Rochesterfan

Ok @GG please show me the math that triangulated the exact position of the ball as it crossed the end line. I need to see the impact of the ball spin and the changing wind direction and how that impacted the attempt in the math. I also need to understand the impact and angle you are using as the ball travelled the majority of the distance on one plain and then the spin and the wind caused the ball speed to slow down and the ball started to rise and shift dramatically to the right. I need to understand and ensure in the triangulation that was done that this was the a major point in the triangulation. Could it be done of-course, but you need a ton of data that I don’t believe is available to the average fan. Height and depth of the netting, angle and wind speed, ball speed - all would be need for an accurate calculation and since we do not have good distance markers once you hit the end zone - not sure you can calculate that easily off from the broadcast angle. Sorry

So it’s not done by mistake - then why insert and obvious different kick. That makes no sense. If it was a conspiracy- would not the simplest thing to have been leave the play out. That happens and it would be easy to explain. Doesn’t it make less sense to say that after cutting all of the plays and piecing it back together - let’s take a good kick and insert it in the missed field goal spot - no one will notice? As all of this is done via computer, could someone doing the video editing not have grabbed the wrong file from the FG folder and post it back into wrong slot. Look I get it, but if the video that was posted by Nick Verona was from the All-22 did you see that kick go through the upright? Neither view shown by Verona showed what happened with the kick. This leads me to believe based upon that view - which is the coaching view trying to show how teams line up and attack and block - the All-22 would not have given you a better shot of the missed kick - correct. The All-22 provided of the made field goal never shows even 2/3rds the way up the Goal posts. So your point is that the NFL knows they screwed up and have purposefully removed the footage - even though the NFL routinely admits errors in most games and the proof is the All-22 that is cut and re-edited together has another kick in its place that also does not show the ball crossing the end line. Got it. The NFL is out to get us.

Why would the NFL care about this? They admit a ton of errors including on scoring plays and plays that may cost a team at the end of a game and actually have an impact on the outcome, but a kick that mattered an insignificant amount in the outcome - that is the tipping point - oh god we can’t let the Bills Mafia know 3-4 days later that we made a mistake. You do understand that they cut and piece the All-22 back together every time for all of the games. This would not be the first time a piece was excluded. Last year I believe when Cover 1 was doing a play review they had to use broadcast film because the play was not on the All-22. Could it show what you say - a perfect view showing it was good? Maybe - I won’t know until they show it.

You might be right, but it would not be simple. You would need ball speed, wind speed and trajectory because the ball does not travel a straight path. It would be easy if this was a round baseball going directly from point a to point b. The difficulty will be do you have every measurement and the effect of the laces and the impact of the wind changing from behind the kicker to at the goal line the wind is blowing directly right. There are also many exact measurements they would need - the exact distance from the pole to the net, the exact distance up the net, exactly how far outside the post it landed into the net. You can do a quick and rough estimate like Shaw did and he determined it was no good, but the problem I have with Shaw’s math was we are assuming a straight path and the ball because of angular spinning velocity and the laces and shape of the ball was pulling to the right it was not a straight line at any point in the kick and you can’t treat it as such. That is why the video would have to be the proof, until they get some type camera/laser system that can determine it was good. The video is inconclusive and unless the physicists have enough data points on all of the variables they are making an educated guess. I would love to see the math though - higher level calculations dealing with multiple variables is fun.

Watch it at 11 seconds and go frame by frame. There is a shot with 3/4 of the ball inside the post, a shot with the ball directly over the post and a shot with 3/4 of the ball outside the post all within the 11 second mark. Which spot did the ball actually cross the end line or was it before or even after that - that is the question and that is why it is not reviewable. I am not sure what would help conclusively show this one way or another. A view up the post or from the top of the post would help. Not sure if a sensor in the ball helps as you are 35 feet above the end line - you would need a second sensor someplace to give any accuracy. I get why people feel the way they do. It seems like there is a good chance it may have been good, but there has been nothing definitive. Just like goal line review - sometimes the physical camera angles just do not allow the ability to identify a TD or down by contact because the shot just is not available.

Nice pic - where is the ball relative to the end line and what angle are we at. This picture to me seems to be well before the ball got to the goalpost maybe 3-5 frames to early and we know the ball is drifting right. This does not show me a good field goal - I am sorry - just do not see it.

So assume they allow this to be reviewed - was it good or because there has not been one conclusive picture at the exact moment do they go with the call on the field? The issue with it is because it is higher than the reference point and because there is not a straight angle camera shot right up the goal post - it will always be deemed inconclusive- unless it goes between the uprights low enough that you can see it. In this case as was stated on the broadcast there was nothing conclusive - so he would have lost a challenge. That is what they would have to fix. I think the All-22 would give us another angle, but that camera is not positioned above the goalpost - not sure it provides a much better view than the 2 shots we already have. We need a view of exactly what the Ref saw. The Ref was in the right spot - under and slightly behind the upright looking up - the only view point on the field that can tell the exact position as it crosses the end line.

I need to see this clear evidence. There are a ton of clips showing this kick and all of them show the same 2 angles from behind the kicker. I would assume since people use their camera to take vids off the tv and the game has not only been shown, but shown on replay - that if their was a clearer shot - someone would post it. I want to be convinced - I just have not seen anything with a shot that you can tell the moment it hits the end line where the ball is.

Totally agree, but none of that was made available and I would assume if CBS had that camera angle that showed something they would have played it. They were not shy about questioning the kick - showed multiple shots of the replay and even brought in their rules expert - so if they had a better shot I would believe they would have showed it. The rules expert stated that it looked like it could be good, but there was nothing showing the exact moment it crossed the goal line - so they could not be sure. this was also the emphasis for the rule change that went into effect years ago that the ball crossing the goal line had to be between the pylons. If you remember years and years ago - the goal line used to be considered infinite around the world and guys could run and dive and land 4-5 yards out of bound and get credit for the TD. They changed that because it is so hard beyond the field of play to get a definitive shot. I believe because the review is based upon the video that the broadcast team has and can put together and show. I don’t think the broadcast has access to the All-22 as it is shot for coaching. If the broadcast was controlling that camera - it could be used and I wished it would as it shows so much. As to why it is missing - I am not going to speculate- they obviously spend a huge amount of time cutting and piecing together the film for the coaches and fans. Was it a legitimate mistake of was it done on purpose - that is for others to argue - right now it just is not available.

Yes for afterwards, but they do not use the all 22 in game as those are shot for the teams. I would love to see the All -22 of this kick, but unfortunately it was not included.

I believe they do not allow review when the kick is above the top of the uprights because of exactly the issue we see in the game footage that is provided. When the kick is above the top of the reference point - you are now bringing in subjective decisions and angles into the decision. Therefore they would not have a definitive shot most of the time meaning they would stay with the call on the field. We are all still sitting here and have not seen one shot stopped at the exact moment the ball is passing the goal line that shows it was in between the 2 uprights. We have seen several slow motion replays of the kick and had a guy say he triangulated things - which I believe is Bull because unlike a simple action with the ball traveling in a straight direction - what ever triangulation has to take into account the wind speed and its impact on the forward and sidewards momentum of the ball to determine the exact moment the ball crossed the plane. Nowhere have I seen the ball speed and the changing speed based upon the wind - which would suggest to me - if someone tried to triangulate based upon the speed of the kick while it is the field of play - they will misjudge the timing and the distance. My guess based upon what we have seen is that for a small market broadcast there was most likely only 1 or 2 broadcast angles as the booths begin moving and positioning cameras for the kick-off. I agree this should be a fairly easy fix with cameras - extended the posts with different material - some type of laser grid - or any number of other ideas, but they are not in place so unfortunately the best viewpoint is that of the refs right under the goal post.

you really can’t tell at what point it gets to the upright. It looks like it sails right over the upright to me.

Yes it was. As was the one on the earlier play were the Jet defender dove and took out the back of Josh’s leg after the throw.

Cody Ford is the most immediate based on Play in game 1, but I think AJ got way to much heat for being a scratch. The biggest whipping boy over all though is Daboll as before we even hit game 1 there was threads about him being on the hot seat.

Yep - unless someone sticks an arm out or a butterfly sails by and Yeldon gets tripped up.

I will add - the gameplan was designed to specifically attack the Jets defensive weaknesses and not necessarily the Bills O-line strengths. The gameplan called for attacking the Jets secondary and using both RPO options and QB run options in the run game because the Jets D struggled against that. Those plays along with the Jet sweeps (count as passes) accounted for the majority of the rushing yards. They are also slower developing plays were the O-Line does not fire out and attack the defensive line, but takes them where they are going and allows the QB to read and react - not attack. I think the strength of Ford and Williams will be in straight 1:1 blocking/Mauling, but that also plays into the strength of the Jets defense. I want to see what this line can do against a different defensive gameplan and maybe one they can attack with the strength of the line. I anticipate Moss having some nice runs up the middle as the Dolphins have to figure out how to stop both the running attack of the RBs and the QB. They did a poor job against NE and I think the Bills will exploit many of the same things we saw NE do. The biggest difference is I think Allen trusts his WR and TEs more than Cam did and therefore I think they can also get yardage in the passing game if Miami stacks the box more in this game. I think just like last year - there will be weeks where the o-line looks dominate and weeks where they look like they can not get a push at all. It will be specific to teams and gameplans because that is how this OC works. He is not going to take and stick to our strengths - he is designing gameplans to exploit weaknesses and that is new for us as fans and can sometimes be frustrating.

Sorry - updated the title to reflect OSU - quite the Honor to be the first.

I do not want him routinely sliding at all. Typically the defensive guys that are running full bore at the QB end up hitting the sliding QB in the head. Murray took his 2 biggest hits to his head and shoulders on plays he slide. A guy like Josh (see Alex Smith and Joe Flacco slides) opens himself up to massive hits to the head when the try to slide. The bigger mobile QBs tend not to get down as fast and the defensive players are taking a shot anyway. I don’t mind getting out of bounds, but even then Josh has taken a few big shots because he just doesn’t make it there fast enough and gets turned around and shoved down.

I did not see this anywhere and just wanted to say Congrats to a great Buffalo Bill. Another nice honor for a deserving player!

I agree with leaving them - want to see them against some different competition. Also not to give excuses, but Ford in his first game had a lot of action against #3 pick Q. Williams. He is a big strong pick that is pretty good in the run game. Daryl Williams was going against a bunch of mush of the DEs on the Jets. I will give him a few games against maybe some lesser run stuffers to see if he can improve.

He helped bring in Joe Douglas as GM (who I happen to think is pretty good) - so I am praying these 2 are tied together at least 2 more years. I then hope they decide to start over with new Coach and GM (or keep the 2 together longer).

The exact same as when he ruptures his ACL because of the hit he got in the pocket by the Jets player.

No longer uncharacteristic - he threw a bunch last year. He did struggle in year 1, but by last year he hit a bunch of touch passes - to the point that he lost his touch on deep passes because he worked so hard on the touch type passes. This was old news and it was a great pass to Diggs.

They might have the capital, but unless the #1 pick is Miami (and they assume Tua is their future) - why would anyone trade essentially Lawrence for lesser picks? Every other team that hits #1 would be because they need a franchise QB and Lawrence has been hyped as that for the last 2 years. I can’t imagine the fan base and GM that passes on that for a couple of other picks.

Wait so in statement #1 are you implying the the kick was low enough and went between the goalposts and the refs missed it? The kick was definitely higher than the goalposts and therefore clearly over the uprights - which is the phrasing for a kick that is higher than the top of the goalposts. I do not understand you angle point - as literally standing under the goalpost and looking up is the only vantage point to be able to judge that. Any other spot on the field and you have to deal with angles to try and decide. The ref looking straight up is equivalent to putting the laser/camera on the top or trying to extend the posts 10 more feet up, but without dealing with sway of the post. I will not say the ref did not miss it - since we have seen it before, but literally there was only 1 person that should of had the perfect angle to see the ball right as it got to the goal post and that was the ref that called it no good. Everything else as both the announcer and the booth ref said were speculation because we can not tell the exact moment it got to the end line. It does not mean that the ref did not blow the call as that happens and it does not mean the NFL cannot do better on this, but I have not seen one shot that shows the kick was good. I have seen a lot of shots showing that at a point around the post it was good and at some point right around there it starts to veer right very quickly. The issue is at the exact point it crosses the goal line we can not tell from any of the camera angles I have seen.