jjakq27 Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art.../503170381/1066LEAGUE MEETINGS: Lewis and the rest of the Bengals entourage will leave later this week for the NFL Annual Meeting March 20-23 in Maui."The only area we're concerned about - the (NFL) Competition Committee already is legislating against the peal-back block," Lewis said.The Bengals lost former defensive tackle Tony Williams to a peal-back block during the Monday night game Oct. 25 against Denver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted March 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 http://www.cincypost.com/2005/03/18/beng03-18-2005.htmlBlock on Bengal may bring changes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------By Jeff Legwold and Lee Rasizer Scripps Howard News ServiceA block on Bengals defensive tackle Tony Williams which was caught by the "Monday Night Football" cameras last season has become a flash point for a potential rules change at the NFL's annual March meetings next week. Atlanta Falcons general manager Rich McKay, who co-chairs the competition committee with Tennessee Titans coach Jeff Fisher, said Wednesday that Denver Broncos offensive lineman George Foster's block against Williams Oct. 25 "are the types of plays we'd like not to have in the game, that have no place in the game, and quite frankly, the players themselves -- they emphasized the point to us." As a result, the competition committee, which recommends all rules changes to owners, has recommended that certain low, or "cut," blocks away from the play be considered unnecessary roughness. That means that in the case of a block like Foster's, if the rules change is approved, the player could be penalized 15 yards after the play and potentially fined by the league. To be approved, the recommendation would have to receive 24 yes votes from the 32 owners. Williams, who visited the Broncos as a free agent this week, suffered a fractured left ankle on the play. The injury ended his season. Under the current rule, Foster's block was legal, a point Broncos coach Mike Shanahan made in the days after the game when the block was heavily criticized. But McKay said discussions with players, including Broncos safety John Lynch, coaches and general managers at the committee's meetings during the scouting combine at Indianapolis last month showed a consensus wanted to do away with those kinds of blocks. "Based on the rule book right now and the way unnecessary roughness is written, we just feel like the language is too narrow," McKay said. The proposal would not affect cut blocks made along the line of scrimmage but those away from the play, either after the ball carrier has crossed the line of scrimmage or has run to the other side of the field. McKay said there also would be a discussion of "peel back" blocks, where a lineman comes back behind a play -- a run or a screen pass -- to block a defender low who does not see him coming. "The defender has no way of knowing these blocks are coming ...," McKay said. "We don't feel like the defender has an actual opportunity to defend himself." Publication Date: 03-18-2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 "The only area we're concerned about - the (NFL) Competition Committee already is legislating against the peal-back block," Lewis said.The Bengals lost former defensive tackle Tony Williams to a peal-back block during the Monday night game Oct. 25 against Denver.WTF is a peal-back block? I mean, I know what it is, but why that terminology? I've never heard that before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 "The only area we're concerned about - the (NFL) Competition Committee already is legislating against the peal-back block," Lewis said.The Bengals lost former defensive tackle Tony Williams to a peal-back block during the Monday night game Oct. 25 against Denver.WTF is a peal-back block? I mean, I know what it is, but why that terminology? I've never heard that before. I think it's misspelled. "Peel-back" I think would be closer to the intended discription. As in you peel off the guy you're hooked up with blocking, and drop back on the other guy and cut him low and from behind. Does that help or no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 "The only area we're concerned about - the (NFL) Competition Committee already is legislating against the peal-back block," Lewis said.The Bengals lost former defensive tackle Tony Williams to a peal-back block during the Monday night game Oct. 25 against Denver.WTF is a peal-back block? I mean, I know what it is, but why that terminology? I've never heard that before. I think it's misspelled. "Peel-back" I think would be closer to the intended discription. As in you peel off the guy you're hooked up with blocking, and drop back on the other guy and cut him low and from behind. Does that help or no? Uh....sure....I guess.......I never played football (organized anyway) so a lot of the stuff is foreign to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted March 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 I think it is also known as a crack-back block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 I think it is also known as a crack-back block. Ultimately it's known as a CHEAP SHOT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted March 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2005 http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...SPT02/503230364Wednesday, March 23, 2005 Bengals quiet on rule votes Owners to address 3 changesBy Mark CurnutteEnquirer staff writer Owners will vote today on three potential rules changes at the NFL annual meeting in Hawaii.One proposal, from the competition committee, would allow the defense to recover the ball if replays showed a fumble occurred before the runner was down by contact - even if game officials blow a whistle, which normally ends the play.The competition committee voted 7-0 to propose the change. Votes from 24 of the 32 teams are required for approval. Instant replay itself remains intact. It was approved last in 2004 and will run through the 2008 season before it requires further approval.Owners also will vote on a proposal that would expand the definition of unnecessary roughness in an effort to get collar tackles out of the game.A third major proposal, seemingly brought up every year by the Kansas City Chiefs, would reduce the penalty for pass interference.The Chiefs and other teams want to make 15 yards the maximum penalty for defensive pass interference, matching the college game.No word from the Bengals, who have one of the league's best deep threats in wide receiver Chad Johnson, on how they will vote.But Bengals offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski said Tuesday that he sees both sides of the issue."It was a very costly penalty for our defense when the offense throws it 50 yards into the end zone, and a borderline call gives the other team first down on the 5-yard line," said Bratkowski, who coached in colleges for 14 seasons."But (the 15-yard maximum) leads to more flagrant fouls. What happens if the proposal passes, and a defensive back gets beat deep? He might as well just tackle the guy."Bratkowski compared the defensive back to a defensive player in basketball."If a guy is driving to the basket, you're going to foul him hard to make sure he doesn't get the shot off and have a chance at a three-point play," he said.The San Francisco Chronicle contributed.INTERFERENCE The Bengals were called for nine pass interference, defensive holding or illegal contact penalties on defense during the 2004-05 season.Meanwhile, Bengals opponents were called for 12 pass interference, defensive holding or illegal contact penalties. Bengals cornerback Tory James was called for a 21-yard pass interference penalty in Game 4 against Pittsburgh.In the same game, Steelers cornerback Chad Scott was called for a 35-yard pass interference penalty against Bengals wide receiver Cliff Russell.Mark Curnutte Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.