NFL Rule Changes

[Yeagermeister]

I respect your "stand" on the matter Yeagermeister. Ok, "take the dresses off of players and make them actually play again" ...let's look at it from your perspective.

What penalties, rulings, limitations that already exist in the NFL, would you implement "lift dress" rule (metaphorically speaking of course) to liberate players from these so-called restrictions?

The no touching a wr after 5 yards, rough the qb, and horse collar are the ones off the top of my head.

When I started watching football a wr had to fight to get off the line. Wr's like Moss wouldn't be able to play with those rules. One of my favorite players of all time is Lester Hayes. Unless a wr put a move on him at the line he wasn't catching a pass.

I don't want to see the QB's just get mangled but you have to admit they are babied now.

 

[HDC]

Two NFL rules are called VERY frequently and often have a large impact on the game: Illegal Block in the Back on returns and Pass Interference/Illegal Contact. Both of these infractions are often caused by the actions and position of the player who is fouled with little or no intent by the player who commits the foul. I would propose that for each foul there be two degrees (as in facemask) simple foul (5 yards from spot of the ball) and flagrant or deliberate foul (penalized as for current rule).

I hate these two current rules and think most fans do too.

 

[AmishCowboy]

One rule that drives me crazy is the 45 man game day roster, why not let all 53 men be active?. I hate when a O-lineman gets hurt and then you only have 1 backup remaining, same with the DB's, you get 1 or 2 injuries and you can't play nickel or your doing like NE and puting in a WR on Defense!.

 

[Doomsday101]

The no touching a wr after 5 yards, rough the qb, and horse collar are the ones off the top of my head.

When I started watching football a wr had to fight to get off the line. Wr's like Moss wouldn't be able to play with those rules. One of my favorite players of all time is Lester Hayes. Unless a wr put a move on him at the line he wasn't catching a pass.

I don't want to see the QB's just get mangled but you have to admit they are babied now.

Which is how it is in college. You can have contact with the WR up until the point where the ball is in the air at that point you can't make contact which is how the NFL once was. I also agree with the over protection afforded QB's in today’s football.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Two NFL rules are called VERY frequently and often have a large impact on the game: Illegal Block in the Back on returns and Pass Interference/Illegal Contact. Both of these infractions are often caused by the actions and position of the player who is fouled with little or no intent by the player who commits the foul. I would propose that for each foul there be two degrees (as in facemask) simple foul (5 yards from spot of the ball) and flagrant or deliberate foul (penalized as for current rule).

I hate these two current rules and think most fans do too.

The PI rule is ok with me except it needs to be called equally. Wr's commit more PI's that aren't called than the defense.

 

[DipChit]

I would like to see the officials letting the play go on whenever there is any type of debatable call (down by contact on a fumble, stepping out of bounds, etc.). They should then let the play go on untill they know the result of that play.

They then could make their ruling (like they do now). But if they decide to rule the play down by contact, the other team could still challenge (unchallengable as of now) because the officials know the result of the play had it not been blown dead.

Kind of having two results for the same play, so either team can challenge the outcome.

Yup, exactly. Not that it'd be a rule change but yeah. It'd still come down to judgement since theres times where they're absolutely sure that when a ball "comes loose" that it was either say an arm going forward or the ground causing it.

But just in general, if for example when it comes to a possible fumble situation, if it's even remotely possible that it was indeed a fumble (versus something that would actually end the play), dont blow that whistle.

Theres no reason not to approach it that way.

Course who knows.. maybe they do but it's just that they're so "sure" they saw what they saw as it was happening. But obviously as it's turned out, thats not good enough. Let the play go on when it's close!

 

[Hostile]

I would make a rule for no more rules directed at Cowboys players.

The Roy Williams Rule
The Emmitt Smith Rule
The Deion Sanders Rule
etc.

Meanwhile the Chop Block lives on.

 

[conner01]

i would change the pi rule to 15 yds and a 1st dwn.and have a flagrant rule that would be a spot foul like it is now for a breakaway play where the defender intentionally fouls

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

As noted, if 51% of the teams that win the coin toss are winning the games, then there is nothing wrong with the current system.

Wait ...let's do this "by-the-numbers" ...if 51% of coin toss winning teams are winning the games, that mean teams that win coin tosses are winning the games more than teams who lose the coin toss!

It's just mere coincidence that coin tosses are being won 51% of the time; hence that could coincidentally change at any time. There's no science to luck of the draw (or coin toss). There is a clear succinct advantage in winning the coin toss!

Want to look at this further ...think about it, then tell me, of the 51% of the coin toss winners, how many elect to receive the ball versus kicking to the opponent teams ...exactly!

If you or some others who have expressed a similar view, were to have told me that out of the 51% of coin toss winners, the majority of those winners elected to kick the ball to the opposing team ...then I would say there's no correlation in the numbers as it impacts on the outcome of the games.

Again, if coin toss winners receive the football (and In the majority of times they will make that obvious decision), they will come out victorious -- which does not give the opponent team a fighting chance -- based on "a coin toss!

 

[Yeagermeister]

I would make a rule for no more rules directed at Cowboys players.

The Roy Williams Rule
The Emmitt Smith Rule
The Deion Sanders Rule
etc.

Meanwhile the Chop Block lives on.

Yeah taking off your helmet is much worse than tearing up someone's knee or breaking their leg.....get your head right Hos

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

Not as much to do with the actual game play but I have always thought there should be rule changes concerning the cap.

I think to a team should be given a little extra cap space on the following season if they gain so much money for charities, putting in community time and so on.

For example.

If the cap next year is $50.00 (just an example here )

If during the season a team raises X amount of dollars for charities (legit charities that are on a list approved by the league, not Jerry jones foundation for Jerrys wallet or something like that).

Then a percentage of money that exceeds a specific goal would turn into a bonus towards a teams cap the following season. Now the amount of money that would go towards the teams cap the following season would itself have a cap on it as well.

So if the league states the goal to reach the bonus cap was $10 but the total amount that could be used over was $15.....then the team went on to raise $20 in charity money.

Now they can only use $5 dollars over the ten because the total of the extra cap was set at $15.

So we use some formula to take that money and add it to the teams next year cap.

This promotes extra reasons for teams to raise money towards charities, this gets the teams even more involved with the community for good causes, it gives good press to a team and the league and it rewards a team for helping others.

Now it must be noted that each player, coach or front office people could only give a limited amount of money from their own pocket...the rest would have to be the team/coaches, front office people out there spending time in the community to help raise the money.....this is to ensure that the team gets involved with the community instead of someone just taking a big chunk of money and throwing it in a bucket to get the extra cap for the following season.

Hope that makes sense.

You always make sense BP.

What about freeing up some extra seed (cap) money (1 million dollars... just an example here ) for teams who are at the bottom of their respective divisions (for example the 2005 NFCE team) ...couldn't resist.

But I do understand the concept and it is feasible.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

SO the team that can afford the most charity gets to have the more cap space? how does this help the little markets?

Find a way to do it.

If you can not raise enough money in the city you play in...move it to statewide charities.

Plus the amount of extra money on the cap itself would be capped.

It would be a small amount extra not some huge amount...something that could just help out in tight spots.

If the cap would currently be 100 million dollars then the bonus cap would be no more than say 1 million.

 

[Hostile]

Yeah taking off your helmet is much worse than tearing up someone's knee or breaking their leg.....get your head right Hos

I don't want to, and you can't make me.

:nana:

 

[JackMagist]

I'd like to see ... both teams have possession of the ball during over-time (they do something similar in college). If the team that has initial possession scores a TD (or FG) and the other team does not score equally -- game over! If the second team matches the score (TD/FG) of the initial team that had possession, they go into a 2nd OT round ; or sudden-death
situation where the first team that scores wins the game. This gives both teams an equal opportunity to score and an opportunity for extended play.

The problem with this rule would be that the games would be extended to even greater lengths on a regular basis. The team getting the ball second would not be playing in the same manner as the team that gets the ball first. The first team will play in the traditional 3 and out (three plays then punt) mindset but the second team would have no choice but to go for it on 4th down every time.

So they would not be playing on even footing and this will lead to many much longer games due to the ties. It could in fact become an advantage for the second team to get the ball since they would essentially be playing with more downs (there is a mathematical study of the statistics shows that a team is better off going for it on 4th down every time). There is just no way to make it even when you get right down to it. Plus the Networks would not go for all the extended games.

Instead of penalizing the team, that lost the ruling, by removing a timeout, I'd like to see the other team pickup an additional timeout (e.g., your team challenges and loses -- you keep the same number of timeouts you had prior to the challenge -- the other team picks-up an additional timeout (because the team that wins the decision isn't really rewarded by winning the decision -- it was the correct call anyway).

Again the problem with this is that it would extend the games unduly. Now if you made them 30 second timeouts only (or less than 30 seconds even) and no more than one additional timeout per team per half then maybe the Networks would go for it (the Networks DO have a say with the bucks they pay to broadcast the games).

 

[Yeagermeister]

I don't want to, and you can't make me.

:nana:

I ain't scared of you :fight: :laugh2:

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

Here's one ...during a kickoff, a special teams player can run out of bounds but cannot be the first to touch the ball/make the tackle or something like that.

I'd Like to modify the rue to take that player completely out of "that one play."

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I am not in favor of changing OT. I hate the college rule. It's rediculous, IMO. Defense is a part of the game. So is luck. If a team wins the toss, then it up to them to score just as it's up to the defense to prevent it. No reason for the change IMO.

This Roy Williams rule is rediculous IMO. I think it should just be changed to prevent players from grabing a player from behind and coming down on there legs. Otherwise, leave it alone. I mean, it's legal for players to yank players down from behind, by the shoulder pads or come down on there legs if your in the tackle box but not in the open field. Is it less dangerous in the tackle box? Sorry if Owens got hurt. If he got down like other WRs do to avoid shots from the safety, then he wouldn't have been injured. If he elects to man up and go for more yards, then he is making the decision to expose himself to injury.

No more double personals offset. Find out who started it and penalize that team with yardage and loss of down. If the opposing team retaliates, then penalize 5 yards less.

Ease up on the pass interferance calls. WRs never get called for it. DBs always get called. It's dispraportianal to the point of absurdity. Let the defense play a little bit more.

Ease up on the late hits as well. You can't hit a QB high, you can't hit a QB low, you can't hit a QB in the mid section even. You can't hit him after the ball is gone, might as well say you can't hit him. If a QB is going to stand in to the last possible second to make the throw, then you can't expect a defensive player to stop within on step of the QB to prevent impact. It's just not possible. This BS has to stop.

Finally, stop with the chop blocks already. I mean, how many guys need to go down before somebody says, this needs to be banned? If it were QBs getting hurt, they would already have drafted a law and gotten it added to the Constitution by now. Because it's only a defensive player, somehow, there not as important. It's BS once again.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Here's one ...during a kickoff, a special teams player can run out of bounds but cannot be the first to touch the ball/make the tackle or something like that.

I'd Like to modify the rue to take that player completely out of "that one play."

If forced out they should be able to touch the ball but if the step out on their own they can't be the first to touch it.....otherwise the receiving would just push every player they can out of bounds.

 

[Hostile]

I ain't scared of you :fight: :laugh2:

I'm eating chili for lunch.

:gassy1:

Talk brave now.

 

[Yeagermeister]

I'm eating chili for lunch.

:gassy1:

Talk brave now.

:choke: