Francois penalty - poor coaching

[Joemailman]

2 problems with the play by the Packers:

1 - Francois is lined up directly in line with the center. There's no dispute about that, it's obvious. Why he's lined up like that is foolish in the first place. If his job is to block the G , then line him up over the G. If it's an area he needs to play, then no need to line him up in line with the C, he sure as hell can take a step or two over if he's not going to block the kick well before the punter kicks the ball.

2 - He's way too close to the LOS. Why put yourself in a position where there is even a reason to have the official make a judgement call? Poor coaching and why someone else on the field didn't see it and tell him to either back off or move over is ridiculous. Again, he didn't rush the punter so why the need to be anywhere close to the LOS?

You can argue about it being a judgement call all day, but when you all but dare the officials to call something when you put yourself smack dab in the greyest of the grey area, don't be shocked when the call goes against you.

It was 4th and 2 at the Packers 43. You put him close to the LOS so they don't run a fake up the middle.

[Patler]

2 problems with the play by the Packers:

1 - Francois is lined up directly in line with the center. There's no dispute about that, it's obvious. Why he's lined up like that is foolish in the first place. If his job is to block the G , then line him up over the G. If it's an area he needs to play, then no need to line him up in line with the C, he sure as hell can take a step or two over if he's not going to block the kick well before the punter kicks the ball.

2 - He's way too close to the LOS. Why put yourself in a position where there is even a reason to have the official make a judgement call? Poor coaching and why someone else on the field didn't see it and tell him to either back off or move over is ridiculous. Again, he didn't rush the punter so why the need to be anywhere close to the LOS?

You can argue about it being a judgement call all day, but when you all but dare the officials to call something when you put yourself smack dab in the greyest of the grey area, don't be shocked when the call goes against you.

It was 4th and 2 at the Packers 43. You put him close to the LOS so they don't run a fake up the middle.

If they have a guy in position for a direct snap, he can be head up on the center, on the LOS. If not, back up two feet so there's no question.

[The Leaper]

He can be anywhere the hell he wants to be...as long as he isn't lined up head on over the center. Move 12 inches right or left...you can put two guys on either shoulder of the center if you want. You just can't EVER be head up on the center on a punt. What is so hard to decipher about that?

McCarthy deserves this...he's held on to Slocum and his incompetence far too long. Only fair that it jumps up and bites him hard in the gonads. McCarthy had to be dragged kicking and screaming to get a competent defensive coordinator...and it appears it will be more of the same with the special teams coach. McCarthy's ability to evaluate his staff and judge where upgrades are necessary is sorely lacking. That is a critical component to being a head coach as well.

[Cheesehead Craig]

2 problems with the play by the Packers:

1 - Francois is lined up directly in line with the center. There's no dispute about that, it's obvious. Why he's lined up like that is foolish in the first place. If his job is to block the G , then line him up over the G. If it's an area he needs to play, then no need to line him up in line with the C, he sure as hell can take a step or two over if he's not going to block the kick well before the punter kicks the ball.

2 - He's way too close to the LOS. Why put yourself in a position where there is even a reason to have the official make a judgement call? Poor coaching and why someone else on the field didn't see it and tell him to either back off or move over is ridiculous. Again, he didn't rush the punter so why the need to be anywhere close to the LOS?

You can argue about it being a judgement call all day, but when you all but dare the officials to call something when you put yourself smack dab in the greyest of the grey area, don't be shocked when the call goes against you.

It was 4th and 2 at the Packers 43. You put him close to the LOS so they don't run a fake up the middle.

Doesn't need to be that close and given where those guys behind the LOS were for Miami, that would have been a colossally dumb idea. Don't buy the reasoning.

[Noodle]

My understanding is that the reason for the rule is to protect the center, which makes sense to me. So you should call it when a guy is within the yard and takes a whack at the C.

But here, Francois didn't whack the C. He kind of stood up stepped forward a little, but the C was up and ready to protect himself with no contact from Francois.

So with it being so dang close (maybe he was 36 inches, maybe 39, maybe 34, you'd need a friggin lazer to tell) and with the C not getting whacked, you put the flag away.

[Patler]

He can be anywhere the hell he wants to be...as long as he isn't lined up head on over the center. Move 12 inches right or left...you can put two guys on either shoulder of the center if you want. You just can't EVER be head up on the center on a punt. What is so hard to decipher about that?

McCarthy deserves this...he's held on to Slocum and his incompetence far too long. Only fair that it jumps up and bites him hard in the gonads. McCarthy had to be dragged kicking and screaming to get a competent defensive coordinator...and it appears it will be more of the same with the special teams coach. McCarthy's ability to evaluate his staff and judge where upgrades are necessary is sorely lacking. That is a critical component to being a head coach as well.

They moved them out even farther this year. I believe they have to be outside the center's shoulders. On a regular punt there is a huge space in the middle now. That's why the added the change if a punting team player is in a threatening position for a direct snap. You can then line up anywhere, I think. Even head up on the center, just like the good old days.

[mraynrand]

I don't see how us tieing the game back up suddenly makes that call moot. If it stayed at 13-13 with us having the ball, who knows what happens?

It's moot because it didn't directly change the outcome of the game. Usually, refs decide the outcome if it is pretty much the last play of the game - like a TD pass that is negated because refs don't know the difference between falling to the ground and getting up. And the bolded part of your post is true - you have no idea what happens. Rodgers could just as easily had driven them down the field, used up the clock and then throw a pick six with no time to recover. Or he could have suffered a season-ending ACL tear. Packers had plenty of opportunities to win the game, the absurd, ridiculous, ticky-tacky, no-fun, slide-rule call notwithstanding.

This team cannot win close games.

[mraynrand]

He can be anywhere the hell he wants to be...as long as he isn't lined up head on over the center. Move 12 inches right or left...you can put two guys on either shoulder of the center if you want. You just can't EVER be head up on the center on a punt. What is so hard to decipher about that?

He was off the line, standing up as a LB, not a down-lineman. The rule was made to protect centers from getting 'canned' by D-linemen. I assume you paid attention to the discussion about how far away the guy has to be. There's been some extremely tedious legal briefs filed in this thread over the exact wording of the rule book. I expect we'll see this appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. It's just that important and exciting.

[Pugger]

It's a great rule and a great call. It's all about what the NFL wants to be, and a trial attourney deciding games based on nitpicking is everything the NFL aspires to. It's wonderful to come to this site and see people arguing over whether a LB who clearly was not violating the spirit of the law was technically violating the letter of the law. Perhaps a day will come when the NFL is completely regulated by laser rulers and computerized officials obeying the letter of the law. That's what fans want - perfect precision and reproducibility down to the micrometer. That's what makes the NFL fun.

That being said, the Packers tied the game, and the call became moot. The most important calls were the calls Stubby made to not get the Packers a first down in overtime and lose another close game - yet again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

The defense was sorely hurting and the offense was pretty much intact. Capers did his job,, and did it pretty well, while Stubby failed - That his offense couldn't score more than 20 points against a pretty average defense at home is pathetic. That he can't find a way to win close games is even worse. No, he shouldn't be fired in midseason, but this counts as yet again another strike against the confusing mix of talent, stubborness, and 'flailure' that defines Stubby. This goes in the negative column when TT evaluates him at the end of the season.

The defense, because of injuries to so many starters, couldn't get off the damn field all afternoon and made Henne look like Peyton Manning. We only had the ball for 3 minutes in the 3rd quarter. It isn't easy to get anything going on offense when you are spending your afternoon sitting on the bench.

[Pugger]

2 problems with the play by the Packers:

1 - Francois is lined up directly in line with the center. There's no dispute about that, it's obvious. Why he's lined up like that is foolish in the first place. If his job is to block the G , then line him up over the G. If it's an area he needs to play, then no need to line him up in line with the C, he sure as hell can take a step or two over if he's not going to block the kick well before the punter kicks the ball.

2 - He's way too close to the LOS. Why put yourself in a position where there is even a reason to have the official make a judgement call? Poor coaching and why someone else on the field didn't see it and tell him to either back off or move over is ridiculous. Again, he didn't rush the punter so why the need to be anywhere close to the LOS?

You can argue about it being a judgement call all day, but when you all but dare the officials to call something when you put yourself smack dab in the greyest of the grey area, don't be shocked when the call goes against you.

+1

Why give the zebras the chance to make that call in the first place? I pray we never put a player directly in front of the center ever again no matter how far back he is from the LOS. It just isn't worth it!

[denverYooper]

If the intent of the rule is to protect the C, shouldn't it have been called before the play happens? Not while the O is already huddling. Did they throw the flag before the play and then confer and call? Seemed to me that they conferred during the TV TO and then decided to all it.

Not to excuse another poor showing by ST but it seems to me that if they're really concerned about protecting the C, they get the flag out before the snap.

[pbmax]

I think the simplest explanation is the likeliest. There is no evidence yet the Packers had an issue with this prior to Francois (at least, not yet).

Given McCarthy's claim about 1 and 1/2 yard distance, I would hazard a guess that replacement Francois either misjudged the distance or measured from the center, rather than the ball. Still, if the refs use the other bodies on the line to measure, then that player should too.

The Packers also had another late run on for the FG block team. But I would bet that was Poppinga's replacement that was late, since it happened not long after he came out of the game.

[mraynrand]

It's a great rule and a great call. It's all about what the NFL wants to be, and a trial attourney deciding games based on nitpicking is everything the NFL aspires to. It's wonderful to come to this site and see people arguing over whether a LB who clearly was not violating the spirit of the law was technically violating the letter of the law. Perhaps a day will come when the NFL is completely regulated by laser rulers and computerized officials obeying the letter of the law. That's what fans want - perfect precision and reproducibility down to the micrometer. That's what makes the NFL fun.

That being said, the Packers tied the game, and the call became moot. The most important calls were the calls Stubby made to not get the Packers a first down in overtime and lose another close game - yet again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

The defense was sorely hurting and the offense was pretty much intact. Capers did his job,, and did it pretty well, while Stubby failed - That his offense couldn't score more than 20 points against a pretty average defense at home is pathetic. That he can't find a way to win close games is even worse. No, he shouldn't be fired in midseason, but this counts as yet again another strike against the confusing mix of talent, stubborness, and 'flailure' that defines Stubby. This goes in the negative column when TT evaluates him at the end of the season.

The defense, because of injuries to so many starters, couldn't get off the damn field all afternoon and made Henne look like Peyton Manning. We only had the ball for 3 minutes in the 3rd quarter. It isn't easy to get anything going on offense when you are spending your afternoon sitting on the bench.

maybe the offense could figure out how to get a first down.

[Brohm]

Crosby (and others) came to Francois' defense saying he was where he was coached to be.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/105155064.html

[Fritz]

It's a great rule and a great call. It's all about what the NFL wants to be, and a trial attourney deciding games based on nitpicking is everything the NFL aspires to. It's wonderful to come to this site and see people arguing over whether a LB who clearly was not violating the spirit of the law was technically violating the letter of the law. Perhaps a day will come when the NFL is completely regulated by laser rulers and computerized officials obeying the letter of the law. That's what fans want - perfect precision and reproducibility down to the micrometer. That's what makes the NFL fun.

That being said, the Packers tied the game, and the call became moot. The most important calls were the calls Stubby made to not get the Packers a first down in overtime and lose another close game - yet again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

The defense was sorely hurting and the offense was pretty much intact. Capers did his job,, and did it pretty well, while Stubby failed - That his offense couldn't score more than 20 points against a pretty average defense at home is pathetic. That he can't find a way to win close games is even worse. No, he shouldn't be fired in midseason, but this counts as yet again another strike against the confusing mix of talent, stubborness, and 'flailure' that defines Stubby. This goes in the negative column when TT evaluates him at the end of the season.

I love that word, mranynrand. Did you make that up?

I also agree with your analysis of Studdy's coaching problems. First, he's not apparently very good at hiring assistant coaches. He got Capers right on his 2nd try for a defensive coordinator, but he is also responsible for Campen and Slocum.
Secondly, for his offense - supposedly with the best wide receiving corps in the league, and with an offensive line that outside Bulaga has lots of experience - to only be able to put up 20 against an okay Miami defense at home is an indictment of Stubby.

Flailure. Exactly.