Visual Proof that Childress is Full of It (no sub prior to 12-man play)

[BleedBNG]

they still had 12 men...

And that 12th man was offsides.

[surfgoon21]

What if it's the end of a game and the clock is running waay down and we sub a hail mary package, do we need to wait for the defense to sub there appropriate players and possibly have the clock run to zero? What half-****ed rule. The NFL gets a little worse every year.

[Chachie]

Nice legwork on the pics. That pretty much puts it to bed.

[paredskinsfan]

He said they went from 2 WR to 3 WR, that 2nd still isnt that good, do you have one before the actual snap?

We probably just split Cooley out wide.

[Peytskins47]

Im pretty sure Gibbs didnt see the 12th man, I would credit the guys up in the booth.

Gibbs just tosses the flag.

Hey, somebody had to toss the flag out!

[RyansRangers]

the point is even when you get bad calls (ahem like we did) you still gotta stop the oppenent from scoring

[SkinsNatsFan]

Let me ask everyone a question even if childress was right..and we were subing and couldnt hurry the play because we have to let them sub doesnt the fumble play get blown dead anyway....and we still keep posession...if im correct i remember the same thing happened against philly we subbed in or jumbo package and they had there package in with all cornerbacks and no bigboys on the field we ran the play and the refs blew it dead and said we had to let them sub...so what is he whining about he wouldnt have gotten the ball anyway.

Makes sense to me. Either a 12 men on the field penalty or a no play.

Unless not allowing the substitution is considered a penalty rather than a no play. In that case the Vikings could have declined that penalty and taken the ball.

Obviously a moot point, but I agree, it would be nice to know the rule.

[laurent]

He said they went from 2 WR to 3 WR, that 2nd still isnt that good, do you have one before the actual snap?

Cooley was split wide as a receiver on the attempted sneak but inline blocking on the previous play. I could see why he would get confused, but the personnel was the same in both situations.

[the1toask]

was there any doubt?

[kuraitengai]

childress is a sore loser. I'm reading the same crap on viking boards.

the vikings fans are saying he's a sore loser too? or did you mean the vikings fans are saying the same crap about us making a sub before the play?

[TheGreek1973]

The way I understand it is so what? Even if the skins subed the play should have been wistled dead with a 5 yard penalty against the skins for illigal substitution but the fumble would NEVER have counted. The only possible break we got from this is the 5 yards. No way the Queens were going to get the ball.

[kuraitengai]

I believe Saunders not only saw the 12th player on the snap, but I believe he may have been anticipating it.

Knowing that the Vikings are not entitled to substitute unless the 'Skins had subbed, and having the specified play for this scenario, Saunders was at an extreme advantage to set the infraction up.

My guess is Saunders knew it was a challengable error, and has schemed specifically for this scenario.

As 'Skins fans we know the correspondence between Gibbs, et al, can take what seems to be an eternity at times. The fact that Gibbs threw the challenge so quickly indicates, to me, that the staff was ready for the 12th man infraction.

Perhaps some of this offensive genius we've been holding our breath for with Al Saunders? I think so..:2cents:

that could explain things. them anticipating the defensive sub and going for 12 men.

to me it would be the logical reason that the entire o-line just stood up and did nothing after the snap. even after the ball was on the ground, the just stood there as it went through their legs.

even with trying to get a snap to kill a potential challenge, you figure you either spike it or dive forward for a yard or so, like a qb sneak. but the line just stood there.

[rebornempowered]

I informed my friend, who is a Vikings fan, that I was wrong and they DO need a new coach. Childress just lost control of the game at that point.

Look across the field dude and watch a professional coach a game!

[Joe Sick]

Does anyone have this as a video file? (My NBC doesn't come in well on my video card.)

I would like to know what signal Collins made, as in the "hurry up and snap the ball so they won't review it" play...

[the1toask]

There is NO way he anticipated that. He would have had to anticipate that Moss would catch the ball, that it might be challenged and that the Vikings would try to substitute. The play happened so fast, no way was this anticipated - no way. I give kudos to who ever saw this though!

I believe Saunders not only saw the 12th player on the snap, but I believe he may have been anticipating it.

Knowing that the Vikings are not entitled to substitute unless the 'Skins had subbed, and having the specified play for this scenario, Saunders was at an extreme advantage to set the infraction up.

My guess is Saunders knew it was a challengable error, and has schemed specifically for this scenario.

As 'Skins fans we know the correspondence between Gibbs, et al, can take what seems to be an eternity at times. The fact that Gibbs threw the challenge so quickly indicates, to me, that the staff was ready for the 12th man infraction.

Perhaps some of this offensive genius we've been holding our breath for with Al Saunders? I think so..:2cents:

[JWB]

Childress's complaining made him look like the DB that has just been called for interference. The guy was looking at the replay video instead of what was going on in the game. He looked pretty silly!

[D'Pablo]

12 men on the field or not enough time for subs, either way, we get the ball back. Quit your ****ing Childress.

[MrJL]

timeout, is there some sort of subbing rule that i dont know?

what matter is it if we subbed or not subbed? they still had 12 men...

It's a rule that came into play when the no huddle became common, basically the offense is capable of having everyone on the sideline know what they're planning to do and with their helmets on, so if say they had a third and one, went to a jumbo package and made it they couldn't have the extra linemen run straight off to go to a four reciever set without allowing their opponents to sub to deal with that set.

[Rskins91]

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

Maybe if he didn't have such a crappy QB and we didn't shut down his rookie phenom, they might have had a shot at winning the game. Crying over one thing the course of the game, when it's obvious the Viqueens had a lot more problems then that, is a sign of being a *****. Look in the mirror Skeletor.

[Joe Sick]

There is NO way he anticipated that. He would have had to anticipate that Moss would catch the ball, that it might be challenged and that the Vikings would try to substitute. The play happened so fast, no way was this anticipated - no way.

BLASPHEMY!

Are you inferring that our players/coaches are not super-smart?

[SkinsMaster88]

Great job proving that Childress can't take responsibility for his team, instead trying to come up with excuses.

I was shocked though by the call, as I always thought penalties couldn't be retroactively enforced by replay (example: pass interference). Since it wasn't a judgment call, I guess they could make that decision, but quick thinking by the guys in the booth.

[Skins-in-CT]

There is NO way he anticipated that. He would have had to anticipate that Moss would catch the ball, that it might be challenged and that the Vikings would try to substitute. The play happened so fast, no way was this anticipated - no way. I give kudos to who ever saw this though!

Yeah I think the article in the WP said that Saunders was calling the hurry up because he was certain Minnesota was going to challenge Santans's catch. Even he didn't think he was in (although desite what Madden and Michaels said, it looks like Moss got the toe drag for the catch).

It was luck that they had 12 men on the field and that the guys in the booth saw it and told Saunders, who in turn urged JG to throw the red flag.

But I will take that luck any day if it mean another W in the column for us.

[AngloSackSon]

There is NO way he anticipated that. He would have had to anticipate that Moss would catch the ball, that it might be challenged and that the Vikings would try to substitute. The play happened so fast, no way was this anticipated - no way. I give kudos to who ever saw this though!

My assertion is that Saunders has schemed for this scenario, not that particular play, in that particular game.

Gibbs stated in the post game presser, that the team has a specific hurry-up play for that scenario. I don't think it's inconceivable for Saunders to anticipate an opposing defense to attempt to sub players.

It's clear whatever specific play the 'Skins have as a hurry-up, comes without making a substitution. Somebody knew that 12 men is a challengeable penalty. It was certainly someone in the booth. I have to think it's Saunders.

The fact that Gibbs threw the challenge flag so quickly, leads me to believe there was no replay viewed in the booth that led to the 12th man observation. Whoever made the observation must have seen it live. Was it a chance observation? Maybe. I tend to believe someone was watching for it. If they were, it was a brillant scheme...:2cents:

[skins fan1010]

Im pretty sure Gibbs didnt see the 12th man, I would credit the guys up in the booth.

Gibbs just tosses the flag.

I love these Gibbs haters.

Gibbs didn't rush the football into the end zone; Portis did;

Gibbs didn't throw two TD passes; Collins did;

Gibbs didn't attack the football and score a TD; Moss did;

Gibbs didn't pick off passes; Smoot and Springs did;

Gibbs doesn't run the offense; Saunders does;

Gibbs doesn't run the defense; Williams does;

etc., etc.

Oh, wait. Gibbs traded for Portis, brought in Saunders and Collins, traded Coles for Moss, signed Smoot and Springs--among many other high-quality players--and made Williams the highest paid assistant in football.

Oh, and EVERYONE on this team credits Gibbs for the team's success. But Gibbs doesn't do anything.

[BraveWarrior]

I love these Gibbs haters.

Gibbs didn't rush the football into the end zone; Portis did;

Gibbs didn't throw two TD passes; Collins did;

Gibbs didn't attack the football and score a TD; Moss did;

Gibbs didn't pick off passes; Smoot and Springs did;

Gibbs doesn't run the offense; Saunders does;

Gibbs doesn't run the defense; Williams does;

etc., etc.

Oh, wait. Gibbs traded for Portis, brought in Saunders and Collins, traded Coles for Moss, signed Smoot and Springs--among many other high-quality players--and made Williams the highest paid assistant in football.

Oh, and EVERYONE on this team credits Gibbs for the team's success. But Gibbs doesn't do anything.

That's strange, I just read this entire thread and didn't see any posts saying those things. Or does it just chap your ass that people don't think Gibbs was the one who noticed the 12 man on the field?