Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

15 Proposed NFL Rule Changes to be voted on
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
areksoo


Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 92
PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shockey1979


Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 25287
Location: RI/MA
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

domepatrol91 wrote:
Why not a strike system? Challenge as many as want, but lose X amount of challenges and you're done.


That'd be much more ideal then what Washington is proposing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3525
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shockey1979 wrote:
domepatrol91 wrote:
Why not a strike system? Challenge as many as want, but lose X amount of challenges and you're done.


That'd be much more ideal then what Washington is proposing


Agreed. 2 strikes and you are done. It's not just better then the WAS proposal but way better than what the NFL has now. That was my point. Putting an arbitrary max is the wrong way. If it's well officiated 2 strikes is plenty. If it's poorly officiated then the team doesn't need to worry about when to challenge. And if this results in big delays because more calls get reversed the officiating issue becomes the problem to address.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PatriotsWin!


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 21291
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Washington: Touchback is at the 20-yard line if the kick goes through the uprights


This one sounds like fun. I like it.
_________________

Mack on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
packerjmf


Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 3465
Location: The Yoop
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

areksoo wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.

I assume it'd be left to the refs' discretion in terms of when to enforce the penalty. They'd only call it in obvious situations where a team is just trying to waste clock.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGame316


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 1897
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
Shockey1979 wrote:
domepatrol91 wrote:
Why not a strike system? Challenge as many as want, but lose X amount of challenges and you're done.


That'd be much more ideal then what Washington is proposing


Agreed. 2 strikes and you are done. It's not just better then the WAS proposal but way better than what the NFL has now. That was my point. Putting an arbitrary max is the wrong way. If it's well officiated 2 strikes is plenty. If it's poorly officiated then the team doesn't need to worry about when to challenge. And if this results in big delays because more calls get reversed the officiating issue becomes the problem to address.


Why not just make it as long as you have Timeouts left you can challenge

If you are right, then call gets reversed and the game goes on

If you are wrong, then it costs you a timeout, if you have no timeouts left, then you can't challenge anything anymore

seems simple enough

If the officials are sooooo bad that you challenge 10 times and are correct 10 times then it should cost you nothing and you shouldn't be limited in any way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thomas5737


Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 15092
Location: West Virginia Occupation: Browns LT
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

packerjmf wrote:
areksoo wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.

I assume it'd be left to the refs' discretion in terms of when to enforce the penalty. They'd only call it in obvious situations where a team is just trying to waste clock.


But what would it prove? One untimed down means nothing if it is the Ravens game we are using as the example.
_________________
Bonanza23 wrote:
1st off Thomas is a man!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3525
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheGame316 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
Shockey1979 wrote:
domepatrol91 wrote:
Why not a strike system? Challenge as many as want, but lose X amount of challenges and you're done.


That'd be much more ideal then what Washington is proposing


Agreed. 2 strikes and you are done. It's not just better then the WAS proposal but way better than what the NFL has now. That was my point. Putting an arbitrary max is the wrong way. If it's well officiated 2 strikes is plenty. If it's poorly officiated then the team doesn't need to worry about when to challenge. And if this results in big delays because more calls get reversed the officiating issue becomes the problem to address.


Why not just make it as long as you have Timeouts left you can challenge

If you are right, then call gets reversed and the game goes on

If you are wrong, then it costs you a timeout, if you have no timeouts left, then you can't challenge anything anymore

seems simple enough

If the officials are sooooo bad that you challenge 10 times and are correct 10 times then it should cost you nothing and you shouldn't be limited in any way


Well in theory you have 3 strikes with that rule - unless you start burning TO's before then. I do agree teams should face a bigger penalty when they lose a challenge, that works too. The ability to challenge would then force teams to manage their TO's strategically.

I think we're splitting hairs with a 2-strike or whatever-TO-are-left rule. If you go 10/10 either way there would be still the ability to challenge. Which we agree on.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 23100
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thomas5737 wrote:
packerjmf wrote:
areksoo wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.

I assume it'd be left to the refs' discretion in terms of when to enforce the penalty. They'd only call it in obvious situations where a team is just trying to waste clock.


But what would it prove? One untimed down means nothing if it is the Ravens game we are using as the example.

If i'm following correctly, you'd put the time back on the clock and make them replay the down with a penalty applied. Forces them to punt in that situation. If i'm remembering the game correctly, there was enough time for a punt and a possible hail mary.

Yeah if they run the clock though it makes no difference, because the Ravens would have just snapped it out the back of the endzone the next play.
_________________
If you're not in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?

~T.S. Eliot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChazStandard


Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 7074
Location: The bandwagon, hop on up!
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thomas5737 wrote:
packerjmf wrote:
areksoo wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.

I assume it'd be left to the refs' discretion in terms of when to enforce the penalty. They'd only call it in obvious situations where a team is just trying to waste clock.


But what would it prove? One untimed down means nothing if it is the Ravens game we are using as the example.


Regardless of what it proves, as it stands right now it's possible for the offensive team to profit by committing a penalty.

The rules alreayd state that the game can't end on a defensive penalty, it's only fair that applies to both sides.
_________________
Adopt-a-Pat
2014 - Rob Gronkowski TE: Rec: 82 Yds: 1124 TD: 12
2015 - Rob Ninkovich DE: Tkl: 52 Sck: 6.5 FF: 1 FR: 1 INT: 0 PD: 7
2016 - Julian Edelman WR: Rec: 98 Yds: 1106 TD: 3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 23100
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ChazStandard wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
packerjmf wrote:
areksoo wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:

#14 is the removing John Harbaugh's hold everyone and take an intentional safety play. That should pass as well.


So how would it work? If that play happened and there were 7 holds they would be penalized an unsportmanlike and the game would be over anyway?


I agree. The reason why teams do this is the run the clock. The problem with issuing an Unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if seemingly harmless fouls like 2 guys jumping offside now jumps up to a 15 yard penalty.

And to your point it still doesn't fix the problem. I say keep it within the last 2 minutes of each half and multiple penalties will result in the clock rewinding to when the ball was snapped.

I assume it'd be left to the refs' discretion in terms of when to enforce the penalty. They'd only call it in obvious situations where a team is just trying to waste clock.


But what would it prove? One untimed down means nothing if it is the Ravens game we are using as the example.


Regardless of what it proves, as it stands right now it's possible for the offensive team to profit by committing a penalty.

The rules alreayd state that the game can't end on a defensive penalty, it's only fair that applies to both sides.

What Thomas is saying is that if they don't do anything about the clock, the penalty doesn't do anything. In the context of what the Ravens did last year, they'd run the clock out on one play, get the penalty, it'd still be 4th down and they'd just kneel it or snap it out the back of the endzone. The Bengals still wouldn't have touched the ball.
_________________
If you're not in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?

~T.S. Eliot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 23100
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heimdallr wrote:
just get rid of the extra point, move kickoffs up 5 yards and if the kickoff goes through the uprights you get 1 point and a touchback.

It would speed up the game, it would cut down on the number of kickoff returns which are one of the most dangerous plays, and it would add a tactical element of choosing to go for the extra point or kicking a short kickoff to pin them deep.

It's not that i necessarily care, but that would place even more emphasis on FG's and kickers, a part of the game most would agree isn't really "football". Essentially this makes FG's about 10% more valuable. That changes a lot of strategy throughout the game.

I just think there should be some really critical thought given to any rule change that changes the scoring dynamics of a game.
_________________
If you're not in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?

~T.S. Eliot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rockice_8


Joined: 05 Oct 2010
Posts: 4141
Location: 1 step ahead
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Really they just need to streamline the challenges better. Usually in about 20-30 sec seeing 2-3 angles you can tell on TV what the right call is. By the time the official runs to the sideline there should be a central officiating unit in NY who is phoning in the call to the ref. 70% of the review time is the ref running to the sideline to get set up when I already know the answer before he's even seen the replay under the hood.
_________________

Props to Mack on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Viewsfromthe206


Joined: 29 Jul 2016
Posts: 209
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apparently the "leaper" rule is going to pass. So dumb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mse326


Moderator
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 18083
Location: mike23md on the sig
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can someone explain #15 to me? That doesn't even make sense.

On it's face it would include stuff like spiking the ball, throwing it away, running OOB. Obviously those aren't being made illegal so what is it actually pertaining to?
_________________

#JDI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group