Lol, there is no possible way that the Patriots can "cheat" in this manner. The quoted article clearly states that the referees stand over the ball until it is allowed to be snapped. There is nothing that the Patriots can do that affects when that happens, and you can't seriously call it "cheating" to snap the ball after the refs have given them the okay to do so. That would be like saying a team "cheated" because the refs marked the spot wrong.
You damn right I'm going to complain if the refs don't give us enough time to sub when the rules clearly state we get time to sub. You don't want this rule enforced? Smh
Fair point. Cheating was too strong of a word. That being said, it would be quite unreasonable if we just allowed the refs to bend the rules in order to accommodate the patriot's offensive gameplan. They can no huddle all night long. As long as they substitute, we should be allowed to do the same so that they can't continuously no huddle us on mis-matched packages.
It seems like the Patriots have been doing that in hopes the referees missed their obligation to stop the snap. It's not cheating but it is getting away with abusing the system. It's not like Brady and the Pats CS couldn't see what was going on.
Why aren't great offenses not allowed to be gimmick? The Patriots run a hurry hurry up that's probably illegal, with multiple TEs, and short receivers who are good at running short routes. It's not a typical offense. It's a gimmick.
Precisely. I wasn't knocking their O with the title of this thread. A player last week dubbed their offense as "gimmicky", because its unconventional.
The NFL referees don't "stop the snap", they are in essence the ones that initiate it to begin with. They place the ball on the field when they have made the subjective determination that the defense has had enough time to substitute. After an NFL referee says "okay you can snap the ball now", do you really envision any QB saying "BUT WAIT!... I don't think you have given the defense enough time yet!"? Defensive backs and offensive linemen make their living by exploiting the things that refs miss. QBs are no different. I don't think anyone is saying that. It has been reported that Pete Carroll brought up the same thing to the refs before last week's game, and the refs handled those situations perfectly. It seems to me like this matter has already been resolved, but I don't blame Rex for bringing it up to the officials.
What is most interesting is the Jets are the reason this rule was put in writing. Back in 2006 there was no such written rule but there was unwritten agreement between coaches that they would not abuse substitutions to gain a competitive advantage. Mangini, against the Colts, used late substitutions that did not allow the Colts to change players on defense. After the game Dungy was outraged and said it was cheating on the part of Mangini. The competition committee called an emergency meeting the next week where they made the above rule. Now we come full circle where the Jets want the protection of the rule that they caused to be written. I find it quite ironic but anything that may slow down Brady I am all for.
I'm starting this off with the assumption that what the pats did was true AND they did it multiple times.. While the ineptitude of the referees are one thing, to take advantage of their obliviousness is another. If they know they are breaking the rules, and taking advantage of their stupidity, and keep doing it -- that is highly unethical and I DO think that counts as cheating. I understand your point of "well it's not our jobs to enforce the law", I don't think that negates the unethical use of that play, because it seemed pretty planned out to me. Hopefully instances like that was a one time or one game thing.
Since this is becoming a topic,I thought it might be an idea to have the complete rule. DEFENSIVE MATCHUPS FOLLOWING SUBSTITUTIONS Article 10 If a substitution is made by the offense, the offense shall not be permitted to snap the ball until the defense has been permitted to respond with its substitutions. While in the process of a substitution (or simulated substitution), the offense is prohibited from rushing quickly to the line of scrimmage and snapping the ball in an obvious attempt to cause a defensive foul (i.e., too many men on the field). If, in the judgment of the officials, this occurs, the following procedure will apply: (a) The Umpire will stand over the ball until the Referee deems that the defense has had a reasonable time to complete its substitutions. (b) If a play takes place and a defensive foul for too many players on the field results, no penalties will be enforced, except for personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct, and the down will be replayed. At this time, the Referee will notify the head coach that any further use of this tactic will result in a penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct. Note: The quick-snap rule does not apply after the two-minute warning of either half, or if there is not a substitution by the offense. (c) On a fourth-down punting situation, the Referee and the Umpire will not allow a quick snap that prevents the defense from having a reasonable time to complete its substitutions. This applies throughout the entire game.
They better enforce that substitution rule. Such horse shit if they get away with it today...Rex better blow his fume about it.
Newsflash: The Broncos got screwed on this several times b/c the refs refused to fairly enforce the rules. Its absolute horseshit that the officials allowed the broncos to get screwed by poor enforcement of the substitution rule.
Honestly, if it was the Jets doing it, no one would see a problem with it and they would just blame it on the refs for not calling it. I'm not gonna talk shit about the Pats or call anything they do a "gimmick". Gimmicks went out of the window after they won 3 SBs and went to 5 with probably the greatest player of all-time. I HATE the Pats with all my heart, but I respect the shit out of them, especially since they keep their mouths shut.
Same shit, different pile to me. But it is noted. This is their latest tactic, I'm glad we are trying to foil it. I used the word gimmick as an ode to Richard Sherman, the next great trash talker in the NFL
I guess if you don't know the meaning of the word gimmick you could take the thread title the wrong way.
