RE: Mike Priefer must GO

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: Mike Priefer must GO

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: Mike Priefer must GO

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 10:43:20 AM

69in09

Posts: 8480
Joined: 1/13/2009
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

I wonder when Walsh will come out and say what actually happened technically that screwed up the kick. He did very well not bringing it up before now.

I can tell you right now.

He didn't "overstep" the kick.

When you need the ball to take a right angle (as in this kick) you should step further past the ball than you would for a straight on kick.

Of course, the opposite is true when you want to angle the kick to the left. You would stop a little short.

For PATS he puts the ball on the right hash, so he is obviously more comfortable doing that.

Presnap he angled himself right, but he didn't overstep and subsequently had almost no follow through. As he finishes, his leg comes more across his body that forward towards the uprights, as it should.

Because that is an unusual angle he needed to consciously remember think to overstep on the 27 yarder, but clearly didn't.

I read somewhere that Kluwe twitted right away that his plant foot was too close to the ball.

I noticed he seemed a little close too but from my experience the closeness of the plant foot is more a preference thing for the kicker than something that will effect the direction of the kick.

_____________________________

This is my burner account.

Post #: 251

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 10:43:46 AM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 26286
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

I have seen a punting team touch the ball first and then the receiving team pick it up and run for a score....there is no muff/fumble if the punting team touches it first.

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 252

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 10:44:41 AM

Ricky J

Posts: 18174
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Merry Christmas, David. I hope all is well!

Thank you Ricky. All was well that day. Also thank you again for all your wonderful support and help you gave me. I would normally say 'you'll never know how much it meant' but I have a feeling you DO know how much it meant.

I'm throwing this out here on the board not for me but for anyone else who by chance might need to hear it...

I spent Christmas in an inpatient treatment center for chemical dependency. I spent 34 days there total with little to no contact with the outside world. I won't use the 40-50+ pages it would take for me to describe the experience but I'll just say that it might be the single most important thing I've ever done and it 100% without a doubt saved my life - for now - as long as I continue to work for a positive recovery.

Please... PLEASE if you are suffering or feel there is no where to turn or no one to talk to seek help. Things might seem hopeless and dark but there are people who can help. Reach out.

Spent 45 days in such a place (some are sicker than others, as the saying goes) starting December 6, 1983. Life got better and has continued so ever since. Keep coming back.

Continued good health to you guys....glad to hear it.

Heck, good health to you guys! I pretty much know I'm not going to kill myself, get sick, or end up in jail (anymore) because of booze. We've got it made. Good luck to you guys!

Post #: 253

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 10:46:11 AM

69in09

Posts: 8480
Joined: 1/13/2009
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

I think I've been over this once before. With all my deletes I'm not sure.

If the punting team touches, but not downs the ball, it is called first touching and the ball is still live. The ball will be set to play at either the first touching or the downed spot - which ever is further. It doesn't matter if you accidentally touch it and they recover because it would go to the spot of first touching. That's why, imo, it is smart to try and pick up the ball and run. The worst thing that can happen to you is it will go back to first touching.

I've been over this with my son. The ball is punted, there is a first touching, bean bag is marking the spot, my boy is trying to get into position to pick up the ball and run, the coaches are screaming, "GET AWAY FROM THE BALL, " I'm screaming from the stands, "PICK IT UP AND RUN!"

Who ever said the coaches are smarter than us fans? Ludicrous!

You are exactly right. I believe you have said you have officiated before or still do?

When the punting team touches but doesn't down the ball it's oddly called an "illegal touching" and the receiving team should be able to advance it but frequently it's prematurely blown dead..

I think most coaches don't favor players trying to advance it because 1) You are relying of the official to make the right call and 2) The player might think the other team touched it, but didn't.

I officiated 15 years in high school. Loved Friday nights about as much as anything. I gave it up to watch my kids play.

re: ... most coaches don't favor players trying to advance it because ...

In my opinion they don't favor it because they don't know the rules.

That might well be true too. On multiple occasions I'm explained it to other coaches on the field and they seem incapable of grasping the concept.

_____________________________

This is my burner account.

Post #: 254

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 10:54:16 AM

Daniel Lee Young

Posts: 12756
Joined: 9/21/2013
Status: offline

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/12_Rule9_Scrimmage_Kick.pdf

FIRST TOUCHING BEYOND THE LINE
Article 2 “First touching” is when a player of the kicking team touches a scrimmage kick that is beyond the
line of scrimmage before it has been touched by a player of the receiving team beyond the line. If the ball
is first touched by a player of the kicking team, it remains in play. First touching is a violation, and the
receivers shall have the option of taking possession of the ball at the spot of first touching, provided no
penalty is accepted on the play, or at the spot where the ball is dead. First touching does not offset a foul
by the receivers.
Note: If the receiving team gains possession, subsequently loses possession, and fouls after the kicking team
gains possession, the spot of first touching is disregarded, and the kicking team retains possession.

KICKERS CATCH OR RECOVER BEYOND LINE
Article 2 When the kickers catch or recover a kick beyond the line of scrimmage, the ball is dead at the
spot of recovery, even if a member of the receiving team has first touched the ball.
Item 1: Legal Catch or Recovery. If the receiving team touches the ball beyond the line, a subsequent
catch or recovery by the kicking team is legal, but the ball is dead. In the event of such a catch or
recovery, it is first-and-10 for the kickers, or if the ball is caught or recovered by the kickers in the
receiver’s end zone, it is a touchdown for the kickers. See 7-3-1-d.

Item 2: Illegal Catch or Recovery. If the kickers catch or recover a kick beyond the line that has not
been touched beyond the line by the receiving team, the ball is dead, and it is first-and-10 for the
receivers at the spot of catch or recovery (see 11-4-2 for missed goals). If a kick from behind the line
is touched by the receiving team behind the line, such touching does not make the kicking team
eligible to catch or recover the kick beyond the line.
Item 3: If a player of the kicking team illegally catches or recovers a scrimmage kick, other than a field
goal attempt from beyond the 20-yard line, and carries the ball across the goal line, or touches the
goal line with any part of his body while in possession of the ball, the ball is dead, and the result of the
play is a touchback. For a missed field goal from beyond the 20-yard line, see 11-4-2.

In this case the bolded means the person actually kicking.. IE the punter

< Message edited by Daniel Lee Young -- 1/14/2016 10:56:42 AM >

_____________________________

"Thou shall not bear false witness”
I am WRATH, incarnate.
@RlyeeNicole’sDad

Post #: 255

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 12:45:00 PM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9305
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 256

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 1:24:19 PM

DavidAOlson

Posts: 17322
Joined: 8/2/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

I wonder when Walsh will come out and say what actually happened technically that screwed up the kick. He did very well not bringing it up before now.

I can tell you right now.

He didn't "overstep" the kick.

When you need the ball to take a right angle (as in this kick) you should step further past the ball than you would for a straight on kick.

Of course, the opposite is true when you want to angle the kick to the left. You would stop a little short.

For PATS he puts the ball on the right hash, so he is obviously more comfortable doing that.

Presnap he angled himself right, but he didn't overstep and subsequently had almost no follow through. As he finishes, his leg comes more across his body that forward towards the uprights, as it should.

Because that is an unusual angle he needed to consciously remember think to overstep on the 27 yarder, but clearly didn't.

I read somewhere that Kluwe twitted right away that his plant foot was too close to the ball.

I noticed he seemed a little close too but from my experience the closeness of the plant foot is more a preference thing for the kicker than something that will effect the direction of the kick.

That's not correct. Walsh was too close compared to his usual distance, and that affects his swing.

http://insidethepylon.com/film-study/film-study-nfl/special-teams-film-study-nfl/2016/01/10/explaining-blair-walsh-missed-field-goal/

_____________________________

I give myself very good advice, but I very seldom follow it. --- Alice

Post #: 257

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 6:38:43 PM

Bill Jandro

Posts: 17809
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavidAOlson

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

I wonder when Walsh will come out and say what actually happened technically that screwed up the kick. He did very well not bringing it up before now.

I can tell you right now.

He didn't "overstep" the kick.

When you need the ball to take a right angle (as in this kick) you should step further past the ball than you would for a straight on kick.

Of course, the opposite is true when you want to angle the kick to the left. You would stop a little short.

For PATS he puts the ball on the right hash, so he is obviously more comfortable doing that.

Presnap he angled himself right, but he didn't overstep and subsequently had almost no follow through. As he finishes, his leg comes more across his body that forward towards the uprights, as it should.

Because that is an unusual angle he needed to consciously remember think to overstep on the 27 yarder, but clearly didn't.

I read somewhere that Kluwe twitted right away that his plant foot was too close to the ball.

I noticed he seemed a little close too but from my experience the closeness of the plant foot is more a preference thing for the kicker than something that will effect the direction of the kick.

That's not correct. Walsh was too close compared to his usual distance, and that affects his swing.

http://insidethepylon.com/film-study/film-study-nfl/special-teams-film-study-nfl/2016/01/10/explaining-blair-walsh-missed-field-goal/

Good article. Walsh missing the kick had nothing to do with the weather just horse shit mechanics.

Had the ball been on the right hash mark it would have been perfect

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft

Post #: 258

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 7:11:23 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28245
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

Guess I never noticed that.

Post #: 259

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 7:14:25 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28245
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Merry Christmas, David. I hope all is well!

Thank you Ricky. All was well that day. Also thank you again for all your wonderful support and help you gave me. I would normally say 'you'll never know how much it meant' but I have a feeling you DO know how much it meant.

I'm throwing this out here on the board not for me but for anyone else who by chance might need to hear it...

I spent Christmas in an inpatient treatment center for chemical dependency. I spent 34 days there total with little to no contact with the outside world. I won't use the 40-50+ pages it would take for me to describe the experience but I'll just say that it might be the single most important thing I've ever done and it 100% without a doubt saved my life - for now - as long as I continue to work for a positive recovery.

Please... PLEASE if you are suffering or feel there is no where to turn or no one to talk to seek help. Things might seem hopeless and dark but there are people who can help. Reach out.

Spent 45 days in such a place (some are sicker than others, as the saying goes) starting December 6, 1983. Life got better and has continued so ever since. Keep coming back.

Continued good health to you guys....glad to hear it.

Heck, good health to you guys! I pretty much know I'm not going to kill myself, get sick, or end up in jail (anymore) because of booze. We've got it made. Good luck to you guys!

Just don't run into JC, you should be good.

Post #: 260

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 7:38:32 PM

Ricky J

Posts: 18174
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Merry Christmas, David. I hope all is well!

Thank you Ricky. All was well that day. Also thank you again for all your wonderful support and help you gave me. I would normally say 'you'll never know how much it meant' but I have a feeling you DO know how much it meant.

I'm throwing this out here on the board not for me but for anyone else who by chance might need to hear it...

I spent Christmas in an inpatient treatment center for chemical dependency. I spent 34 days there total with little to no contact with the outside world. I won't use the 40-50+ pages it would take for me to describe the experience but I'll just say that it might be the single most important thing I've ever done and it 100% without a doubt saved my life - for now - as long as I continue to work for a positive recovery.

Please... PLEASE if you are suffering or feel there is no where to turn or no one to talk to seek help. Things might seem hopeless and dark but there are people who can help. Reach out.

Spent 45 days in such a place (some are sicker than others, as the saying goes) starting December 6, 1983. Life got better and has continued so ever since. Keep coming back.

Continued good health to you guys....glad to hear it.

Heck, good health to you guys! I pretty much know I'm not going to kill myself, get sick, or end up in jail (anymore) because of booze. We've got it made. Good luck to you guys!

Just don't run into JC, you should be good.

I don't run anymore, too old - unlike you

Post #: 261

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/14/2016 8:35:22 PM

69in09

Posts: 8480
Joined: 1/13/2009
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavidAOlson

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

I wonder when Walsh will come out and say what actually happened technically that screwed up the kick. He did very well not bringing it up before now.

I can tell you right now.

He didn't "overstep" the kick.

When you need the ball to take a right angle (as in this kick) you should step further past the ball than you would for a straight on kick.

Of course, the opposite is true when you want to angle the kick to the left. You would stop a little short.

For PATS he puts the ball on the right hash, so he is obviously more comfortable doing that.

Presnap he angled himself right, but he didn't overstep and subsequently had almost no follow through. As he finishes, his leg comes more across his body that forward towards the uprights, as it should.

Because that is an unusual angle he needed to consciously remember think to overstep on the 27 yarder, but clearly didn't.

I read somewhere that Kluwe twitted right away that his plant foot was too close to the ball.

I noticed he seemed a little close too but from my experience the closeness of the plant foot is more a preference thing for the kicker than something that will effect the direction of the kick.

That's not correct. Walsh was too close compared to his usual distance, and that affects his swing.

http://insidethepylon.com/film-study/film-study-nfl/special-teams-film-study-nfl/2016/01/10/explaining-blair-walsh-missed-field-goal/

That's what I get for talking in absolutes.

It looks like that was the cause. I don't think it's necessarily that his plant foot was too close, but if that varied from his regular plant (which seems very wide in his example) that could have easily caused it.

I haven't re-watched it since seeing it live and with the immediate replays and I was pretty pissed off at the time.

I see on his example when contact is made, the rubber pebbles are all behind his plan foot so his "overstep" was likely sufficient.

Thanks for providing that. I stand corrected.

_____________________________

This is my burner account.

Post #: 262

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/15/2016 8:13:10 AM

eagleflorida

Posts: 1627
Joined: 12/23/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

I absolutley agree with you on this. I saw it occur at least once in that last game & I gave it a WTF is this crap all about. Some new scheme I supposed but it didn't make much sense to me as I understood the rules.

Post #: 263

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/15/2016 9:48:04 AM

David F.

Posts: 10832
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eagleflorida

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

I absolutley agree with you on this. I saw it occur at least once in that last game & I gave it a WTF is this crap all about. Some new scheme I supposed but it didn't make much sense to me as I understood the rules.

I've seen it too. It gives me a mild heart attack.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!

Post #: 264

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/15/2016 10:02:15 AM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9305
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eagleflorida

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

I absolutley agree with you on this. I saw it occur at least once in that last game & I gave it a WTF is this crap all about. Some new scheme I supposed but it didn't make much sense to me as I understood the rules.

I've seen it too. It gives me a mild heart attack.

i've noticed it in our last couple of games...one inadvertent bounce - ball touches receiving team player - live ball and all hell breaks loose....

i cannot imagine what priefer's thought process is here, but it's hard to see an upside that balances the extreme downside....

if that ball touches one vikings player and the punting team recovers zimmer and the rest of us are going apeshit....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 265

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/15/2016 10:44:40 AM

69in09

Posts: 8480
Joined: 1/13/2009
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eagleflorida

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daniel Lee Young

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
does it bother anyone else that our punting team players run down and surround the receiving players and the bouncing ball before it's been downed and could become 'live' if it touches one the punting team players?...they fake like they're going to grab the ball and while doing so get way too close to the ball...it just seems so risky and all for nothing....

the team punting has only one option on a punt..

first touching or downing the ball.. which is essentislly the same thing..

the only way a punted ball can become "live" and the punting team can do anything but down it, is if it touches in any way a member of the receiving team..

once a member of the receiving team touches the ball , either by attempting to field a punt ( muffed)or by inadvertently being touched on the leg or in the back, or any other way touches the punted ball first,, and ONLY if a receiving team player touches the ball first.. it is then a live ball and can be picked up and advanced by either team.

Punting team members SHOULD BE surrounding the ball..

This is way the punt returner either calls for a Fair Catch, to field it clean and "down it" at the spot of the fair catch, or waves off all other players on the receiving team so they DO NOT accidently touch it , creating a live ball.

He must have switched punting team and receiving team around inadvertently. He would know that otherwise.

i did not explain myself properly, and i apologize....

i meant our receiving team on a punt...our receiving team players surround the ball while punting team is letting to ball dribble down the field...our receiving team fakes like they're going to jump into the scrum to get the ball...this seems stupid regarding the rules as i understand them....

I absolutley agree with you on this. I saw it occur at least once in that last game & I gave it a WTF is this crap all about. Some new scheme I supposed but it didn't make much sense to me as I understood the rules.

I've seen it too. It gives me a mild heart attack.

i've noticed it in our last couple of games...one inadvertent bounce - ball touches receiving team player - live ball and all hell breaks loose....

i cannot imagine what priefer's thought process is here, but it's hard to see an upside that balances the extreme downside....

if that ball touches one vikings player and the punting team recovers zimmer and the rest of us are going apeshit....

The only possible advantage I see is that it may provoke the kicking team to touch the ball prematurely?

I guess he really trusts his guys to make smart plays. The risk seems to far out weigh the reward on that.

_____________________________

This is my burner account.

Post #: 266

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 11:39:40 AM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 11994
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

Viking Special Teams rated #10 by Rick Gosselin.

If we cut Locke, maybe we can get into the Top 5.

Post #: 267

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 11:46:23 AM

Todd M

Posts: 39703
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

Might as well scrap it all.

Lifer ST's coach that does little.
A shit punter.
A choking top 5 paid middle producing kicker.

Use up CP's legs for one more year on the cheap if you have to. Hope his positives outweigh the negatives. Low rounders available every year that aren't starting CB's, RB's or WR's but dangerous returners so I wouldn't sweat it too much.

Post #: 268

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 12:31:34 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33452
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavidAOlson

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: 69in09

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

I wonder when Walsh will come out and say what actually happened technically that screwed up the kick. He did very well not bringing it up before now.

I can tell you right now.

He didn't "overstep" the kick.

When you need the ball to take a right angle (as in this kick) you should step further past the ball than you would for a straight on kick.

Of course, the opposite is true when you want to angle the kick to the left. You would stop a little short.

For PATS he puts the ball on the right hash, so he is obviously more comfortable doing that.

Presnap he angled himself right, but he didn't overstep and subsequently had almost no follow through. As he finishes, his leg comes more across his body that forward towards the uprights, as it should.

Because that is an unusual angle he needed to consciously remember think to overstep on the 27 yarder, but clearly didn't.

I read somewhere that Kluwe twitted right away that his plant foot was too close to the ball.

I noticed he seemed a little close too but from my experience the closeness of the plant foot is more a preference thing for the kicker than something that will effect the direction of the kick.

That's not correct. Walsh was too close compared to his usual distance, and that affects his swing.

http://insidethepylon.com/film-study/film-study-nfl/special-teams-film-study-nfl/2016/01/10/explaining-blair-walsh-missed-field-goal/

Good article. Walsh missing the kick had nothing to do with the weather just horse shit mechanics.

Had the ball been on the right hash mark it would have been perfect

So why didn't we run to the right?

Post #: 269

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 12:48:27 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19062
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

We did. Peterson cut it back trying to force his way for a first down.

Post #: 270

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 3:59:02 PM 2 votes

DavidAOlson

Posts: 17322
Joined: 8/2/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

We did. Peterson cut it back trying to force his way for a first down.

And in the Peterson thread AD was taking heat for running into the pile instead of looking for the hole. Here he takes heat for going into the hole instead of running into the pile. Yes, the right hash was preferred, but the left hash shouldn't have made much of a difference. And the first down would have been worth it.

The snapper/holder were having issues all day, which might mean they didn't practice enough in the cold with gloves on, to get the rotations right.

The kicker reverted to putting his plant foot too close, like earlier in the season.

The punter, one of the best prospects to come out in the last few years, has been at the bottom of the league. I'm old enough to remember when a subgroup of posters was thrilled to dump the then average Kluwe --- who curiously had regressed when a new ST coach showed up --- for the cheaper hot prospect. Can we get average back?

He got credit for fixing Walsh, but apparently not much blame for his regression (see Todd M's post in the General thread).

He doesn't take heat for Kluwe's regression upon his arrival, for Locke's underperformance, and somehow the underperformance of punters he's coached at other stops teflons away.

The kickoff team coverage seemed less than stellar late in the season.

At some points, Priefer had the excuse of weak personnel (e.g., telling Kluwe he had to compensate for a coverage team that wasn't very good). But looking at what Zim managed to put together against the Cards, when he was pretty well down his depth chart, that excuse is pretty much gone.

He gets credit for developing Sherels into a solid PR and excellent gunner. He's done a good job with first-round kickoff returners (Harvin, Patterson), but that's not an ideal source for ST talent. Punt coverage seemed fine. Is there anything else that stands out as a solid plus?

Zimmer isn't going to replace him, but I really doubt the situation gets better by changing players and keeping the coach the same. Maybe I'm wrong. Someone try to convince me otherwise.

For obvious reasons, he's unlikely to get hired away. Zim might be reluctant to drop him because he'd have a hard time getting new coaching job. Or maybe Zim likes the mentality and hasn't really looked at the ST performance in a detailed way. Or maybe I'm just plain wrong and Priefer is an irreplaceable genius.

< Message edited by DavidAOlson -- 1/19/2016 4:00:47 PM >

_____________________________

I give myself very good advice, but I very seldom follow it. --- Alice

Post #: 271

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 6:33:42 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19062
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

Oh, don't get me wrong. I wasn't blaming Peterson, just answering the question. He was very close to a first down and that would have been huge. That miss was/is all on Walsh.

Post #: 272

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 6:54:44 PM

Bill Jandro

Posts: 17809
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

We did. Peterson cut it back trying to force his way for a first down.

We didn't need to get any closer. We needed the ball on the right hash mark and his holiness was more interested in playing hero ball.

< Message edited by Bill Jandro -- 1/19/2016 6:56:58 PM >

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft

Post #: 273

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 7:45:34 PM

Todd M

Posts: 39703
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

We did. Peterson cut it back trying to force his way for a first down.

We didn't need to get any closer. We needed the ball on the right hash mark and his holiness was more interested in playing hero ball.

**** the hashmark. It was so close it would be like throwing a tennis ball through a hula hoop from 5 feet. No matter a little to the left or a little to the right you should make it every time.

Peterson didn't do anything wrong that last drive. He had that ball secured better than he ever has in his life and tried to muscle the best he could for the 1st down. Got close to.

Post #: 274

RE: Mike Priefer must GO - 1/19/2016 7:47:47 PM 1 votes

Ricky J

Posts: 18174
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

A 27 F yard field goal! Stop making this out to be anything other than B Walsh choked and ended our season. The pros hash marks are less than half the size of college, high schools divide their fields in thirds.

Post #: 275