Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) How does taking away the coach's ability to call a timeout fix this problem? Yes, the coaches are the ones who are calling the TO's in question, but that's just because it's easier for them. There's no reason a player couldn't basically do the same thing: alert the official that he's going to signal for a TO right before the snap, then make a quick signal at the appropriate time.

[/ QUOTE ]It was never a problem when this was the rule. Players calling timeout from field is no issue at all. Other side sees it coming. The coach calling it I don't even think his team has a any idea a timeout is coming most of the time. Otherwise they wouldn't try to block it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? You mean the defense wouldn't try to block it? Of course they would, the whole point is to deceive the kicking team into thinking this is the real thing. Besides, they can't be certain that they'll successfully get the TO called.

And yes, as far as I can recall, this wasn't an issue when players had to call timeouts. But lots of things have changed about the way the game is played since then. This is an NFL culture change (albeit, perhaps, one that got a nudge from a rules change). Again, there is nothing stopping a defensive player from doing exactly what the coaches are doing now.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

When the coach does it, he signals to the linesman. The linesman then runs onto the field to tell the other officials, but not before the ball is snapped and the kick is taken. Neither the teams, nor the fans, nor the TV commentators have any clue until after the ball goes through the uprights.

When the player does it, he signals to the umpire in the middle of the field. The umpire then waves his hands and signals the play dead. Everyone sees this. So even if the defensive player times it perfectly and calls timeout right before the ball is snapped, everyone will still know the play won't count.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

can we start calling it "shanahaning" the kicker? use "ice" to refer the old way?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

Hmm, that does make sense. I suppose the player could just flash a signal to the linesman (after notifying him that it was coming), but I can see how it's a lot tougher to get them to kick the ball after the whistle if a player has to call TO.

I still prefer my solution, though, because a coach should be able to call the TO (players are sometimes too caught up in the moment to signal for the TO in a timely manner or to see the coach giving them the signal). Aside from this scenario, is there any reaon for the coach not to have that ability?


Also, a sick fake-out: Say that the NFL does change the rules back so only players can call for time. On a last second FG try, the defense has 10 men line up to block the kick, with one standing all the way over by the sideline talking to the line-judge. The kicking team sees this, assumes the last second TO is coming and sleep-walks through the FG attempt (missing it, of course), only the defense never actually calls timeout.

Genius, huh? I should be a general manager somewhere.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, a sick fake-out: Say that the NFL does change the rules back so only players can call for time. On a last second FG try, the defense has 10 men line up to block the kick, with one standing all the way over by the sideline talking to the line-judge. The kicking team sees this, assumes the last second TO is coming and sleep-walks through the FG attempt (missing it, of course), only the defense never actually calls timeout.

[/ QUOTE ]This would never happen.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

Right, because no NFL coach is as smart as I am.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

Seriously though, if the other team did actually see the 11th defended talking to the line judge, and if they did actually draw the conclusion that a last-second TO was coming, I bet they would be distracted by the thought, and hence less likely to hit the FG.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously though, if the other team did actually see the 11th defended talking to the line judge, and if they did actually draw the conclusion that a last-second TO was coming, I bet they would be distracted by the thought, and hence less likely to hit the FG.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know why teams don't just have one guy eat vanilla pudding out of a bag marked "Liposuction Waste" just across the line of scrimmage ya know?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

It's the anticipation that I would expect to distract them. The kicker starts his motion towards the ball and kicks it, but in the back of his mind he's expecting to hear a whistle.

Imagine you were playing golf (or bowling, or whatever you do). For whatever reason you think your playing partners are about to play a prank on you by blowing an air-horn during your backswing. They in fact do not, and you go through with your swing. Don't you think you'd tend to perform worse in that situation than if you knew nothing unusual was coming up?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you actually a retard, or do you just play one on the internet? ... Jesus H. Christ, you're dense.

[/ QUOTE ]


What the hell? Your posts in this thread have been consistently unclear and irrational. Your arguments here make almost no sense to anyone, and you inexplicably believe it's more likely that that everyone else is dense and you're the only smart one. Then you have the nerve to attack the one guy who was able to find anything logical that the rest of us may have missed.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

This probably isn't all that relevant, but food for thought - it speaks volumes about the Bills that they need to resort to this cheap tactic to try and win a game they couldn't take over at home after intercepting Romo FIVE times.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's the anticipation that I would expect to distract them. The kicker starts his motion towards the ball and kicks it, but in the back of his mind he's expecting to hear a whistle.

Imagine you were playing golf (or bowling, or whatever you do). For whatever reason you think your playing partners are about to play a prank on you by blowing an air-horn during your backswing. They in fact do not, and you go through with your swing. Don't you think you'd tend to perform worse in that situation than if you knew nothing unusual was coming up?

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I a professional athlete? It changes my answer.

The injured party in this icing [censored] isn't the other team, it's the fans. It disrupts the flow of the game.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who cares?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait till Tom Coughlin does this to David Akers and he misses second.
I promise you'll care.

[/ QUOTE ]
No I wont because if anything he probably has a higher success rate on the second kick than the first one.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, changes in wind, a better jump for the defense, and (if you're on a natural field) minor changes in field condition can happen. Also, obviously, the possibility of a fumbled snap, bad hold, or just general stuff that happens when Tony Romo is your holder could happen too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is this more likely to happen the second time? Couldn't you get the better jump the first time etc.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, changes in wind, a better jump for the defense, and (if you're on a natural field) minor changes in field condition can happen. Also, obviously, the possibility of a fumbled snap, bad hold, or just general stuff that happens when Tony Romo is your holder could happen too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is this more likely to happen the second time? Couldn't you get the better jump the first time etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was tired last night after an entire day of writing essays. I may not have been clear enough, but basically, while I accept that all those things CAN happen on the first kick, and they're not MORE likely on the second, its not insignificant.

A lot of it depends on the kicker's mental toughness. A lot of it is just lucky breaks. Phil Dawson missed a kick in Oakland after making his first one (correct me if I'm wrong). He was kicking on Oakland's infield, which is hard dirt instead of soft grass where you can get a good plant foot.

Basically, there's lots of things that can go wrong, and you improve you chances of some of them when you let the kicker think about the entire situation for a minute. Its probably not significant, but the fact that we have this much debate over it and the only reason the people who want it banned can come up with is because "the fans" hate it leads me back to my initial answer to the thread that icing this way shouldn't be banned.

For a guy like me who didn't care about either of the teams last night, the added drama of "can he do it twice?" made it better for me, and I don't think I'm alone.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
2) Of course this should be banned, and it's easy to do. Just make a rule that, on a FG attempt, the defense can't call a TO once the kicking team is set. You can still ice the kicker if you want, but what you can't do is fake out two million people watching the game into thinking they just watched the last play of the game.


[/ QUOTE ]
This makes it too easy for the offense to take advantage of the situation with fakes. If the offense comes out in "field goal" formation and quickly sets up in a field goal formation ready for a fake play the defense is screwed if they only have a couple of seconds to call them out on it.

I still don't see a way to for the NFL to get rid of this practice without take the time outs away from the coaches. Even then the players can do essentially the same thing.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

edge, if you're in a casino at a roulette table and it comes up red. do you then put all your dough on black for the next spin? because the chances of it coming up red twice are approx. 22.4%? easy money!

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

The kicker gets more clutchier during the 2nd kick.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

The way to do this is simple. Make a rule that if there are fewer than 5 seconds left on the play clock, then defensive timeouts can only be called by players on the field (not by a coach on the sideline). Iceing the kicker would still be possible the way that it has alwyas been done, but it would be difficult to call timeout at the last second, forcing the kicker to kick twice.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
edge, if you're in a casino at a roulette table and it comes up red. do you then put all your dough on black for the next spin? because the chances of it coming up red twice are approx. 22.4%? easy money!

[/ QUOTE ]

wow this is a great strategy - how have i not heard of this before

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

The rule won't be changed for at least the rest of this year.....

BUT...what you will see, and have already seen some teams doing is coaching their special teams to have the LS put his head down earlier, not directly based on when the snap is imminent, along with having blind snaps as opposed to the holder signalling the snap.

That will make it much tougher for coaches to call timeouts directly prior to the snap....and they'll have to get awfully lucky, otherwise they call them too early and no kick is sent off, or too late, and the TO doesn't count.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

I don't think it's unethical, cheap, or douchey. I do think it's a pretty pointless and counterproductive thing to do.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

Don't worry about removing the powers of the coaches to call timeouts. One simple way to put an end to this and not mentioned. $$$$$$$ Fine the teams/coaches who do call a timeout that is extremely obvious in those situations.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
edge, if you're in a casino at a roulette table and it comes up red. do you then put all your dough on black for the next spin? because the chances of it coming up red twice are approx. 22.4%? easy money!

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more genius than that- he bets black on the first spin also, but then pulls his chips off right before the ball drops. That gives him TWO CHANCES to hit black for the price of one!!

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't worry about removing the powers of the coaches to call timeouts. One simple way to put an end to this and not mentioned. $$$$$$$ Fine the teams/coaches who do call a timeout that is extremely obvious in those situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

awesome. I like it.

people in the "it doesn't matter" camp: On the first "kick", the kicker either makes it and he's the hero or he misses and he's the villain. It's an emotional moment. When he's forced to kick again, that emotion will probably have a negative effect on his performance.

The data cited against this doesn't make much sense, since the old way of icing the kicker doesn't include him actually kicking the ball and not realizing it doesn't count until well after the results are apparant.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

This isn't a brand new situation this year. There have been many last second timeouts where the kicker goes through with the kick, only to have to do it over. It just used to be more obvious to the announcers and viewers because you'd see the defensive player call the timeout, or the ref signal for it within your scope of vision. And so you knew it didn't count earlier, whereas now we're finding out after the play.

I heard one ex-coach say he didn't like to give the kicker essentially a practice try. It gives him the opportunity to make adjustments if he misses, or to try to repeat the motion if he makes it. Seems as valid as anything on the other side of the argument.

I think we'll start seeing more coaches *not* call the timeout, as maybe the kickers and offenses will be expecting it and maybe won't be as focused on the first attempt.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
can we start calling it "shanahaning" the kicker? use "ice" to refer the old way?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was a college coach that did it a week or two before Shanahan.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

I've thought that more coaches would use such bluffing strategy more frequently to try to keep kickers off-balance but it really hasn't happened much I don't think.
But if a kicker knows he has to wait longer then the impact of the time-out is not as great. Reverse-psychology to try to make him kick it the first time when he might not be as ready due to timeout-anticipation could be a valid strategy.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The kicker gets more clutchier during the 2nd kick.

[/ QUOTE ]

And he isn't any MORE likely to miss it the second time, but this fact is not INSIGNIFICANT!

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, there's lots of things that can go wrong, and you improve you chances of some of them when you let the kicker think about the entire situation for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

This line of thinking has always bothered me about icing the kicker. It's completely illogical. You're giving a professional athlete extra time to prepare to do an act that he is paid to do. Why would that hurt him?

If Phil Dawson is kicking from the Oakland dirt, why would he do worse on the second attempt? If anything he should do better, having had a practice shot at kicking from the dirt.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, there's lots of things that can go wrong, and you improve you chances of some of them when you let the kicker think about the entire situation for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

This line of thinking has always bothered me about icing the kicker. It's completely illogical. You're giving a professional athlete extra time to prepare to do an act that he is paid to do. Why would that hurt him?

If Phil Dawson is kicking from the Oakland dirt, why would he do worse on the second attempt? If anything he should do better, having had a practice shot at kicking from the dirt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And as far as I know the data backs you up.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So a coach can say "I want a timeout, but I want to wait for the ball to be snapped and then have it retroactively applied to the second before the snap" ?

[/ QUOTE ]It seems like it... that's really the dumb part.

[/ QUOTE ]

No he can't, a coach (or player for that matter, watch the QB as the clock nears the 2 min. warning) has to say "timeout" or something else to notify the official of exactly when he wants the timeout to be taken.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. If you watch the replays of the Denver/OAK game or BUF/DAL games in question, you'll see that the coach goes to the lineman and says that he will call a timeout. But the actual timeout isn't called until the coach says so.

Basically, the coach knows the kicker's pre-snap routine and knows approximately when the snap will happen. (If you watch your team's kicker and you'll see the kicker does the same thing every kick. It's easy to guess when the snap will occur. E.g., Neil Rackers will take his steps back. Then to the side, do a small step with his left foot, then move his arms out, then back in. Then he will nod his head to the holder. Call a timeout then.)

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

god this thread is lame. please rename it to "waaaaa waaaaa sobbbb sobbb, things didn't go MY way, please change/make a rule"

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The kicker gets more clutchier during the 2nd kick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. Even Jeter would marvel at the opposing coaches ignorance.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The old way was fine. It was never debated. I bet they just go back to the way it was.

[/ QUOTE ]Yep. It's only an issue because coming from the sideline. Just go back to old way. Makes no difference. If you can't communicate to players to call timeout for you, you suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how having a player do it is any diff? So a player stands right next tio the ref and does the same thing... same results.

What's next? Linebackers not allowed to move up to the line of scrimmage to fake blitz? "I'm sorry, you can not do that because we feel it gets into the QBs head to much"..LOL

BTW, the whole icing the kicker thing is WAY over-rated. These guys are pros, making them wait another 20 seconds is typically not going to do anything. To the people who REALLY think these guys are mentally/emotionally fragile..LMAO!

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

Should the rules with this issue be altered instead of banned?

For example, should coaches be limited to one timeout in these "icing" situation? Should they be unable to call timeout after the kicking is fully set (all players down, holder set, kicker all the way back in formation)? Any other changes?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
the new rule yes. the old rule was fine when the defense had to call it. It's pure chickensh*t to let the coach wait until 2 seconds before the ball is snapped. The is no debate on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think calling timeouts "2 seconds before the ball is snapped" should be disallowed?

How would that be enforced?

If a center hears a ref blow the whistle, he just snaps the ball and claims "illegal timeout" or whatever.

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The defense getting 2 shots at a block is better than one, obviously. Same for a fumbled snap, or even a simple shank. They're not that common on any one given play, but you get two shots at it, and who knows what can happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From your posts in this thread it seems like you don't realize that if the first FG goes wide but timeout was called, they get to try again.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally realize that.

[/ QUOTE ]

...

[/ QUOTE ]

The two posts are not mutually exclusive. I'm going to hate myself for asking this, but do you see why?

EDIT: I'm going to bed, I'll check back on this thread in the morning...I'm sure it will have died by then.

[/ QUOTE ]

You dont' get "two shots at a block" or two shots at a fumbled snap or a shank. DUCY?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't worry about removing the powers of the coaches to call timeouts. One simple way to put an end to this and not mentioned. $$$$$$$ Fine the teams/coaches who do call a timeout that is extremely obvious in those situations.

[/ QUOTE ]


Considering how much team owners pay for atheletes in the hopes of winning more games, and considering that the intent of this tactic is to win more games (regardless of effectiveness), how big do you think the fine would have to be in order to actually put a stop to this?

Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Should the rules with this issue be altered instead of banned?

For example, should coaches be limited to one timeout in these "icing" situation? Should they be unable to call timeout after the kicking is fully set (all players down, holder set, kicker all the way back in formation)? Any other changes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I favor the defense is NOT allowed to call timeout once the offense is fully set. This is for all plays, not just kicking plays.