Milano Roughing the Passer

[DrDawkinstein]

12 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

The outcome is dependent on how the blocker acts. 

 

The effect on the QB becomes more unpredictable the closer the action is to the QB.

 

So, adjusting the rule to account for the action and proximity to the QB makes perfect sense.

You just don't like that I called your tactic lazy and you have no counter-argument. It's not personal, it's just about winning the debate.

 

Thanks!

 

There was no tactic, what you perceive as "common sense" isnt necessarily "common" outside of us on this board. only thing lazy is your brain in understanding that.

 

but lol at "winning a debate" in this thread (or even on the board). if that's what youre after here, youve already lost. ?

Edited October 8, 2019 by DrDawkinstein

[frostbitmic]

If he hit Brady like that, Milano would never play in this league again.

[Rochesterfan]

22 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

The problem, Alpha, is you think the work "block" means "push." That is not accurate.  If the NFL had meant for the term block to encompass pushing the defender into the QB, they would have used the term "push." The fact that they didn't means they intended something else. 

 

 

It does not necessarily mean push,  the DE could be rushing and beat him to the outside and the tackle could grab the arm and pull causing him to go  into the QBs legs.  The DT could bull rush and knock a guard on his back and the guard could pull him down and they collide with the QBs legs and it does not get called.  

 

The defining part seems to be the “blocker” creates the momentum that causes the impact.  In this case the blocker caused the player to flip, but did not cause the momentum that brought him in contact.  The NFL rules as written just do not cover every situation - it would be impossible- therefore there is leeway and guidance that helps the refs make a call.

[LeGOATski]

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

There was no tactic, what you perceive as "common sense" isnt necessarily "common" outside of us on this board.

 

but lol at "winning a debate" in this thread (or even on the board). if that's what youre after here, youve already lost. ?

It's the same reason you're in this thread, quoting rules and such.

 

Pot calling the kettle black.

[Bookie Man]

To me, it looked like he could have avoided rolling into him. It was a pretty athletic move mid-air, but it seemed like he was still going for the sack via some kind of aerial log roll or something. Haha I know that sounds weird and it may be unpopular, but I think he could have not touched him if wanted to. 

[JESSEFEFFER]

As a result of a cut block (not chip or chop) the defender was no longer able to avoid contact with the QB because this feet were flipped over his head.  This is a dangerous type of block at a blitzing LB just for that reason and I doubt they teach it that way.  That is the definition of unavoidable due to a block attempt.

[Florida Bills Fanatic]

2 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

It was indeed Roughing the Passer according to the modern rules. I said "Thats a flag" the second i happened, and sure enough.... Even if "unavoidable" (which I agree with)

 

The idea that an OL would purposely throw a Defender into his own QB's knees is a bit ludicrous. That OL would be cut immediately.

I don't disagree that the rule is pretty nondescript about hitting the player low.  It does not delineate any exceptions.  I have to admit that I have seen other hits not called where the blocker provided the impetus for the collision.  Unless the rule is altered to call out exceptions, the most we can hope for is to call it consistently.

[DrDawkinstein]

5 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

It's the same reason you're in this thread, quoting rules and such.

 

Pot calling the kettle black.

 

And yet, you dont see me or JoshAllenHasBigHands taking anything so personally or trying to "win".

 

Plus, why bring race into this?

 

[Alphadawg7]

35 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

The problem, Alpha, is you think the work "block" means "push." That is not accurate.  If the NFL had meant for the term block to encompass pushing the defender into the QB, they would have used the term "push." The fact that they didn't means they intended something else. 

That’s not what I or others think at all though.  

 

The bottom line is that players momentum into the QB was not at all caused by the minor contact on his thigh and was primarily from Milano’s own momentum.

 
In other words the contact did not forcibly propel Milano into the QB.

[LeGOATski]

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

And yet, you dont see me or JoshAllenHasBigHands taking anything so personally or trying to "win".

 

You literally are.

 

You just can't own up to it because you didn't have a good argument.

 

It's plain as day.

[Kelly the Dog]

9 minutes ago, NC Book said:

To me, it looked like he could have avoided rolling into him. It was a pretty athletic move mid-air, but it seemed like he was still going for the sack via some kind of aerial log roll or something. Haha I know that sounds weird and it may be unpopular, but I think he could have not touched him if wanted to. 

Cirque de Soleil, maybe. NFL linebacker, not so much.

[Buffarukus]

id love to see rules start getting enforced on the guys who are commiting them. 

 

helpless reciever? maybe they should not throw the ball into traffic...penalty on the qb.

 

guy lowers his head at the last second its on him that the helmet colision happens

 

qb wants extra yards slides at the very last moment or holds the ball forever you get hit...stop doing it.

 

chop block a guy blitzing and its his fault he flys into the qbs knees? 

 

the nfl is acctually encouraging offensive guys to do dangerous stuff because they can get free yardage out of it and if you watch the guys are turning into soccer floppers left and right..its pretty sad to see. a bs call is a bs call and if your going to complain about milano you also have to complain about the bs allen late hit where guy tryed avoid him but caught him with a knee.

 

direct and intentional is fine but this pitty pat bs is really putting games in the wrong hands

 

 

 

 

[Kelly the Dog]

My feeling is that with his "lunge" he would have not landed close to the QB. He was several yards away. The block is what got him to that point and the only thing that got him to that point, unless you believe he pushed himself further while falling. I guess that is possible but I don't see that.

[LeGOATski]

3 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

id love to see rules start getting enforced on the guys who are commiting them. 

 

helpless reciever? maybe they should not throw the ball into traffic...penalty on the qb.

 

guy lowers his head at the last second its on him that the helmet colision happens

 

qb wants extra yards slides at the very last moment or holds the ball forever you get hit...stop doing it.

 

chop block a guy blitzing and its his fault he flys into the qbs knees? 

 

the nfl is acctually encouraging offensive guys to do dangerous stuff because they can get free yardage out of it and if you watch the guys are turning into soccer floppers left and right..its pretty sad to see. a bs call is a bs call and if your going to complain about milano you also have to complain about the bs allen late hit where guy tryed avoid him but caught him with a knee.

 

direct and intentional is fine but this pitty pat bs is really putting games in the wrong hands

 

 

 

 

It is to a degree and they have to rely more on the basic tenets of common sense and unfair advantage.

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

The outcome is dependent on how the blocker acts. 

 

The effect on the QB becomes more unpredictable the closer the action is to the QB.

 

So, adjusting the rule to account for the action and proximity to the QB makes perfect sense.

You just don't like that I called your tactic lazy and you have no counter-argument. It's not personal, it's just about winning the debate.

 

Thanks!

 

I have no issue if you want to ban the low hits, but that is not currently the rule.  
 

You see defensive players get upended like that in every couple of games - they are still responsible for their momentum.  
 

Whether it helps or not is up for debate because it happens infrequently and without that getting called would it happen more?  Would defensive players launch themselves more frequently and with more abandon if they were not penalized if the blocker touched them?

 

We won’t know - only that currently it seems to be illegal and is a very infrequent issue.

[billsfan89]

There has to be some digression with a call like that. At that point you are just rewarding a QB for an unavoidable play happening. Those types of penalties are just too favorable to the offense. 

[JESSEFEFFER]

17 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

I have no issue if you want to ban the low hits, but that is not currently the rule.  
 

You see defensive players get upended like that in every couple of games - they are still responsible for their momentum.  
 

Whether it helps or not is up for debate because it happens infrequently and without that getting called would it happen more?  Would defensive players launch themselves more frequently and with more abandon if they were not penalized if the blocker touched them?

 

We won’t know - only that currently it seems to be illegal and is a very infrequent issue.

 

I do not see momentum anywhere in the rule.  As a matter of fact the reason to blitz like that is to defeat the blocker, make sure he can't become a receiver and continue on to the QB.  That's how it will happen if Lewis tries to block him higher.  Instead he cuts him and turns him into a flying, tumbling missile.  Unavoidable contact due to a block, say I.

[LABILLBACKER]

Where was the penalty on the player that cut Milano at the knees and launched him into the air? 

[3rdand12]

4 hours ago, Happy Gilmore said:

I've seen this type of contact happen with multiple teams, not just Matt Milano and the Bills.  Not sure why the NFL can't get this straightened out with reviews and coach's challenges.  I see the need to protect the QB against unnecessary roughness, but it has gone too far where they might as well be playing flag football.

I think i am okay with it. not right, but if it is consistently enforced? then Players can at least understand what they are up against.
But that said, no way he intended any illegal contact.
such is the game ..

[Seven-N-Nine]

I think he purposely pushed off with his hands and cartwheeled to get more airtime to force a collision.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Seven-N-Nine