All Things 2024 Minnesota Vikings Off-Season Thread

Donate To GopherHole
MplsGopher said:
You fumble the ball at your own 25, it rolls forward to your own 23, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

You fumble the ball at your opponent's 1, it rolls forward to a yard into the end zone but does not go out of bounds, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

Exactly the same, therefore proving the rule book should be fixed.
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer the question. I know why and so do you but you just can’t admit it, because it shows you as wrong once again.
I’ll answer for you. It’s a TD because the goal line has a different Set of rules for ALL types of plays.
The rule is exactly the way it should be.
 

GFBfan said:
the goal line has a different Set of rules for ALL types of plays.
Click to expand...
You fumble the ball at your own 25, it rolls forward to your own 23, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

You fumble the ball at your opponent's 1, it rolls forward to a yard into the end zone but does not go out of bounds, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

Exactly the same
 

Ope3 said:
Uhh, because additional information on the long term effects of injuries in general and head trauma specifically affected the leagues decision to change the rules.
Click to expand...
:ROFLMAO:

Pick any rule which has changed in the last few years.

“why didn't the NFL change it decades ago?”
 

The NFL continuously improves the rules, every year. This would be a great opportunity to improve the game.
 

MplsGopher said:
You fumble the ball at your own 25, it rolls forward to your own 23, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

You fumble the ball at your opponent's 1, it rolls forward to a yard into the end zone but does not go out of bounds, the defense falls on it. Ball goes to the defensive team.

Exactly the same
Click to expand...
Wrong again. In case 2 they put the ball at the 20.
Keep digging that hole.
 




GFBfan said:
In case 2 they put the ball at the 20.
Click to expand...
You propose for the defensive recovering team to start with the ball one yard in the end zone? It has to go somewhere. I could make a valid case that they should start at the 1 foot line, but the rule is whatever the touchback yard line is.

If you had a valid leg to stand on, then the defense wouldn’t be allowed to recover the ball in the end zone because the end zone is “special”.

I’ve proven it isn’t. You haven’t disproven it.


All rules are arbitrary. It would be better and correct to make the rule be that offense retains possession at the spot of the fumble.


They could’ve arbitrarily decided to continue with the rule that PI isn’t reviewable, but they correctly changed it. This would be just another correct change.
 

MplsGopher said:
You propose for the defensive recovering team to start with the ball one yard in the end zone? It has to go somewhere. I could make a valid case that they should start at the 1 foot line, but the rule is whatever the touchback yard line is.

If you had a valid leg to stand on, then the defense wouldn’t be allowed to recover the ball in the end zone because the end zone is “special”.

I’ve proven it isn’t. You haven’t disproven it.


All rules are arbitrary. It would be better and correct to make the rule be that offense retains possession at the spot of the fumble.


They could’ve arbitrarily decided to continue with the rule that PI isn’t reviewable, but they correctly changed it. This would be just another correct change.
Click to expand...
Pass Interference was only reviewable for 1 year. They changed the rule back so that it no longer can be challenged.
 



Just heard this bizarro stat -

Lamar has the fifth highest postseason rushing average per game @93.4

Top 4 -
Terrell Davis
John Riggins
Derrick Henry
Eric Dickerson

Emmitt Smith is 6th.
 
Last edited:

Ope3 said:
Pass Interference was only reviewable for 1 year. They changed the rule back so that it no longer can be challenged.
Click to expand...
Glad that you’re on board with the fact that rules change every year.

Giving the defense the ball when they didn’t recover the fumble, when that isn’t done anywhere else in the field, is one of the stupidest and silliest rules in the game.


You haven't convinced me otherwise a single iota, just as I haven’t done for you. Don’t care.
I’m right and you’re wrong.
 

MplsGopher said:
Glad that you’re on board with the fact that rules change every year.
Click to expand...
When did I ever claim that rules are not changed every year?

The End Zone fumble rule has been considered previously and has been rejected, because not enough were in favor of it. Fact.

MplsGopher said:
Giving the defense the ball when they didn’t recover the fumble, when that isn’t done anywhere else in the field, is one of the stupidest and silliest rules in the game.

You haven't convinced me otherwise a single iota, just as I haven’t done for you. Don’t care.
I’m right and you’re wrong.
Click to expand...
My goal was never to convince you to change your opinion.

Great rule. I hope they keep it. Hint for you, that alone signals I acknowledge the possibility it might change.
 

Ope3 said:
The End Zone fumble rule has been considered previously and has been rejected, because not enough were in favor of it. Fact.
Click to expand...
I could believe it. Not really relevant for now.

Ope3 said:
My goal was never to convince you to change your opinion.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter if you’re telling the truth here or not. I was only responding to your many, many posts on the subject and noting that they were not persuasive.

Ope3 said:
Great rule. I hope they keep it.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree
 



MplsGopher said:
Doesn’t matter if you’re telling the truth here or not. I was only responding to your many, many posts on the subject and noting that they were not persuasive.
Click to expand...
The many, many posts were obviously in response to the give and take nature of boards. Most often I was responding to direct points I made or even questions specifically to me. That's how it works on msg boards.

As best as I can tell, your argument is "consistency" for the rest of the field. I reject that as necessary. I enjoy that it is different in the end zone.

Not all rules are (or need to be) applied consistently. For example the clock stops when a player goes out of bounds in the last 2 minutes of the 1st half, last 5 in the 2nd half. Instant replay changes under the two minute warning and OT.

I like the inconsistency in some circumstances. Makes it exciting and better. My opinion.
 


Ope3 said:
As best as I can tell, your argument is "consistency" for the rest of the field. I reject that as necessary. I enjoy that it is different in the end zone.
Click to expand...
You can say you enjoy whatever you want to claim that you do.

A fumble rolling out of bounds can never be considered a take away by the defense. “Rewarding” the defense for allowing the offense to march all the way down the field, and then getting extremely lucky, is pure bunk. It’s just logic.

It’s at least one thing if the defense actually caused the fumble.

But they literally didn’t touch the guy and the ball just slips out, or they’re just doing a normal tackle and guy reaches out to try to cross the plane and the ball comes out? Pure bunk.

Can’t wait for the rule to be corrected
 

MplsGopher said:
But they literally didn’t touch the guy and the ball just slips out, or they’re just doing a normal tackle and guy reaches out to try to cross the plane and the ball comes out?
Click to expand...
Why shouldn't the offense be penalized for failing at ball security?
 

Ope3 said:
Why shouldn't the offense be penalized for failing at ball security?
Click to expand...
They are if the defense recovers it. Why should the defense be rewarded for failing to recover a fumble in bounds?

This play happens like 4 times/year. It's usually random bad luck whether it rolls out before or after the goal line and not some brilliant play by the defense and represents a massive momentum swing. The punishment doesn't fit the crime, IMO.
 

Hope 1 of you will contact the NFL rules committee. I'm sure they'll get right on it.
 

howeda7 said:
They are if the defense recovers it. Why should the defense be rewarded for failing to recover a fumble in bounds?

This play happens like 4 times/year. It's usually random bad luck whether it rolls out before or after the goal line and not some brilliant play by the defense and represents a massive momentum swing. The punishment doesn't fit the crime, IMO.
Click to expand...
Again, for me the difference is because when a ball carrier lunges to the goal line if even the very nose touches the ball it's a TD and the player does not need to survive the ground as is the case the rest of the field. That it just rehashed.

From googling the rule origins, there was another theory that without it if an offensive player is heading towards the end zone, the rule prevents "intentionally" fumbling to a teammate already there or close (Raiders Holy Roller vs the Chargers). Risking if it goes out of bounds dissuades that attempt.

That was on some other msg board. I am not at all positive that's a fact. I know there are rules against the offense gaining yardage from that, but maybe just late in the game. I'm only offering as a potential for "unintended consequences".

If they change it and it happens to Justin Jefferson again like it did against the Eagles this year, I will be happy. If it happens while the Viking are on defense, I will be extremely upset.

Scoring was so far down this year, I would not be surprised if it was changed to benefit the offense.
 


Ope3 said:
Again, for me the difference is because when a ball carrier lunges to the goal line if even the very nose touches the ball it's a TD and the player does not need to survive the ground as is the case the rest of the field. That it just rehashed.

From googling the rule origins, there was another theory that without it if an offensive player is heading towards the end zone, the rule prevents "intentionally" fumbling to a teammate already there or close (Raiders Holy Roller vs the Chargers). Risking if it goes out of bounds dissuades that attempt.

That was on some other msg board. I am not at all positive that's a fact. I know there are rules against the offense gaining yardage from that, but maybe just late in the game. I'm only offering as a potential for "unintended consequences".

If they change it and it happens to Justin Jefferson again like it did against the Eagles this year, I will be happy. If it happens while the Viking are on defense, I will be extremely upset.

Scoring was so far down this year, I would not be surprised if it was changed to benefit the offense.
Click to expand...
I agree the offense should not be able to gain yards on a fumble. Should always go back to the sport of the fumble. I believe that is already the case but I could be wrong.
 

howeda7 said:
Supposedly they are likely to change this rule.
Click to expand...
Everytime this happens, people jump up and down to get rule change, and it never happens. Who knows, maybe they'll break the mold this time.
 


So in KC 3 dudes froze to death watching the KC football game? How is this real?
 


howeda7 said:
Click to expand...

I don't see the Antonio Pierce hiring by the Raiders for HC going well for them. Pierce will now be coaching against Harbaugh, Sean Payton and Andy Reid within the division, and could easily also have the 4th worst QB in that division, depending on what they do at QB and what the Broncos do at QB. Worst HC and worst QB in your own division, not a recipe for success.

This is why you don't let the fans and the players hire your Head Coach. I like Pierce, and I think he's a really good leader, but if he doesn't have some rockstars at OC and DC, he'll fail miserably.
 

Ogee Ogilthorpe said:
I don't see the Antonio Pierce hiring by the Raiders for HC going well for them. Pierce will now be coaching against Harbaugh, Sean Payton and Andy Reid within the division, and could easily also have the 4th worst QB in that division, depending on what they do at QB and what the Broncos do at QB. Worst HC and worst QB in your own division, not a recipe for success.

This is why you don't let the fans and the players hire your Head Coach. I like Pierce, and I think he's a really good leader, but if he doesn't have some rockstars at OC and DC, he'll fail miserably.
Click to expand...
Are we sure about Reid? He's 65 now, lots of talk about swan song. On the other hand tough to go out with prime Mahomes.
 


Congrats to Ivan Pace Jr. for making multiple all-rookie teams.

theramswire.usatoday.com

Rams land NFL-high 4 players on PFWA's 2023 All-Rookie Team

The Rams had 4 players selected to the PFWA All-Rookie Team, the most of any team in the NFL this year
theramswire.usatoday.com theramswire.usatoday.com

https://theathletic.com/5219240/202...ie-team-cj-stroud/?source=user_shared_article

From The Athletic’s write up -

I was higher than most on Pace when I stamped him with a fourth-round grade, but it was still surprising to see him go undrafted given his college tape and production. The Vikings certainly benefited. Pace rookie finished with 102 tackles and a pair of turnovers (one interception, one forced fumble), while playing in every game. Not only did he start on defense, Pace was a core special-teamer, as well. —
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom