Dan Campbell admits Lions tried to confuse Cowboys as to who was eligible on two-point play

Dan Campbell admits Lions tried to confuse Cowboys as to who was eligible on two-point play

One of the most important tales in the NFL is still the pivotal two-point play between the Lions and Cowboys that was called back because of an eligibility penalty. Many Lions supporters think the officials ruined the game, by purpose or by accident.

But there continues to be one very important question that hasn’t been answered. Did coach Dan Campbell review before the game with members of the officiating crew the play itself, or did he review with them the manner in which the Lions hoped to confuse the Cowboys, by having three different linemen approach referee Brad Allen before the players went to the line of scrimmage.

It was evident from Campbell’s Monday press conference that he had no desire to discuss the matter further. Consequently, no one was able to delve into the specifics of whether the pregame explanation covered the attempt to get the Cowboys to believe that a player other than tackle Taylor Decker could have caught the ball that would have won the game if it had been ruled legal.

It is clear, however, that the Lions wanted to fool the Cowboys.

“It’s about eligibility,” Campbell told reporters. “That’s what it’s about. And it has nothing to do with the ref. The ref knows. He knows. Because 68 reported. It’s for the defense, so that they see three different people. And you’re just hoping they happen to not hear that it’s 70 [who isn’t eligible]. That’s all.”

That’s all, but that’s everything. By having both Decker and tackle Penei Sewell approach referee Brad Allen from one direction while the Lions usual jumbo tight end, Dan Skipper, ran from the sideline and approached Allen as if Skipper were reporting as eligible, the Lions hoped the Cowboys would lose track of which player was actually eligible.

The problem is that, in the effort to fool the Cowboys, the Lions also fooled Allen.

And while Campbell wasn’t asked the specific question as to whether the pregame communication included an explanation that they intended to play a shell game with the Cowboys, Campbell’s comments regarding his explanation to the officials was focused only on the play itself.

“I had it one a piece of paper,” Campbell said of the pregame meeting, which (as PFT reported) Allen did not personally attend. “Our play. What our players have. All I can do is talk through it. That’s all I can do.”

However, he was capable of more. “Now, look, when we run this play, we want to make the Cowboys think 70 is eligible, not 68,” he may have stated to the referees. We will thus have three players approach the referee, and our hope is that the defense will not recognize who is truly qualified. It will appear to be 70, but in reality, it is just 68.

As explained earlier today, it’s hard to imagine a head coach essentially recruiting the officials to go along with that kind of ruse. The Lions assumed the risk that having three players approach Allen — including the usual jumbo tight end who ran not to the huddle or to the line but directly toward Allen — would confuse both the Cowboys and the referee.

That’s exactly what happened. It was, as far as the league is concerned, deception and gamesmanship. And the Lions ultimately did too good of a job confusing the Cowboys, because Skipper’s part of the ploy made Allen think the Lions’ usual jumbo tight end was reporting as eligible. That’s why Skipper ran from the sideline directly to Allen.

Campbell said he’d do nothing differently, if he were to do it again.

“I don’t have a timeout,” Campbell said. “I mean, there’s nothing I can do, you know? And it’s loud. You can’t hear anything. Not where we were at, you know? I think right when the play started, you realize that they ID’d 70 [as eligible]. So, it is what it is.”

All it was, quite simply, an attempt to hide Decker’s eligibility. The goal was to convince the Cowboys that Skipper qualified.

It was successful. Far too well.

Read more on sportupdates.co.uk

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*