on a turnover. 5 seconds is enough time to fall on the football. But you're missing another possibility. Suppose they fumble the exchange and it's rolling free, and the Bucs pick it up and run for a touchdown. You still honestly believe they should just quit? You guys are arguing against probability, but maybe you should talk to the 2002 Kentucky Wildcats who lost to LSU on a 74 yard touchdown pass with 2 seconds on the clock. You never know what might happen, and if the Bucs somehow come up with the ball, they at least get the chance at a miracle.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

If the Bucs WERE able to cause a fumble with the 5 seconds left, by the time the ball was recovered, AND the officials got it sorted out which team had recovered it, the time would have expired.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

PLAYER SAFETY huh? BS!!!!! NFL

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

... yeah, like there's time to "disrupt" the center-QB snap... good one.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Probably the best thing to do is try to time the snap. Have your MLB run full speed, time the snap, jump over the center, and nail the QB right in the chest.

If your timing is off, its only a 5 yard off-sides penalty... line up and do it again, and again, and again. Its legal as long as you don't go helmet to helmet, right?

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

*BREAKING NEWS*

*BRAWL BREAKS OUT AT NFL GAME*

*BOTH TEAMS SUSPENDED FOR THE ENTIRE SEASON*

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

To me this ranks up there with Atlanta running out of the tunnel at the start of the game and running off the field into the Lions' huddle and pregame warmups, jawing at them like a bunch of goons...it's just stupid. There is a reason a fumble on that play NEVER happens in the pros, because the QB and center are not moving full speed like in other snaps, where there may be legitimate problems with the exchange. Nice try but stupid. OK Tampa we get that you are tough guys. It's in the rules, good on you. Did it work out for you? BIG FAT NFL NO. Whether it's a touchdown or a kneel down, I say act like you've been there before. This coach thinks he is still at Rutgers.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I really don't much agree with Jerry Jones, but he suggested doing away with kneeling the ball altogether, and I kinda don't hate that idea.

Now there are all kinds of reasons why it'll never happen, but it would create a lot more of those 'miracle' situations if, say in a close game, the team with the lead had the ball as the clock was winding down and HAD to run some sort of play that attempted to advance the ball. Then playing to the end of the game takes on a whole new meaning

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I always wanted to see somebody try the last play where instead of taking a knee in the victory formation, they hand off to their most sure-handed back, who then turns and runs the other direction, circling around the field like a chicken with his head cut off, losing yardage and running away from the defense in "Football Follies" style play, just to run more time off the clock. Like you'd start out at midfield and end up with him zig zagging around and flopping down at the 5 yard line. It would play hell with the stats in fantasy, tho.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

If more teams follow Tampa's lead, I could see them outlawing 'the kneel' ... I don't like agreeing with Jerry Jones either.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Tom Coughlin has a right to be mad at Schiano over the knee down controversy. As bet he was cursing up a storm. Really the Bucs had no right to do that.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

You have to time your jump perfectly. It's not a high probability, but neither is a hail mary. I can always count on your classless sarcasm in here.

It's not a matter of WILL it work, but rather it COULD work. Giving up is unacceptable.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

The clock doesn't keep running while they sort it out. Not on a fumble. On a normal running play the clock would keep running, but when the ball comes out and there is a pile, the clock stops. Now, if the ball is rolling around for a while before they jump on it, then I agree the clock would run out. I'm talking about a guy shooting the gap and the ball is laying right in front of the QB, and the defender immediately falls on it. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Technically yes.

But you ignored the most important point I was trying to get across. You're assuming there would be a pile up, but what if the ball rolls free and a Bucs player picks it up and runs with it for a touchdown? Again, not likely, but neither is any other desperation play, and we've all seen plenty of instances where football's version of a miracle has happened.

And it's especially hypocritical for any of us to talk about a hard play as being dirty when we've been defending the Saints for months on making big LEGAL hits. I still stand by the Saints and I still have no problem with the Bucs play.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Classless sarcasm? Oh, I am so hurt.

Hey, you can avoid my "classless sarcasm" by not replying to my posts or typing dumb things when replying to my posts. Simple.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Don't need you to be hurt by it. Merely pointing out a fact. You never reply to me in any kind of mature manner. But suit it yourself... If my posts were so dumb, where is your rebuttal? I am making a point. Where's yours?

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

:lightsabres:

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

We are talking about 5 seconds, not 45 or even 25. What I meant about sorting and the clock running is that by the time the refs even REALIZE that there IS a fumble, there will be a pause while they let the play run itself out and that takes time.

If a team gets a 1st down @ the 2:00 warning and is trying to run out the clock and the other team is out of timeouts, then I could see a team attempting to force a turnover.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I understand that part of it, but again, you're assuming there would even be a pile up. And why would they take that long to realize there was a fumble? If the Center has a bad snap, which is precisely the scenario I'm talking about, the play would be right there for the refs to see. I know we're talking about 5 seconds. You've mentioned that several times, and I am fully aware. In the scenario I'm speaking of, 5 seconds is enough time.

I will say this one last time, and after this I don't know what more can be said... If the Bucs were to pick up the ball and run it back for a touchdown, it wouldn't matter if there were only 1 second left. As long as they pick it up without being tackled they would be free to take it in for a TD, and I am sure you realize that. So with that said, how is it wrong to at least try to make something happen? Most teams do just give up and take it for granted, but there is a reason that there's no rule against what the Bucs did. It's a football play.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Coughlin is right, Schiano is a douche! Classless move by the Bucs but I'd expect nothing else from them.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

What is being lost/forgotten in all of this is the MANNER in which the Bucs are trying to force a turnover.

They are diving at the KNEES of the center, trying to disrupt the exchange.

The Saints have potentially had their season destroyed because the league believes the Saints were running a bounty, pay-to-injure program.
For the Bucs plan to work, they are targeting the center's knees.

How isn't this WORSE than what the Saints are accused of?

There will be someone that will say, "The Bucs, or any team doing this, are trying to win the game." And I would respond so are the Saints!

Once again Goodell and the league are failing to protect players.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I think the crux of the matter is that while Tampa technically did not break any rules and 'fought to win all the way to the last down', they did commit a football 'faux pas'.

On an official level, you cannot fault Tampa for trying to 'win' the game on the last play & surely endeared themselves to the fans who would have undoubtedly criticized them for not playing 100% on the last play of a game where they were down by only one score.

On a professional sport, 'gentlemanly' level ... that's another story and hence the 'faux pas'. In a sport where extreme physical contact is the nature of every play, the correct/gentlemanly thing to do when the winning team has indicated it will 'kneel' to end the game is to not take advantage of the play by running in to them at full-speed. Everyone is supposed to be professional out there.

I can see why Schiano did it and I can see why Coughlin was upset. If I was Schiano, I damn sure don't want my fanbase saying I layed down on the last play of a game that was not out of reach and if I'm Coughlin (who I think may have committed his own faux pas by imposing the 'kneel-down' when only being up by one score), I'm damn sure upset at an opponent that could have possibly injured one of my starters on a kneel-down that is widely accepted throughout the league as a way to end a game.

If nothing else, it will make teams pay attention more to that last play of the game and how they handle it. Winning teams may have to run one last play as losing teams will now view the 'kneel' as one last chance to get a shot on the opposing players, eh? This is something that could potentially get very ugly.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

I hear what you're saying man, and I agree that this is how the kneel down is generally viewed.

My problem is that I don't know what made these players decide the kneel down was a gentleman thing. I've always thought of it as a way to run out the clock without risking a turnover. But if you're the defense, you have to try to disrupt that center. Sure, someone could have gotten hurt, but we can say that about every play. The object of the game is to win, and the last play -when you're only down one score- should be no different than any other play.

Now, I know that many have argued that injury was more likely because the Giants were somehow caught off guard, but when I see the replay it was very obvious that the Bucs were ready to send the house. They weren't just standing around. So it's the Giants fault, in my humble opinion, for taking it for granted and allowing themselves to get pushed back like that... And I'll add that if players still think the kneel is a universal "everybody stop playing" signal, then I agree with Jerry Jones that they should just outlaw it.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

The way to make sure Tampa never does this crap again is to be 2 scores ahead!

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Josh freeman is a wuss

Just thought I'd say it lol

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

When did all this kneel-down-to-end-a-game crap start, anyway? I vaguely remember, as a kid, it kinda' showing up sometime in the '70's and much to the disdain of the fans ... I even vaguely remember arguing during sandlot games when kids on the other team would try to pull that stunt. I even want to say I remember fans boo-ing the play when it started showing up in games, but don't quote me on that.

So I did some digging and came up with this (and yes, apparently I do have too much time on my hands, :lol:). I find it ironic that the NYG were involved in the original controversy that basically started the whole 'kneel-down' procedure and that they're embroiled in controversy over the 'kneel-down' once again ... maybe they were having flashbacks to 1978, eh? :

This is an example of why the Buccaneers did what they did, they were within a score and could have hypothetically won the game had they caused a fumble ... is it any different a principle from an onside kick? ... and that's where I'm at in regards to the Giants ... if the offensive lineman couldn't see that Tampa Bay was coming, then that's their problem. I guess I'll look at Herm Edwards in a different light from now on also, when he's doing his goofy game analysis for ESPN, :lol:.

Just outlaw the practice of kneeling-down-to-win-a-game, IMO.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

Thank you. That is precisely the point I've been getting at for days, lol. I didn't know that the Giants were involved in starting all this kneel down stuff, but that's interesting.

But yeah, it's kind of lame to not run a play. I never had a huge beef with it though, until the Giants got their panties bunched up about a team trying make a play with the game still in reach.

Re: NFL sides with Buccaneers on kneel-down controversy
 

5 seconds= 1 play. A fumble return = win. I agree with the Bucs trying to pull the game out by any means