Skip to content

Josh McDaniels defends ineligible receiver plays

Getty Images

While not everyone thinks it is within the sporting bounds, Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels said Wednesday opponents have had plenty of time to adjust.

When asked about running an uptempo offense and using deception, McDaniels cut off a question to make a point.

One thing about that that I’d like to clear up is we didn’t do any of those things [with ineligible receivers] without huddling,” McDaniels said, via Mike Reiss of ESPNBoston.com. “When we did those things the last couple of games, we huddled every time we did it with the ineligible player. We substituted, we huddled, we declared him ineligible, the official declared him ineligible, and then we lined up.”

The Ravens might not agree, after they got caught with their collective pants down in the divisional round.

But McDaniels insisted everything was within the rules.

“I think we’ve only done it five times all year; we’ve huddled every time,” he said. “We’ve reported every time ineligible and once we did that we broke the huddle, we lined up and we ran the play. We didn’t try to hurry. We didn’t try to do anything that was deceptive in that manner. I think it was unique for a few plays. We ran it a couple times last week against Indianapolis and got nothing out of it [incomplete pass and sack]. Everybody talks about those couple Baltimore plays, but Indianapolis defended it very well. It’s just something we tried the one week and it gave us a little spark.”

If nothing else, it has given the Seahawks one more thing to think about and prepare for, which might be as effective as any yards they gain on the plays.

Permalink 67 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, New England Patriots, Rumor Mill, Seattle Seahawks
67 Responses to “Josh McDaniels defends ineligible receiver plays”
  1. Rindell says: Jan 28, 2015 2:52 PM

    Man I hope these stinking cheaters get BLOWN OUT

  2. bassplucker says: Jan 28, 2015 2:52 PM

    He’s just one of those guys you want to go up to and slap.

  3. unionjack1776 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:52 PM

    This guy is a knucklehead and will fail as a HC again.

  4. whitetrash69 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:53 PM

    I’m going to frame my opinion using simple logic and skills:
    If a person is accused of something and evidence exists that could potentially exonerate them in the future, why would a person in power destroy that evidence?
    If a whistleblower goes to the press claiming they have access to information implicating foul play, and can’t produce the information because it was destroyed, does that mean it was untrue?
    In addition, if the accused party has a close relationship with the person in power who confiscated and destroyed the evidence, what would you conclude?
    A reasonable and unbiased person would find this to be highly suspicious and likely conclude that something isn’t adding up.
    I firmly believe the Patriots filmed the Rams walkthrough prior to the Super Bowl and Roger Goodell burned any evidence that would prove this occurred.

  5. cobrala2 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:55 PM

    One thing I would like to clear up is the Super Bowl cannot come fast enough.

  6. tombradyhonorsociety says: Jan 28, 2015 2:56 PM

    “Maybe the should read the rule book and figure it out.”

  7. flash1287 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:56 PM

    He doesn’t have to “defend it” they are legal plays.

    It was announced by the red in stadium “34 is ineligible, defense do not cover 34” everyone heard it. Then there was 7-10 seconds after the ball was spotted before it was snapped.

    The Ravens might not agree, after they got caught with their collective pants down in the divisional round.

    That’s exactly what happened, it’s not the Patriots fault the Ravens players were to stupid to know what to do even when they are told “don’t cover 34”

  8. flash1287 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:58 PM

    Rindell says:
    Jan 28, 2015 2:52 PM
    Man I hope these stinking cheaters get BLOWN OUT


    Can you say “crybaby”?

  9. bucrightoff says: Jan 28, 2015 2:58 PM

    He really needs to defend drafting Tebow in the first round.

  10. edgarpoe3 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:58 PM

    Why, if it was not meant to deceive, did you not announce the substitutions BEFORE the huddle instead of when you broke the huddle? And I saw the games, you did hurry to the line after the huddle (IMO so that the defense would have a hard time distinguishing who was eligible and who was not – to me, that’s deception).

  11. twopaw513 says: Jan 28, 2015 2:58 PM

    Tight ends caught all passes while running the formation 3 times against the Ravens. Why did they leave a tight end uncovered? You haters will grasp at everything.

  12. dukeearl says: Jan 28, 2015 3:05 PM

    cobrala2.. amen to that…

  13. Rindell says: Jan 28, 2015 3:05 PM

    Culture Of Cheating

  14. patfanken says: Jan 28, 2015 3:15 PM

    Egar, why then doesn’t the QB announce to the defense that he won’t REALLY be handing the ball off to RB BEFORE he runs a play action pass.

    Good football coaches have been running “deceptive” plays and formations for over 100 years now. Only the truly weak minded and blind haters would even make this an issue.

    Good coaches would simply tip their cap, learn how to defend it, and copy it when they get the chance. Bad coaches whine about it and hope no one notices they didn’t screw up.

    Which kind of coach leads your team, Edgar

  15. barneyrumble says: Jan 28, 2015 3:15 PM

    Cheaters defending cheating…where oh where have we seen this before?

  16. lanflfan says: Jan 28, 2015 3:17 PM

    If the Patriots are a “dynasty” and all that, why do they have to resort to cheap, high school tricks to win games?

  17. FinFan68 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:19 PM

    It forces teams to play defense rather than scheme defense. The huddle is intentional because it allows the confusion to settle in. If they went no huddle defenses would simply react to who is covered on the line of scrimmage and who isn’t. The Pats huddle forces the defensive players to try and think and further confuse themselves. Defenses are based on personnel groupings. When a bunch of offensive guys with weird number combinations take the field, the defensive coaches have no idea what personnel to send in the game. The defensive players are usually late and are scrambling when the Patriots break the huddle. All that adds confusion. The answer is simple. Just play a cover 3 or 4 deep zone. That ensures nobody is accidentally uncovered, guards against deep plays and the cover 3 can add a safety to the box if it is a run. Brady can pick apart a zone but that is better than having a guy wide open because he is uncovered due to confusion.

  18. hairpie2 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:21 PM

    Why is no one talking about the refs cheating for the Ravens by TELLING THEM who to cover and who not to cover on those plays? Thats cheating.

  19. MostcensoredposteronPFT says: Jan 28, 2015 3:21 PM

    Josh McDanials was the kid who had always one finger on “base” in freeze tag as a kid. What a tool.

  20. wizardofgronk says: Jan 28, 2015 3:22 PM

    Ok edgarpoe, I will take the bait. If that is deception, in your opinion, and I won’t try to say you are wrong,, how do you define play action? If you make the defense think you are handing the ball off but then you don’t, that is deception. What about a fake field goal? When you line up to kick a field goal, making the defense think you are kicking a field goal, but then you don’t, that to is deception, no?

    Sounds like a bunch of whining to me. As a for all fan, we all love innovation. We’re you whining about deception when tony sporano and his Dolphins rolled into Foxboro and unleashed the wild cat (and the pats were embarrassed cuz they had no answers on defense)? It was an innovation. Everything is deception when it has never been seen before. Is that the rule we are going with?

    My question with regard to the ineligible receiver sets, can you take a player who is ineligible and move him in motion pre snap?

  21. kokoskmr says: Jan 28, 2015 3:23 PM

    Why does the NFL game book for the divisional playoff only list 1 play where a receiver reported ineligible if everyone agrees that there were 3 such plays?

  22. claymus1 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:24 PM

    I respect the way the Seahawks just line up…and try to hit you in the mouth….no more, no less….may the best team win, and hopefully put on a hell of a show!

  23. weepingjebus says: Jan 28, 2015 3:28 PM

    The Harbaughs are those kids you knew in middle school that wanted to play checkers but would flip the board when they started losing.

  24. seattlesue427 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:28 PM

    If the Pats play sneaky ball, I think the Hawks will not only be ready, but may have a few sneaky plays of their own. Go Hawks!

  25. flash1287 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:30 PM

    claymus1 says:
    Jan 28, 2015 3:24 PM
    I respect the way the Seahawks just line up…and try to hit you in the mouth….no more, no less….may the best team win, and hopefully put on a hell of a show!

    So the read option isn’t trickory?
    The QB acting like he is going to hand off then keeping it.

  26. a072455 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:32 PM

    Why should Josh have to defend Tebow only? What about the Brady 6? How about Ryan Leaf or Rick Mirer, Bert Jones, Mark Sanchez, JeMarcus Russell, Matt Leinart? What about these lemons?

  27. cguy7 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:37 PM

    Smoke and mirrors operation… #anothersbblowout

  28. metalup666 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:38 PM

    Aren’t all offensive plays based on deception?

  29. themanfromtheblacklodge says: Jan 28, 2015 3:39 PM

    It’s as sneaky and deceptive as the Seahawks’ fake field goal in the NFC Championship game.

  30. kissbillsrings says: Jan 28, 2015 3:39 PM

    I love it!!!
    Patriots are so good they even have to defend even non rule violations….AWESOME!!!
    & the mental midgets can’t understand how they continue to be so good…. Too funny!!!
    Pats play chess while others play checkers!!!

  31. micronin127 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:43 PM

    The 4 OL formation where a normally eligible player split wide declares as the 5th ineligible player is a little weird. Harbaugh complained that the 7 seconds between announced and snapped wasn’t enough time for defense to adjust. A fair point, but he could have called time out as well, or the defense could have checked to a zone defense.

    Tony Dungy complaining about the Nate Solder TD is ridiculous. That is where you put a 6th OL on the field and one guy normally not elibigle has to declare as eligible. The Pats were doing that all day to power run against the Colts with Blount. On that play, they decided to throw it to Solder, and it worked.

    IIRC, Anthony Castonzo scored a TD for the Colts on a very similar play in the Colts-Pats November game. So, it’s OK for the Colts to throw it to Castonzo, but not OK for the Pats to throw it to Solder.

    Sour grapes Tony!

  32. koenig61 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:43 PM

    “When we did those things the last couple of games, we huddled every time we did it with the ineligible player. We substituted, we huddled, we declared him ineligible, the official declared him ineligible, and then we lined up.”
    The problem with this is, the Patriots declare the Player ineligible after they break the huddle, and are walking up to the line of scrimmage, and then snap the ball quickly. I believe next year the league will mandate the Offense has to declare the ineligible player before they break the huddle and before they walk up to the line of scrimmage. The defense sees a RB or Receiver in the huddle, and assumes hes eligible. The the Patriots break huddle, inform the ref, the ref informs the defense, and the Pats snap the ball with very little time for the defense to adjust. Its brilliant strategy, but its toeing the line of being illegal. Theres a reason why the offense gets penalized for 12 men in the huddle. Its because the defense doesn’t know whose going to stay on the field and who will run out after the huddle breaks. This ineligible technicality is the same thing.

  33. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 3:43 PM

    Why, if it was not meant to deceive, did you not announce the substitutions BEFORE the huddle instead of when you broke the huddle?
    ===
    Because the play hadn’t been called yet, so the offense didn’t know which player was going to be ineligible.

  34. aznwhip says: Jan 28, 2015 3:49 PM

    Deception is not illegal. Deception is part of the game. Every team runs deceptive plays (play action, reverse, hard count, flea flicker, screen, fake punt, fake spike, bunch formation, etc). If everything was transparent and we strictly relied upon who was faster or stronger, it’d be boring….like the olympics…

  35. hjb99992013 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:50 PM

    I wonder what brought this on . Mcdaniels never tried to explain his previous cheating before

  36. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 3:51 PM

    “When we did those things the last couple of games, we huddled every time we did it with the ineligible player. We substituted, we huddled, we declared him ineligible, the official declared him ineligible, and then we lined up.”

    The Ravens might not agree, after they got caught with their collective pants down in the divisional round.
    ====
    How can you write this when the tape shows exactly that? It’s not like this game wasn’t played on national TV for everyone to DVR.

  37. canedaddy says: Jan 28, 2015 3:53 PM

    Harbaugh’s gripe wasn’t that it was an illegal formation, it was that the notification of who was eligible came too slowly for the Ravens to react.

    What he said: “It was about the mechanics of the officiating. I never had an issue with the formation, never even brought that up. It wasn’t about the formation at all. I had a chance to talk to [referee] Bill Vinovich during the game, and he addressed it. He said that was right. There’s a certain timing that goes with that, in terms of the referee getting back in position to referee the game. The ball was being snapped so quickly that he didn’t have a chance to do that. Plus, another interesting thing is the signal for an eligible receiver and an ineligible receiver is the same, so it’s a little difficult to determine what the official is actually signaling in the heat of battle when it’s done that quickly. Bill was great about it, he said he would slow it down. I think he went over and told their sideline the same thing, and we didn’t see it after that.”

    No doubt the league will address that issue in the offseason, along with handling of footballs to ensure that teams can’t cheat.

  38. scrp2 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:55 PM

    We aren’t 100% evil. We did huddle before the quick snap.

  39. clipper522 says: Jan 28, 2015 3:57 PM

    Because saying “34 is an eligible receiver” and “34 is an ineligible receiver” in front of 70,000+ crazy fans in an outdoor stadium is very clear. Especially when the player reporting uses the same gesture for reporting eligible/ineligible.

    Once the officials figured out how to communicate this to the defense, the Ravens figured it out.

    It was and underhanded play that won’t be replicated because the officials now know how to handle it properly.

    This was Harbaugh’s argument from the beginning.

  40. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 3:58 PM

    Canedaddy:
    That was his complaint, but he’s still wrong. It’s not a sub. The sub happens before the huddle. The time to match is while the offense is huddled. By the time the ineligible player is announced, that time to match personnel has come and gone. There is no provision in the rule book that allows the defense time to identify the eligible players. The rulebook assumes that the defense should know that the players in the backfield and on the ends of the LOS are eligible.

  41. upper23 says: Jan 28, 2015 4:04 PM

    There is no reason, other than a special teams play, for an eligible number to play an ineligible position. The only reason to do it is to deceive your opponent. Make it a rule you cant do it other than in kick formation ( just like high school rule) and problem goes away.

  42. all4patriots says: Jan 28, 2015 4:04 PM

    My high school ran plays like that all of the time in practice.

    It taught us the rules of football with respect to eligible receivers, and taught us the key point that ineligible receivers are unable to go downfield on a pass play.

    Testing whether your opponent is smart or not, whether they simply know the rules of the sport or not, is NOT cheating.

    It is no more deceptive than a fake spike, a surprise onsides kick, or a fake punt, or any other thing among a dozen other trick plays.

  43. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 4:07 PM

    Here’s a Chip Kelly formation that messes with defensive expectations across the LOS:

    Snap by C: ET ——-GCG——TE

    Should the defense get a moment to figure out what’s going on? Heck no. Call a time out if you need time to think. Otherwise: play.

  44. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 4:15 PM

    There is no reason, other than a special teams play, for an eligible number to play an ineligible position. The only reason to do it is to deceive your opponent.
    ===

    Sure there is.

    If you want to run a play where the QB has six targets. The ineligible player can take a backwards pass or hand off. Vereen dropped for a screen each time he was ineligible.

  45. croghan1919 says: Jan 28, 2015 4:15 PM

    Colts fan here.
    I agree with McDaniels.

  46. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 4:20 PM

    Why does the NFL game book for the divisional playoff only list 1 play where a receiver reported ineligible if everyone agrees that there were 3 such plays?
    ===
    Because the folks in the press box missed it too. I only caught it the first time because there was a spider cam from the “Madden” view and I saw 47 at LT. Then he caught a pass, and I only counted four people blocking.

  47. 2001asterisk2003asterisk2004asterisk says: Jan 28, 2015 4:25 PM

    little twerp

  48. all4patriots says: Jan 28, 2015 4:32 PM

    Cincinnati Bengals Hall of Fame left tackle Anthony Muñoz had seven career receptions & scored four touchdowns on tackle-eligible plays.

    Some of them were in playoff games. One was on a do-or-die, win-or-lose play.

    Was it cheating? Of course not.

  49. lemmetalkwouldya says: Jan 28, 2015 4:32 PM

    whitetrash69 says:
    I firmly believe the Patriots filmed the Rams walkthrough prior to the Super Bowl and Roger Goodell burned any evidence that would prove this occurred.
    ———————————————————
    You do realize that the only people who accused them of this – The Boston Herald – printed a full retraction that their source (fired employee Matt Walsh) lied to them, and they printed an unsubstantiated accusation …….. right?

    But you keep believing a lie, if it makes you feel better about hating this team 😉

  50. thefirstsmilergrogan says: Jan 28, 2015 4:38 PM

    the league has number rules to assist in identifying who are eligible receivers.

    when the pats ran out their scheme formations; not just the usual tight end replaced by a tackle eligible on the end of a 5 man line, determining by number who was eligible was nullified. given the crowd noise and the fact the refs hadn’t seen the scheme before, it served to the pats advantage.

    pats fans will call it smart. everyone else calls it sleazy. and when you combine it with the deflation of the game balls, i think everyone not in the pats home area will be hoping the seahawks kick them into next week…..

  51. allmyexsliveintexas says: Jan 28, 2015 4:50 PM

    Dear Josh, the Colts could defend it properly because game film of those plays could be studied beforehand. That wasn’t the case the week prior.

  52. hr1213 says: Jan 28, 2015 4:50 PM

    The problem isn’t with the Pats. It’s the fact the refs don’t know how to police it

  53. lemmetalkwouldya says: Jan 28, 2015 4:53 PM

    koenig61 says:
    I believe next year the league will mandate the Offense has to declare the ineligible player before they break the huddle and before they walk up to the line of scrimmage.
    ———————————————————-
    So, you want them to notify the ref while they’re still IN a huddle??? Are they supposed to bring the ref INTO the huddle???

    Or do you want them to notify the ref BEFORE they huddle; you know, before they even know what play is going to be CALLED????

    Look, however they did it, the Ravens had no less than 7-1o seconds to react to it. The officials gave them notice, the Patriots didn’t “quick snap” the ball.

    Even worse, the Ravens fell for this THREE TIMES.

    Harbaugh and all Ravens fans need to just shut up and get over it

  54. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 5:12 PM

    the league has number rules to assist in identifying who are eligible receivers.
    ==
    Including telling the defense when player’s eligibility doesn’t match their number.

    If you want a rule change, have at it, but don’t pretend that what was done was illegal or even the least bit shady. If you have to change the rule to make something illegal, it was legal before hand.

  55. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 5:14 PM

    Even worse, the Ravens fell for this THREE TIMES.
    ===

    That’s what happens when you have a stupid or poorly coached team. I’m leaning more towards dumb, because they should have looked into the huddle and seen only four widebodies. Check to a safe call or call a time out. You had like 15-20 seconds to count the huddle or to count the guys breaking the huddle.

  56. patsbrat says: Jan 28, 2015 6:08 PM

    I have never understood the complaints about deception. That is what this game is all about and there is nothing illegal or immoral about it.

    Ineligible receivers are announced before the play. Should defenses be required to announce when linebackers intend to blitz? This whole deception angle just does not hold water.

  57. TheWizard says: Jan 28, 2015 6:24 PM

    Yeah, it’s so underhanded you’re about to see 2/3 of the leagues’ teams running it next year.

  58. harrisonhits2 says: Jan 28, 2015 6:58 PM

    “If a person is accused of something and evidence exists that could potentially exonerate them in the future, why would a person in power destroy that evidence?”

    Because it showed other teams filming the Pats back from their sidelines. The only difference was the Pats did it one game more than the other teams after it was banned.

    As far as these plays, the Pats followed the rules, period. Just because Harbaugh made a horse’s rear end of himself while getting out coached doesn’t change that.

    It’s funny that the Pats do goings within the rules and are over and over again called cheaters for things other teams do without second thought. Prime example the Pats signed 3 players near the end of the season to futures contracts. There were quite a number of outraged posters here claiming the Pats somehow were cheating the next day. Within 24 hours another article had been posted here detailing futures signings by 22 teams including the Pats. Yet somehow the other 21 teams weren’t called cheaters for this.

    It’s calked a double standard. That invalidates any criticism you have of the Pats.

  59. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 7:18 PM

    Yeah, it’s so underhanded you’re about to see 2/3 of the leagues’ teams running it next year.
    ===
    That depends on if the rules-making bodies are dominated by offensive or defensive-minded coaches.

  60. lemmetalkwouldya says: Jan 28, 2015 7:39 PM

    Anyone saying that Harbaugh’s complaint was about the way the officials handled these plays, and not that the plays themselves were illegal, needs to go back and read Harbaugh’s whining right after the game.

    Dude flat-out whined that the plays were cheating and illegal, and he said NOTHING about the ref’s performance.

    He changed his tune the next day, after he became the laughingstock of the entire NFL.

  61. joetoronto says: Jan 28, 2015 8:00 PM

    Deception, it’s the Patriot way.

  62. smasonsmith says: Jan 28, 2015 8:37 PM

    Deception, it’s the Patriot way.
    ===
    Welcome to sports.

  63. eyeandfootballofhorus says: Jan 28, 2015 9:46 PM

    tagliabue recently said something about having allies as being useful. i suspect ‘deflategate’ is really at its core an in-house NFL power struggle, an effort to diminish kraft’s influence with goodell by other owners. i’m not exonerating the patriots, far from it. it’s more than possible there was some funny business–and BTW, kraft’s surprise statement was probably more to counter the unfavorable impression that belichick and brady made last week than anything. like most true football fans, i’m just sick of these sanctimoniously puritan people and media hacks who harp on this non-issue, which has *absolute zero* bearing on the SB. come game time, players will decide who is best that day. incidentally, also starting at 6:30 pm sunday should be about 3-4 hours blissfully and relatively devoid of any mention of ‘deflategate’. may the best team win, and by saying that, i really mean the patriots.

  64. bbwasright says: Jan 28, 2015 10:18 PM

    Yet another stupid issue-non-issue. The Patriots are playing deceptive football, and that is a criticism?! If they are playing deceptive football, they are playing GOOD football. Part of the game is to come up with plays that surprise the other team and create favorable matchups for your team. Deception is as central to that strategy as it is to war. I hear teams and haters complain that they are being deceptive, or that it isn’t fair that they catch the defense off guard. All they are doing is complaining because they aren’t prepared for the game, or play. That is bad coaching and or bad execution on the defense. That is not something new to accuse the Patriots of doing to cheat.

  65. eyeandfootballofhorus says: Jan 28, 2015 10:56 PM

    Man I hope these stinking cheaters get BLOWN OUT
    ===================

    which ‘cheaters’ are you referring to? seadderal or NE?

    ===================

    culture of cheating

    ====================

    again, which team are you referring to? the colts? the broncos? the seahawks? the patriots? dolphins? raiders? 49ers perhaps?

  66. nyerinbaltimore says: Feb 1, 2015 2:29 PM

    Just 1 Second: The Illegal 20-Yard Swing in the Pats-Ravens Game

    Despite the attention heaped on deflategate, the bigger scandal of the playoffs will end up having been the refs mishandling of the Patriots eligibility-aided drive against the Ravens.

    Proper enforcement of the rules would have penalized the Patriots for 5 yards. Add that 5 to the 15 yard penalty that the Ravens took to call attention to the scheme and that’s a 20-yard swing on a scoring drive in a very close game.

    No one, including PROFOOTBALLTALK.COM, appears to have held the refs to the standards laid out in the NFL’s 2012 POINTS OF EMPHASIS, which specifically address the situation that occurred in the Patriots-Ravens game. Everyone, including PROFOOTBALLTALK.COM, has taken the refs at their word without much scrutiny. The refs still seem confused about how to handle this situation. If they looked at the 2012 POINTS OF EMPHASIS, the answer is right there.

    The cold logic here includes two points and one extrapolation.

    1. FACT: It was widely reported that Shane Vereen on at least one play reported his ineligibility just before the snap on the drive.

    2. FACT: Players wearing numbers that don’t qualify them for their position must report to the referee “BEFORE ENTERING THE HUDDLE.” And if a player fails to properly report his change in eligibility, “IT WILL RESULT IN A 5-YARD PENALTY FOR ILLEGAL SUBSTITUION.”

    3. EXTRAPOLATION: If the refs had thrown the flag, Harbaugh would not have gotten the unsportsmanlike conduct. That’s the 20-yard swing on a scoring drive.

    Here is the portion of the 2012 points of emphasis:
    The committee also reviewed the procedures for an offensive player who comes into the game wearing a number that does not qualify him for the position he takes. These players must report to the referee, before entering the huddle. The referee and umpire will then report the same to the defensive team.

    This rule prevails whether a player is already in the game or is an entering substitute and whether it is a play from scrimmage, an attempted field goal, or a try after a touchdown. If a player fails to report his change in eligibility, it will result in a 5-yard penalty for illegal substitution.

    Clearly no one wants to talk about this. Not the Patriots certainly, not the NFL refs (who are still confused about how to handle this issue) and not the Ravens (who in retrospect should have called a timeout.) But that doesn’t change the fact that if the refs had handled it properly, the outcome might have been different.

  67. nyerinbaltimore says: Feb 1, 2015 2:39 PM

    Someone’s not telling the truth about the timing of Shane Vereen’s report to the refs of his ineligibility against the Ravens:

    Chris Wesserling at NFL.com said this: “On one play, running back Shane Vereen didn’t alert the officials to his ineligibility until just before the snap.”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!