THE SPIKE THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED

[Patler]

What you aren't recognizing is that the QB may release the ball before he realizes the receiver and he weren't on the same page. While its not rocket science, todays pro game is not as simple as you make it out to be.

This is an arguement to never run a no-huddle offense. "It's too hard."

Of course its not. This was a crucial time. They had time and downs to try and make sure everyone was thinking the same. But this was it, their last chance. Spiking was the smart thing to do. As somone else pointed out, if the next play had occured exactly as it did, with Favre fumbling, everyone would have sreamed that they had a down to waste, they could have spiked the ball to make sure everyone knew what they were doing, the fumble wouldn't have happened, etc. etc.


But no point in beating this dead horse any further. You will not convince me that it was wrong, nor will I convince you that it was correct.

[OS PA]

Did anybody else notice that about 3 seconds after he fumbled Favre was driven to the ground pretty hard? Is this still considered roughing the quarterback? Or do you have every right to tackle the person who fumbled?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Of course its not. This was a crucial time. They had time and downs to try and make sure everyone was thinking the same. But this was it, their last chance. Spiking was the smart thing to do. As somone else pointed out, if the next play had occured exactly as it did, with Favre fumbling, everyone would have sreamed that they had a down to waste, they could have spiked the ball to make sure everyone knew what they were doing, the fumble wouldn't have happened, etc. etc.

what you are missing is that throwing the ball out of the endzone is equivalent to spiking.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I didn't agree with the spike. I said so during the game. However, it had ZERO affect on the outcome of the game. I wouldn't have spiked it, but it's not really something I'd get too upset about either way.

[Harlan Huckleby]

However, it had ZERO affect on the outcome of the game.

Well, we can't know this, maybe a pass in endzone instead of into turf would have been a touchdown.

I'm ragging on this point because it is an old pet peeve of mine. Spiking only makes logical sense when there are less than 30 seconds on the clock, and there may not be time to run 4 plays anyway. The team has to get set whether the play is a spike or an audible pass. The risk of the QB failing to throw the ball away is small, especially with a decent QB, compared to the reward of an extra scoring opportunity.

[Patler]

Of course its not. This was a crucial time. They had time and downs to try and make sure everyone was thinking the same. But this was it, their last chance. Spiking was the smart thing to do. As somone else pointed out, if the next play had occured exactly as it did, with Favre fumbling, everyone would have sreamed that they had a down to waste, they could have spiked the ball to make sure everyone knew what they were doing, the fumble wouldn't have happened, etc. etc.

what you are missing is that throwing the ball out of the endzone is equivalent to spiking.

IF, IF, IF he throws it out of the endzone. That only happens if Favre actually sees the play will fail. Few plays end that way, and even fewer when Favre is the QB.

On the other hand, if Favre expects a "zig", thinks it might be open, and throws it for a hoped for TD; but the receiver thinks he was supposed to "zag" on the play the resulting interception ends the game. Favre will have released the ball before he realizes the player screwed up. It happens all the time.

When you still have two downs to run plays on from the 10 yard line and plenty of time in which to do it, in my opinion, it is never a mistake with a young offensive team to give them a chance to get their heads collected.

[MadtownPacker]

Talking about spiking the ball is kinda bad considering how much time they had left. Thats is something that has nagged me about all 5 games.

Yesterday the O was showing no urgency to move the ball when they where down 10. Maybe its due to the youth on the Oline and the young/new WRs but they really need to get it in gear in the 4th.

[Harlan Huckleby]

IF, IF, IF he throws it out of the endzone. That only happens if Favre actually sees the play will fail. Few plays end that way, and even fewer when Favre is the QB.

On the other hand, if Favre expects a "zig", thinks it might be open, and throws it for a hoped for TD; but the receiver thinks he was supposed

The risk of something bad happening is present on any play. And in this case, the QB acts with "throw ball away first" mentality, so risk is actually lower than on most plays.

Again, reward is an extra scoring opportunity. I expect most people will go for this risk/reward.

When you still have two downs to run plays on from the 10 yard line and plenty of time in which to do it, in my opinion, it is never a mistake with a young offensive team to give them a chance to get their heads collected.

This is a constant. They get clock stopped, collect themselves, whether it is through a spike or pass out of endzone.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Talking about spiking the ball is kinda bad considering how much time they had left. Thats is something that has nagged me about all 5 games.

Yesterday the O was showing no urgency to move the ball when they where down 10. Maybe its due to the youth on the Oline and the young/new WRs but they really need to get it in gear in the 4th.

There was over 8 minutes left in the game and the Packers were driving. They did things right and got the defense thinking short passes and Favre hit them for a deep TD. They were being successful in moving the ball and had a nice drive. I'll take a successful drive in a TD over a no-huddle failure that was done just to placate the masses into thinking the Pack are urgently trying to win.

[SkinBasket]

Did anybody else notice that about 3 seconds after he fumbled Favre was driven to the ground pretty hard? Is this still considered roughing the quarterback? Or do you have every right to tackle the person who fumbled?

I didn't notice that, but at that point, he's just another player. Gotta keep your eyes open til the whistle blows. Just ask Clifton. Cheap? Yes. Against the rules? No.

[Patler]

I no longer trust Favre to make cool decisions under the heat of battle with little time remaining and the game in the balance. Mostly he has failed in those situation the last three seasons. I certainly don't expect three rookies and three player who weren't even on the roster for the first game to do any better.

It only takes one play to score a TD. I would rather run my first attempt at it as a play from a huddle, with everyone knowing what it is than risk a paniced deciasion by those players that results in never running a play in a collected manner.

heck, they couldn't even get it right taking their time. The chances of it blowing up in their face in a hurry up was even greater.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm ragging on this point because it is an old pet peeve of mine. Spiking only makes logical sense when there are less than 30 seconds on the clock, and there may not be time to run 4 plays anyway. The team has to get set whether the play is a spike or an audible pass. The risk of the QB failing to throw the ball away is small, especially with a decent QB, compared to the reward of an extra scoring opportunity.

What makes you think they would have gotten four plays off? There was 44 seconds, but we had no timeouts. Sure, we oculd have gotten four incompletions off, but one completed pass inbounds and short of the goalline would have run off half that time. Maybe McCarthy didn't want to the team to feel rushed on an important play like that. Let them huddle and all get on the same page. Didn't work, but I think that's a valid argument. I wouldn't have spiked the ball, but it's not a big issue IMHO. Nothing to really second guess the coach on anyways.

[Freak Out]

I would have run a play instead of spiking the ball at that moment...spike it on the next play if you make a completion or run the ball short of the goal line and then take a shot at the endzone or kick the field goal. They had time to set and run a play and the Rams D was tired. But there were many other "mistakes" that were made throughout the day that had a bigger impact than the spike.

[Bretsky]

I didn't agree with the spike. I said so during the game. However, it had ZERO affect on the outcome of the game. I wouldn't have spiked it, but it's not really something I'd get too upset about either way.

I can't prove it either way, but I'm not sure I'd categorize it as zero impact.

Leonard Little was very very tired out there; I think I read he had to get fluids after the game. We gave him a breather and he's the guy who knocked the ball out of Favre's hands. Maybe ? he needed that breather to get there.

But that's not my real argument for not spiking. We let the defense get organized; if MM sends in the play to Favre and we move swiftly in the no huddle the offense would in all probablity be be more prepared than the defense.

[HarveyWallbangers]

But that's not my real argument for not spiking. We let the defense get organized; if MM sends in the play to Favre and we move swiftly in the no huddle the offense would in all probablity be be more prepared than the defense.

But the counter argument is that you might run a play instead of spiking the ball, and guys might not be on the same page. Look at how many times we've messed up the quick hike this year--when we had people in bad personnel groupings. I think we messed up again in that situation in this game. We have a young OL, young RB that needs to handle a blitz, and a young WR. Sometimes it might be best to huddle up and make sure everybody is on the same page. I'm sure Little wasn't the only guy on the field that was gassed. Hell, the OL and Favre might have been needed a breather just as much as Little.