Change a NFL Rule

[Nav22]

Get rid of the tuck rule. Once and for all.

It's my opinion that the ONLY reason they haven't amended that garbage is because the NFL doesn't want to illegitimize the Patriots' "dynasty".

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

One rule that I would like to see changed:

Change anything that could result in "half the distance to the goal"

If there isn't enough room for the enforced penalty, then move the first down marker.

Example:
Offense has the ball 1st and ten at their own ten, they commit a personal foul. Back the ball down to the one and move the first down marker from the twenty out to the twenty six. Then the O has a first and twenty five.

Another example:
The offense has the ball at the 14 of their opponent. Defense gets a PF. Move the ball down to the one.

 

[dadymat]

One rule that I would like to see changed:

Change anything that could result in "half the distance to the goal"

If there isn't enough room for the enforced penalty, then move the first down marker.

Example:
Offense has the ball 1st and ten at their own ten, they commit a personal foul. Back the ball down to the one and move the first down marker from the twenty out to the twenty six. Then the O has a first and twenty five.

Another example:
The offense has the ball at the 14 of their opponent. Defense gets a PF. Move the ball down to the one.

i like this idea.....

 

[Nav22]

One rule that I would like to see changed:

Change anything that could result in "half the distance to the goal"

If there isn't enough room for the enforced penalty, then move the first down marker.

Example:
Offense has the ball 1st and ten at their own ten, they commit a personal foul. Back the ball down to the one and move the first down marker from the twenty out to the twenty six. Then the O has a first and twenty five.

Another example:
The offense has the ball at the 14 of their opponent. Defense gets a PF. Move the ball down to the one.

I like it. Why should the penalty be less just because the offending team is in a tough spot field position-wise? "Half the distance" is a cop-out.

 

[Wulfman]

i think the pass int calls could be settled by just letting it be a reviewable penalty

I would settle for this instead of changing the rule IF they would do it. Unfortunately, the league seems to be afraid that this would be "showing up" the officials who make the judgment calls like this one. And I'm sorry, but that's a load of crap.

Those officials will get "shown up" more by planting their face--and their botched call--on a 60-yard wide hi-def video board so 100,000 Cowboys fans can point out to them that the call they just made to bail out the Cowboys' opponent was a total crock. I'm sure that won't show them up at all!

Seriously, either change the yardage of the penalty to 15 yards and automatic first down or make it reviewable. Either will achieve the goal. But I don't expect to see either coming down the road anytime soon...

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

i like this idea.....

Why thank you.

I like it. Why should the penalty be less just because the offending team is in a tough spot field position-wise? "Half the distance" is a cop-out.

Agreed on the cop-out and that is what has always bugged me about it. Just doesn't make sense for an offense to get a PF while at their own ten, the foul is "half the distance", so they get 1st and 15.

 

[Rogah]

Get rid of the tuck rule. Once and for all.

It's my opinion that the ONLY reason they haven't amended that garbage is because the NFL doesn't want to illegitimize the Patriots' "dynasty".

Puh-leeze. The rule is in place because they don't want a forward pass to be a judgement call where the refs have to try and determine intent.

The NFL wants their rules to be as black and white as possible. That's why they got rid of the "force out" rule and that's why the tuck rule is here to stay - regardless of what happened 8 years ago.

 

[couchscout]

Puh-leeze. The rule is in place because they don't want a forward pass to be a judgement call where the refs have to try and determine intent.

The NFL wants their rules to be as black and white as possible. That's why they got rid of the "force out" rule and that's why the tuck rule is here to stay - regardless of what happened 8 years ago.

Absolutely correct. It kind of astounds how some people cannot grasp the point of that rule. No one can tell a QB at what point he needs to be releasing the ball. Brady could have argued that he was trying to throw at an odd angle out to the left flat to throw off the defense, or he could just say I was trying to throw it into the ground and take the intentional grounding cause no one was open downfield. This takes referee and fan perception of when a QB should release the ball out of it completely. His arm was moving forward, its pass. Period.

 

[fgoodwin]

Agreed on the cop-out and that is what has always bugged me about it. Just doesn't make sense for an offense to get a PF while at their own ten, the foul is "half the distance", so they get 1st and 15.

But if the offense has first and goal at the five, and the defense commits a PF, there is no way for the offense to get a full 15 yard benefit -- the most they can get is half is the distance.

Thus, the rule will never change as suggested because it would be asymmetric in its application.

As the rule stands now, both offense and defense benefit equally (or are penalized equally depending on your POV) by half the distance.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

I'd change defensive pass interference to be a 15-yard penalty and automatic first down, like it is in college. Having this thing be a spot foul in the NFL is just dumb, and bails out too many long bombs by QBs who don't have a prayer of actually completing a Hail Mary.

Pass interference is a 15 yard penalty.

Not worried about downfield muggings?

Agreed, I hate how it bails out QBs like Jamarcus especially since the game already favors the offense.

How about half the distance between the LOS and alleged interference?