quote:

ORIGINAL: Terry Stoneberg

quote:

ORIGINAL: JT2

I'm leaning really hard towards giving the holder more credit in terms of not having to spin the laces forward. How can the LS get credit for what the ball does AFTER it hits the holders hands?

The LS gets it there quick and tight. That's good. The other stuff is nonsense. You really think a LS can a deliver the ball to the holder the exact same way every time, laces up?

"The holder never once rotated the ball."

Prior to watching the video I would have heartily agreed with you. Did you actually watch the video or are you shooting from the hip?

Here's the video (presumably of all the FG and PAT attempts for 3 or 4 games...maybe the whole season, I didn't research that far.)

https://youtu.be/pI0CmocvSHM

I'm the one who said the holder never rotated the ball. Tell me the minutes and seconds into the video where that is not true. Tell me the minutes and seconds where you can see the holder make any adjustment at all to his catch to get the laces right. Tell me the minutes and seconds where the laces are placed incorrectly (I see only one at 13:35). Several I cannot see. A few I can and they all look right to me except that one.

I respect your opinion, but I have to confess I'd respect it a lot more if you could tell me the places in the video where I'm wrong and you see an alternative explanation.

You can believe what you want but for me I'm sticking with the fact that I've never seen anyone snap that consistently, HS, college or pro. I've never seen anyone snap such that the holder doesn't even try to rotate the ball. I'm really glad we got him. I won't be surprised if he becomes the Ray Guy of long snappers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

This skill is very similar to Horseshoe pitching. Needing the shoe to open up to the stake right at the point of arrival.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terry Stoneberg

quote:

ORIGINAL: JT2

I'm leaning really hard towards giving the holder more credit in terms of not having to spin the laces forward. How can the LS get credit for what the ball does AFTER it hits the holders hands?

The LS gets it there quick and tight. That's good. The other stuff is nonsense. You really think a LS can a deliver the ball to the holder the exact same way every time, laces up?

"The holder never once rotated the ball."

Prior to watching the video I would have heartily agreed with you. Did you actually watch the video or are you shooting from the hip?

Here's the video (presumably of all the FG and PAT attempts for 3 or 4 games...maybe the whole season, I didn't research that far.)

https://youtu.be/pI0CmocvSHM

I'm the one who said the holder never rotated the ball. Tell me the minutes and seconds into the video where that is not true. Tell me the minutes and seconds where you can see the holder make any adjustment at all to his catch to get the laces right. Tell me the minutes and seconds where the laces are placed incorrectly (I see only one at 13:35). Several I cannot see. A few I can and they all look right to me except that one.

I respect your opinion, but I have to confess I'd respect it a lot more if you could tell me the places in the video where I'm wrong and you see an alternative explanation.

You can believe what you want but for me I'm sticking with the fact that I've never seen anyone snap that consistently, HS, college or pro. I've never seen anyone snap such that the holder doesn't even try to rotate the ball. I'm really glad we got him. I won't be surprised if he becomes the Ray Guy of long snappers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

This skill is very similar to Horseshoe pitching. Needing the shoe to open up to the stake right at the point of arrival.

And what would be the success rate for the world's best horseshoe pitchers?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

This skill is very similar to Horseshoe pitching. Needing the shoe to open up to the stake right at the point of arrival.

And what would be the success rate for the world's best horseshoe pitchers?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terry Stoneberg

quote:

ORIGINAL: JT2

I'm leaning really hard towards giving the holder more credit in terms of not having to spin the laces forward. How can the LS get credit for what the ball does AFTER it hits the holders hands?

The LS gets it there quick and tight. That's good. The other stuff is nonsense. You really think a LS can a deliver the ball to the holder the exact same way every time, laces up?

"The holder never once rotated the ball."

Prior to watching the video I would have heartily agreed with you. Did you actually watch the video or are you shooting from the hip?

Here's the video (presumably of all the FG and PAT attempts for 3 or 4 games...maybe the whole season, I didn't research that far.)

https://youtu.be/pI0CmocvSHM

I'm the one who said the holder never rotated the ball. Tell me the minutes and seconds into the video where that is not true. Tell me the minutes and seconds where you can see the holder make any adjustment at all to his catch to get the laces right. Tell me the minutes and seconds where the laces are placed incorrectly (I see only one at 13:35). Several I cannot see. A few I can and they all look right to me except that one.

I respect your opinion, but I have to confess I'd respect it a lot more if you could tell me the places in the video where I'm wrong and you see an alternative explanation.

You can believe what you want but for me I'm sticking with the fact that I've never seen anyone snap that consistently, HS, college or pro. I've never seen anyone snap such that the holder doesn't even try to rotate the ball. I'm really glad we got him. I won't be surprised if he becomes the Ray Guy of long snappers.

McDermott last year as a point of comparison:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlBR1BIg90s

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

This skill is very similar to Horseshoe pitching. Needing the shoe to open up to the stake right at the point of arrival.

And what would be the success rate for the world's best horseshoe pitchers?

Id like to think im pretty good at bags but im still trying to make 8 in a row

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

You know what I think is a great sign that the Vikings could be very good/special?

We're arguing/debating about a longsnappers skills in here.

Most of the rest of the team is of less concern at this point.

I know the Oline WRs, DBs DT etc, but it seems like we have good options to answer a lot of those questions.

I just love that the intense debate in here is over a longsnappers ability to deliver a ball well to the holder/punter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

Maybe he has figured out the "knuckle ball" snap. I don't see the why it's so hard to believe that someone may have advanced the science of the long snap. Many long snappers in the NFL are not that experienced at long snapping the ball, it's a skill they have added to earn themselves a spot on an NFL roster, or maybe help them cement a backup spot. Someone who has invested significantly more perfecting the skill, with the specific goal of getting the ball to the holder with the laces in the right spot, I don't see why it is impossible that guy would be better at it than others.

Investing significantly more, be it in terms of time, is flawed reasoning. Of all his competitors, he singularly - at least on the surface - has likely had the least amount of time to work on snapping the past four years.

Not sure how much "free" time students at the Air Force Academy have on a daily basis. I'm guessing it's different from Marine Corps boot camp. Are you saying he wouldn't be able to cut out, say, 2 hours a day? Outside of regular football practice? Seems to me if he wanted to, he would have enough "time" available to him to put in the extra work.

You post about investing (time) to "perfecting the skill". Two hours? Maybe, as an upperclassmen. Although that doesn't sound like enough time to be so revolutionary. His time is immaterial though since his competitors likely have more available time.

Simply put, you picked the wrong 'college' to suggest a player has extra time to perfect a skill.

Actually the "extra time" "or lack thereof" at a "college" "in the last four years" was your contention, and only tangentially related to my original post.

They got a decent Physics program at the Air Force Academy? Maybe he was able to combine some classroom time on the physics of the long snap, AND was able put in extra time practicing it under the guise of "research". Yeah, sure, that's the ticket!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd M

“Hitters in fast ball-sports do not align their gaze with the ball throughout ball-flight; rather, they use predictive eye movement strategies that contribute towards their level of interceptive skill. Existing studies claim that (i) baseball and cricket batters cannot track the ball because it moves too quickly to be tracked by the eyes, and that consequently (ii) batters do not – and possibly cannot – watch the ball at the moment they hit it."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/seriouslyscience/2013/06/12/really-good-baseball-players-dont-just-keep-their-eye-on-the-ball/#.XRqKvo8pDIU


Well there goes the 'picking up the seams' argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

C - they cherry picked the snaps for the video

D - they told the holder DO NOT under any circumstances rotate the ball!

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Let's take informal poll. Assuming it can be done intentionally, which do you believe is more reasonable:

A - snapping the exact rotation to the same distance every time putting the laces in an area to be spotted without having to rotate the ball

B - seeing the rotation and grasping the ball at the exact moment needed to spot the ball without having to rotate it

I say A

- and I say that not convinced that it's possible (of course I haven't watch the video yet)

This skill is very similar to Horseshoe pitching. Needing the shoe to open up to the stake right at the point of arrival.

And what would be the success rate for the world's best horseshoe pitchers?

Id like to think im pretty good at bags but im still trying to make 8 in a row

Bags? You mean that corn hole game?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd M

“Hitters in fast ball-sports do not align their gaze with the ball throughout ball-flight; rather, they use predictive eye movement strategies that contribute towards their level of interceptive skill. Existing studies claim that (i) baseball and cricket batters cannot track the ball because it moves too quickly to be tracked by the eyes, and that consequently (ii) batters do not – and possibly cannot – watch the ball at the moment they hit it."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/seriouslyscience/2013/06/12/really-good-baseball-players-dont-just-keep-their-eye-on-the-ball/#.XRqKvo8pDIU


Well there goes the 'picking up the seams' argument.

The Dodgers track it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lyle chabot

Bruce Johnson thank you for all of the information you Post

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

We all know that there's something wrong with Adrian. With all of the money he's made, why is he even borrowing money anyway?

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/07/02/adrian-peterson-ordered-to-pay-2-4-million-after-defaulting-on-a-loan/

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo


And what would be the success rate for the world's best horseshoe pitchers?