NFL might tweak offensive holding, false start rules

[Cochese]

I don't think they should change the false start rule. If an offensive player flinches, it could effect the defensive player. If the wide receiver moves his arm, the corner back may shift or start his back pedal as a reaction. That can give the receiver an advantage. It could provide the receiver more of a cushion to work with or if the DB is out of balance the reciever can get off the line easier.

Agreed. The false start rule is fine as it is.

As for the holding rule, it seems like Holmgrens pathetic crying finally accomplished something, no matter how stupid it is. If the NFL doesnt want players to hold, either get rid of the rule or teach them how to actually block correctly.

 

[Kalyan]

I don't think they should change the false start rule. If an offensive player flinches, it could effect the defensive player. If the wide receiver moves his arm, the corner back may shift or start his back pedal as a reaction. That can give the receiver an advantage. It could provide the receiver more of a cushion to work with or if the DB is out of balance the reciever can get off the line easier.

Agreed, but doesn't it work the other way around? LB/S/CB moving/stunting before the snap, is that a disadvantage to offense?

 

[Cochese]

Agreed, but doesn't it work the other way around? LB/S/CB moving/stunting before the snap, is that a disadvantage to offense?

The NFL made it so that any time a defensive player intentionally draws a false start on the offense, the foul is against the defense.

 

[ComicBookGuy]

Not really. The offense moves on the snap. They know when the snap is. The defense doesn't, that is a disadvantage to the defense. The defense has the right to move around in order to match what the offense is showing. The offense knows when the snap is, if they move before then it is an idiotic move on that player, plain and simple.

 

[aikemirv]

This section is beyond ludicrous. What exactly was happening in the past? Were officials anticipating holding calls based on matchups before the snap and then deciding to throw the flag? Were they relying on some coach on the sideline to scream out if there was a hold and then call the penalty?

I'm trying to figure out how this makes any sense as worded. If they wanted to slightly change the definition of what constitutes a hold, fine. But to instruct the officials to make sure they see a foul before throwing the flag? And this new directive ONLY applies to holding calls and not any of the other numerous fouls?

I would hope they were talking about things that "look" like a hold, being called. For example an OLineman may have a hand in the chest of the DE and the DE is to his right or left and it may look like he is holding when in reality he is not "holding" the jersey

 

[Kalyan]

Not really. The offense moves on the snap. They know when the snap is. The defense doesn't, that is a disadvantage to the defense. The defense has the right to move around in order to match what the offense is showing. The offense knows when the snap is, if they move before then it is an idiotic move on that player, plain and simple.

Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying the rule

 

[AmericasTeam31]

Just watched the clip on NFL Network that what's his face used to describe why he wants to change the horse collar rule to include the collar of the jersey.

It's BS. What other way did that LB have to make that tackle? This isn't about avoiding injury (how many injuries that that tackle cause this year? Specifically, how many injuries were caused by that tackle where only the jersey was grabbed?). It's about making it easier for the refs to call. Now they'd actually have to f'in pay attention to what is being grabbed. If the rule goes through, the ref doesn't have to use his head, he can just throw the flag.

It's f'in BS. Injuries have NOTHING to do with the proposed change.


And this BS about being able to award change of possession on fumbles that occured after/during the whistle is BS too. How about you teach these loser refs to do a BETTER job now, instead of being able to fix their mistakes later? Again, just another rule being proposed to make life easier for a ref. It's BS. Do a better job training the dang refs and those types of plays will be few and far between. No need to add a rule that will let the refs know they can screw up cuz it'll get fixed. These guys don't need any more incentive to get any lazier doing their jobs. Keep it the way it is, only teach these morons to do their jobs better.

I think the whole game should officiated from the booth. Set up the cameras in every stadium the way they were in the Super Bowl when the Ravens won. They could get a 360 degree view of every play. The refs on the field are useless anyway, and it takes them longer to review a play on a challenge so why not?

 

[MikeD17]

the should of madea rule against those tackls at qbs legs 10 years ago. I hate it when i seesom defensive lineman on his knees diving into th side of a qbs leg. thats the worse tackle in football, carson plamersis the perfect example

 

[CooterBrown]

The league is trying to protect its marquee players, the QBs. They say its about preventing injuries. BS. It is about ticket sales and fan interest.
So now the defense can't tackle the QB below the knees. Let's put dresses on them so we'll know where the knees are.