I recall an entertainment writer/film critic for the SF Examiner, Mick LaSalle, whose writing style (cynical, on point, with perfectly timed and always imaginative barbs) is/was very similar to Mr. Tanier's...I would rush to that section of the paper when there was a review present and savored every line. I would feel compelled to do the same vis a vis this writer if this column were an example of more of the same to come. The humor hits my bent on the button, and while at times flippant (in the best way), his is a "we kid because we love" style with which even the most sensitive targets would find difficult to take umbrage. Great stuff!!!...........San Francisco Fillippo
I can't find any 30-year-old articles on it now, but when Jason Hanson was at Washington State there were reports of him hitting 70-plus-yarders in practice. Now, that's off a tee, taking all the time he needs, and if he hits it 1-out-of-100 times, it counts as hitting it. But it's definitely in the realm of possibility. (Sanders, if you're not familiar, kicked for the Lions for over 20 years, and set the NFL record for most 40-plus-yard field goals made.)
And the only problem with the new kickoff rule is that touchbacks are not punished harshly enough. We're still seeing very few returns (1.7 per team per game, more than last year but fewer than every other year in league history), but the ones we're getting are rippers. 27.3 yards per return would obliterate the all-time record, which has never even hit 24 yards before.
For most of the years when kickoffs were at the 40 (1932-1974), "kicker" was a job, not a position (as late as 1965, about half of the players who attempted FGs/PATs are listed in P-F-R with a position other than "Kicker"), and most kickoffs couldn't reach the end zone. As kickers got better, the NFL moved the kickoff position back (to the 35 then the 30) but in 2011 they started munging the objectives of "encourage returns" and "protect players", and moved it up to the 35 again. Not surprisingly, a pool of kickers who can hit 70% of field goals from 50+ can reliably drive a kickoff 65+ yards.
Instead of the stupid game theory approach of "let's try to discourage touchbacks by giving the receiving team better field position", just move the damn kicker back another 10 yards. Or 15 yards. Or whatever it takes so that only 20%-30% of kicks can actually reach the goal line.
I think part of the reason there is such focus on kickers is that for the first few weeks of the season, kickers were making kicks at an astounding conversion rate.....especially the 50 plus yards field goals. It does seem like the last say 6 weeks, the conversion rate has gone down to below what has been "average" the past few years.
Kicking accuracy does decrease as the season wears on because of weather and kicker injuries. It's aggregate data, of course.
There were a stunning number of 57-61ish yard field goals early in the year. Then, when guys like Fairbairn and Elliott missed a few 50-yarders, we were like: WTF is happening. Now it is easier to sort out the real slumps -- Tucker, Koo -- from guys just having random misses.
My strongest opinion on rule changes is a fumble out of the offensive endzone should still go to the defense just at the 1 yd line. I would be fine if any fumble out of bounds went to the defense. Holding onto the ball is important!
I would suggest that the team who last touched the ball before it went out of bounds gets possession. Basically, the opposite of basketball.
Right now, it's a smart play for an offensive player to bat a fumble out of bounds. In your proposed change, that goes entirely in the other direction. A middle ground makes more sense to me. Plus, we'd get some "greased pig" comedy pratfalls watching some players smack at the ball while others try to grab it.
I'm good with the new kickoff rule. More returns, including returns short of the 30 yd line, so the kicking team obtains some small advantage for good coverage. At least it's a chance for a big play for either kicking or receiving teams.
Oh yeah, I remember your talk about your honeymoon now that you mention it. I have a memory like a sieve. XD I very much disagree with any fumble being a penalty. Penalties are things people do that break a rule. There is no rule against fumbling out of the end zone, nor should there be. It is just an accident.
Yeah, and I feel like the same as fumbling out of bounds it should mean that in the absence of an actual recovery by the other team it stays with the fumbling team. I see the argument that you should be punished for fumbling, but I disagree that the other team should be rewarded when they weren’t able to actually recover it.
Make the rule so that any fumble out of bounds reverts to the fumbling team at either the point where the ball went out of bounds or the spot of the fumble, whichever is farther from the opponent's end zone. Special cases are the enemy of understanding.
Some folks lose their minds over preserving the fumble touchback. I assume they are overcompensating for something.
There has to be some penalty for fumbling in the end zone, however, otherwise players will attempt weird Holy Roller stuff. I don't want to see anyone trying to bowl the ball toward the pylon when being tackled.
Penalty should be the same as it is everywhere on the field: risk that the opposition recovers balanced against zero reward because at best the ball comes back to where it was fumbled. That's sufficient to create an incentive-free environment for "fake": fumbles.
Should you ever make that trip to Paris, I recommend doing it during the off season. In my first trip there I spent two months from just before Christmas to Valentine's Day. It was to be with the French woman who became my wife. Many a tale to tell. I'll simply say that I got to see Paris without the tourists and it was great!
The plan is to wait until after her teacher retirement, then go in the winter or ultra-early spring. Maybe I will line up guest columns for the Too Deep Zone when it happens.
We used to talk about going during the Tour De France, but Karen becomes a Karen when it's over 80 degrees and she is separated from air conditioning and/or pool/beach.
Wandering the aisles at Blockbuster felt far more exciting than the modern equivalent, browsing thousands of titles across multiple streaming services to find.... nothing.
At least the effort of driving to Blockbuster meant you couldn't leave without something, even if it was "The Great Escape" for the 412nd time...
My belief on replay reviews is simple: anything should be reviewable but if it isn’t clear after 1-2 replays and a very short amount of time, then stick with the call on the field. It would allow egregious missed calls to be overturned (including penalties) but would not bog down the game with interminable reviews that often end up sticking with the call on the field today.
You’d still maybe need to take a little more time to determine the time on the clock or where to place the ball in certain scenarios, but if we raise the standard of overturning the call on the field then that means it’s in service of correcting an egregiously bad call so probably worth it.
Replays don't take as much time as people think they do. The latest data I can find is from 2022 but in that season there were an average of 1.04 replay reviews per game taking an average of 2:25. Compare that to 1 hour 3 minutes of advertising per game during the same season.
"Replay assist" (the greatest thing to happen to the NFL since Harry Kalas) has taken care of basically all the egregious non-penalty screw-ups. I might be ok opening up replay assist (and possibly coaches' challenges) for procedure and formation penalties, for which there is something resembling an objective standard, but remember what happened when they allowed challenges on DPI?
Spending 30 years listening to Harry Kalas cover baseball 162 times per year was a blessing. Kept me interested in baseball until I could no longer stomach the 5 hour games
I think there's a difference between "he dove for the pylon and the ball wiggled a bit" and "he flat-out fumbled and the ball went on a rolling adventure."
Most fumble touchbacks nowadays are plays that would have been touchdowns before instant replay, but we now get a freeze frame of someone like Tyreek losing his grasp on the ball 0.2 femtoseconds before it crosses the plane. I just can't abide by giving the defense a free turnover on plays like that.
I started watching Steelers Bengals condensed this morning. Wow. Looked up Russel Wilson's yards per attempt is an absurd 8.7 YPA. YPA My preferred passing stat, cuts thru eras.
Wilsons best seasons 8.2 in 2013 and 8.3 in 2015. Which were great because a typical MVP QB is 7.8 or higher. Wilsons YPA will most likely drift back to earth a bit but it's been a pretty amazing stretch so far. Ironic its Arthur Smith; as coordinator for Titans 2019 Ryan Tannehil got 9.6 yards per attempt and 7.9 for 2020. With mariota it didn't work, with tannehill being effective Derrick Henry was unleashed on honest fronts.
Regarding Russell Wilson, I believe that a big component was that Nathaniel Hackett was part fanboy and part head coach. Related to this, RW was allowed to believe he would be the next Broncos Peyton Manning. Even bulked up to be more of pocket passer vs. hybrid/mobile.
Good or bad, he took on some things that, with team failing, were perceived horrifically - and if team was successful, would have been applauded as him being the consummate dedicated professional. For example, having an office at the team facility (many QBs have that to watch film/prep), personal trainers and dietitians (TB12, right?), etc.
Now in Pittsburgh, the Denver years being humbling and with a competent head coach who values him, he is thriving. Not particularly surprising given that this is the same guy with the most wins in the first decade of a QB career. If you read between the lines, Sean Payton likely accepted the Denver job under the condition that he could move on from Russ after one year.
Good for Russ on his Steelers success and good for the Broncos on their Bo Nix success - very rare that there's a win-win in the aftermath of something like this. Usually the veteran player career spiral continues and the dysfunctional organization/coach does more of the same. Looks like there's a happy ending for both parties.
PS One fascinating irony:
Should RW and the Steelers win a Super Bowl, Mike Tomlin could leapfrog Mike Shanahan for Pro Football Hall of Fame consideration. That is...if Tomlin were to fairly immediately retire - waiting period is just 1 season and Belichick awaits (if no NFL HC job) after Holmgren. Of course, Reid is another automatic upon retirement.
“It’s easy – and very common – for an NFL franchise to shield its franchise quarterback from personality-based criticism by the local media. It’s a simple matter for the media relations director to issue a “Don’t Report That” order when the quarterback is leading a visualization circle at the 50-yard line during minicamp.”
Thanks for explaining this Mike. I’ve spent several years wondering how Seattle and Green Bay kept Wilson’s and Rodger’s crazy under wraps for all those years!
In Green Bay, there are only a tiny handful of outlets. They credential the established blogs there, which is good. But if your credential is pulled, you are covering U of Wisconsin volleyball for the rest of your career.
Pittsburgh also has a tiny press pool: 1 or 2 from the Post-Gazette, 1 from the Athletic, a smattering of people from the Pennsyltucky Times. I don't know if they credential SBNation-level blogs. I spent yeas covering them each training camp and watching as they squeezed access.
Here's the thing: if the Media Relations person doesn't like you, he will deny you 1-on-1 interview opps. If you lose those, you are unlikely to survive as a beat writer. If a few veterans ice you out as well, you might as well hang it up. In NYC, Philly, LA, you can take your chances on burning bridges in search of a scoop. It's harder in smaller markets.
I recall an entertainment writer/film critic for the SF Examiner, Mick LaSalle, whose writing style (cynical, on point, with perfectly timed and always imaginative barbs) is/was very similar to Mr. Tanier's...I would rush to that section of the paper when there was a review present and savored every line. I would feel compelled to do the same vis a vis this writer if this column were an example of more of the same to come. The humor hits my bent on the button, and while at times flippant (in the best way), his is a "we kid because we love" style with which even the most sensitive targets would find difficult to take umbrage. Great stuff!!!...........San Francisco Fillippo
I can't find any 30-year-old articles on it now, but when Jason Hanson was at Washington State there were reports of him hitting 70-plus-yarders in practice. Now, that's off a tee, taking all the time he needs, and if he hits it 1-out-of-100 times, it counts as hitting it. But it's definitely in the realm of possibility. (Sanders, if you're not familiar, kicked for the Lions for over 20 years, and set the NFL record for most 40-plus-yard field goals made.)
And the only problem with the new kickoff rule is that touchbacks are not punished harshly enough. We're still seeing very few returns (1.7 per team per game, more than last year but fewer than every other year in league history), but the ones we're getting are rippers. 27.3 yards per return would obliterate the all-time record, which has never even hit 24 yards before.
The Lions had only two kickers from 1980 (Eddie Murray) to 2012 (Hanson).
Murray played against Gene Upshaw, who was in Super Bowl 2. Hanson played against Matt Stafford, who was in Super Bowl 56.
Many people are wondering about this, and they don’t even know it.
For most of the years when kickoffs were at the 40 (1932-1974), "kicker" was a job, not a position (as late as 1965, about half of the players who attempted FGs/PATs are listed in P-F-R with a position other than "Kicker"), and most kickoffs couldn't reach the end zone. As kickers got better, the NFL moved the kickoff position back (to the 35 then the 30) but in 2011 they started munging the objectives of "encourage returns" and "protect players", and moved it up to the 35 again. Not surprisingly, a pool of kickers who can hit 70% of field goals from 50+ can reliably drive a kickoff 65+ yards.
Instead of the stupid game theory approach of "let's try to discourage touchbacks by giving the receiving team better field position", just move the damn kicker back another 10 yards. Or 15 yards. Or whatever it takes so that only 20%-30% of kicks can actually reach the goal line.
"A column on changing kick distances would require intense, careful research. I would wait for Bryan Knowles to write it at FTN, then just link to it"
This is delightful
I gotta be me.
Can't read that without thinking of this scene
https://youtu.be/zwsv2ybxhpA?feature=shared
One of the 80's movies I showed this kids and actually got a thumbs up on (batting around 500)
I think part of the reason there is such focus on kickers is that for the first few weeks of the season, kickers were making kicks at an astounding conversion rate.....especially the 50 plus yards field goals. It does seem like the last say 6 weeks, the conversion rate has gone down to below what has been "average" the past few years.
Part of that is weather, I imagine.
The rest is likely small sample size + Brandon Aubrey.
Kicking accuracy does decrease as the season wears on because of weather and kicker injuries. It's aggregate data, of course.
There were a stunning number of 57-61ish yard field goals early in the year. Then, when guys like Fairbairn and Elliott missed a few 50-yarders, we were like: WTF is happening. Now it is easier to sort out the real slumps -- Tucker, Koo -- from guys just having random misses.
My strongest opinion on rule changes is a fumble out of the offensive endzone should still go to the defense just at the 1 yd line. I would be fine if any fumble out of bounds went to the defense. Holding onto the ball is important!
I would suggest that the team who last touched the ball before it went out of bounds gets possession. Basically, the opposite of basketball.
Right now, it's a smart play for an offensive player to bat a fumble out of bounds. In your proposed change, that goes entirely in the other direction. A middle ground makes more sense to me. Plus, we'd get some "greased pig" comedy pratfalls watching some players smack at the ball while others try to grab it.
I'm good with the new kickoff rule. More returns, including returns short of the 30 yd line, so the kicking team obtains some small advantage for good coverage. At least it's a chance for a big play for either kicking or receiving teams.
I got a bottle of Stan Lee's Excelsior cologne at WizardWorld a few years ago. It's surprisingly good. I like to think I smell like T'Challa.
There are many aspects of this sentence that I prefer not to address.
Oh yeah, I remember your talk about your honeymoon now that you mention it. I have a memory like a sieve. XD I very much disagree with any fumble being a penalty. Penalties are things people do that break a rule. There is no rule against fumbling out of the end zone, nor should there be. It is just an accident.
Josh, you are expected to remember each of my stray musings about any and all topics. There will be a quiz at my wake.
I am older than you so i probably will not be around for your wake.
Yeah, and I feel like the same as fumbling out of bounds it should mean that in the absence of an actual recovery by the other team it stays with the fumbling team. I see the argument that you should be punished for fumbling, but I disagree that the other team should be rewarded when they weren’t able to actually recover it.
Make the rule so that any fumble out of bounds reverts to the fumbling team at either the point where the ball went out of bounds or the spot of the fumble, whichever is farther from the opponent's end zone. Special cases are the enemy of understanding.
Fumbling is punishment enough
Some folks lose their minds over preserving the fumble touchback. I assume they are overcompensating for something.
There has to be some penalty for fumbling in the end zone, however, otherwise players will attempt weird Holy Roller stuff. I don't want to see anyone trying to bowl the ball toward the pylon when being tackled.
Penalty should be the same as it is everywhere on the field: risk that the opposition recovers balanced against zero reward because at best the ball comes back to where it was fumbled. That's sufficient to create an incentive-free environment for "fake": fumbles.
That…is an excellent point
Should you ever make that trip to Paris, I recommend doing it during the off season. In my first trip there I spent two months from just before Christmas to Valentine's Day. It was to be with the French woman who became my wife. Many a tale to tell. I'll simply say that I got to see Paris without the tourists and it was great!
The plan is to wait until after her teacher retirement, then go in the winter or ultra-early spring. Maybe I will line up guest columns for the Too Deep Zone when it happens.
We used to talk about going during the Tour De France, but Karen becomes a Karen when it's over 80 degrees and she is separated from air conditioning and/or pool/beach.
Bad weather is better than hordes of tourists. Every time.
I think you just explained Buffalo.
The "bad weather/great city" designation goes to Minneapolis. It's New Orelans during an Ice Age.
Wandering the aisles at Blockbuster felt far more exciting than the modern equivalent, browsing thousands of titles across multiple streaming services to find.... nothing.
At least the effort of driving to Blockbuster meant you couldn't leave without something, even if it was "The Great Escape" for the 412nd time...
"The Great Escape" for the 412th time is objectively better than 90% of what's available on streaming services.
My belief on replay reviews is simple: anything should be reviewable but if it isn’t clear after 1-2 replays and a very short amount of time, then stick with the call on the field. It would allow egregious missed calls to be overturned (including penalties) but would not bog down the game with interminable reviews that often end up sticking with the call on the field today.
You’d still maybe need to take a little more time to determine the time on the clock or where to place the ball in certain scenarios, but if we raise the standard of overturning the call on the field then that means it’s in service of correcting an egregiously bad call so probably worth it.
Replays don't take as much time as people think they do. The latest data I can find is from 2022 but in that season there were an average of 1.04 replay reviews per game taking an average of 2:25. Compare that to 1 hour 3 minutes of advertising per game during the same season.
"Replay assist" (the greatest thing to happen to the NFL since Harry Kalas) has taken care of basically all the egregious non-penalty screw-ups. I might be ok opening up replay assist (and possibly coaches' challenges) for procedure and formation penalties, for which there is something resembling an objective standard, but remember what happened when they allowed challenges on DPI?
Replay assist has been really good.
Spending 30 years listening to Harry Kalas cover baseball 162 times per year was a blessing. Kept me interested in baseball until I could no longer stomach the 5 hour games
I cannot agree enough with the three suggested rule changes. All of these should be enacted post haste.
Why the big difference between "side of the end zone" and "back of the end zone"?
I think there's a difference between "he dove for the pylon and the ball wiggled a bit" and "he flat-out fumbled and the ball went on a rolling adventure."
Most fumble touchbacks nowadays are plays that would have been touchdowns before instant replay, but we now get a freeze frame of someone like Tyreek losing his grasp on the ball 0.2 femtoseconds before it crosses the plane. I just can't abide by giving the defense a free turnover on plays like that.
I started watching Steelers Bengals condensed this morning. Wow. Looked up Russel Wilson's yards per attempt is an absurd 8.7 YPA. YPA My preferred passing stat, cuts thru eras.
Wilsons best seasons 8.2 in 2013 and 8.3 in 2015. Which were great because a typical MVP QB is 7.8 or higher. Wilsons YPA will most likely drift back to earth a bit but it's been a pretty amazing stretch so far. Ironic its Arthur Smith; as coordinator for Titans 2019 Ryan Tannehil got 9.6 yards per attempt and 7.9 for 2020. With mariota it didn't work, with tannehill being effective Derrick Henry was unleashed on honest fronts.
Regarding Russell Wilson, I believe that a big component was that Nathaniel Hackett was part fanboy and part head coach. Related to this, RW was allowed to believe he would be the next Broncos Peyton Manning. Even bulked up to be more of pocket passer vs. hybrid/mobile.
Good or bad, he took on some things that, with team failing, were perceived horrifically - and if team was successful, would have been applauded as him being the consummate dedicated professional. For example, having an office at the team facility (many QBs have that to watch film/prep), personal trainers and dietitians (TB12, right?), etc.
Now in Pittsburgh, the Denver years being humbling and with a competent head coach who values him, he is thriving. Not particularly surprising given that this is the same guy with the most wins in the first decade of a QB career. If you read between the lines, Sean Payton likely accepted the Denver job under the condition that he could move on from Russ after one year.
Good for Russ on his Steelers success and good for the Broncos on their Bo Nix success - very rare that there's a win-win in the aftermath of something like this. Usually the veteran player career spiral continues and the dysfunctional organization/coach does more of the same. Looks like there's a happy ending for both parties.
PS One fascinating irony:
Should RW and the Steelers win a Super Bowl, Mike Tomlin could leapfrog Mike Shanahan for Pro Football Hall of Fame consideration. That is...if Tomlin were to fairly immediately retire - waiting period is just 1 season and Belichick awaits (if no NFL HC job) after Holmgren. Of course, Reid is another automatic upon retirement.
Oh and thank you very much Lou Doench, I will now have "All Out of Love" in my head for weeks.
“It’s easy – and very common – for an NFL franchise to shield its franchise quarterback from personality-based criticism by the local media. It’s a simple matter for the media relations director to issue a “Don’t Report That” order when the quarterback is leading a visualization circle at the 50-yard line during minicamp.”
Thanks for explaining this Mike. I’ve spent several years wondering how Seattle and Green Bay kept Wilson’s and Rodger’s crazy under wraps for all those years!
In Green Bay, there are only a tiny handful of outlets. They credential the established blogs there, which is good. But if your credential is pulled, you are covering U of Wisconsin volleyball for the rest of your career.
Pittsburgh also has a tiny press pool: 1 or 2 from the Post-Gazette, 1 from the Athletic, a smattering of people from the Pennsyltucky Times. I don't know if they credential SBNation-level blogs. I spent yeas covering them each training camp and watching as they squeezed access.
Here's the thing: if the Media Relations person doesn't like you, he will deny you 1-on-1 interview opps. If you lose those, you are unlikely to survive as a beat writer. If a few veterans ice you out as well, you might as well hang it up. In NYC, Philly, LA, you can take your chances on burning bridges in search of a scoop. It's harder in smaller markets.
This is info I don’t get anywhere else. It’s why I subscribe