Rule Clarification on Forceout and Deferral Examples Please

[daniukid]

I just read the following and wanted someone to clarify with an example:

New rules
In the face of strong opposition, the NFL competition committee withdrew its postseason re-seeding proposal that would have given wild-card teams a chance to host wild-card games.
But NFL owners did pass several new rules, including eliminating the forceout on receptions; allowing teams to defer their decision to the second half after winning the coin toss;

How I'm reading the forceout is that if you eliminate it, it basically means that if a player makes a catch and is tackled and lands out of bounds, then he is out. No more judgment calls on if he was forced out. Is that correct?

As for the deferral, if Dallas wins the toss and they defer...what exactly do they get to defer? An example from my highly esteemed fellow Zoners would be great!
Thanks,
Daniukid

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

How I'm reading the forceout is that if you eliminate it, it basically means that if a player makes a catch and is tackled and lands out of bounds, then he is out. No more judgment calls on if he was forced out. Is that correct?

You are correct.

As for the deferral, if Dallas wins the toss and they defer...what exactly do they get to defer? An example from my highly esteemed fellow Zoners would be great!
Thanks,
Daniukid

If they win a coin toss, they can defer to kickoff to start a game, and then recieve the kickoff at the start of the second half.

 

[coogrfan]

If they win a coin toss, they can defer to kickoff to start a game, and then recieve the kickoff at the start of the second half.

Not exactly. The team that wins the coin toss will now have the option to defer it's choice of kicking or receiving until the start of the 2nd half (in previous years the team that lost the coin toss always had the choice).

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

Not exactly. The team that wins the coin toss will now have the option to defer it's choice of kicking or receiving until the start of the 2nd half (in previous years the team that lost the coin toss always had the choice).

Then what is the point of "winning" the coin flip if the loser has the choice? Am I missing something here?

Reread my post. Now the winner of the coin flip has an option to either recieve or kickoff at the start of a game.

 

[Spectre]

The only thing that would explain it to me is, the winning (cointoss) team essentially allows the other team to choose to receive or kick so that they can choose which side of the field to defend, instead. Thus letting the winning team decided which way the wind will affect their 4th quarter.

Just a guess.

Other than that, I have no idea.

 

[joseephuss]

Washington visits Dallas at Texas Stadium

Washington being the visitors calls it in the air. "Heads". It is heads. They say they will defer to the second half. Dallas gets to decide whether they kick or receive in the first half and says they will receive the ball in the first half.

It is the second half. Washington decides they like to play defense because their QB is not doing too well, so they decide to kick off for the second half. Dallas gets the ball first in the second half.

This rule is pretty innocuous. Very rarely do you see the same team kick off to start both halves of play in college football where they use this rule. It does happen, but for the most part it doesn't mean much. Most people won't even notice. Too bad Jerome Bettis is not still playing because I am sure he would screw it up like he did the coin flip.

 

[Spectre]

Washington visits Dallas at Texas Stadium

Washington being the visitors calls it in the air. "Heads". It is heads. They say they will defer to the second half. Dallas gets to decide whether they kick or receive in the first half and says they will receive the ball in the first half.

It is the second half. Washington decides they like to play defense because their QB is not doing too well, so they decide to kick off for the second half. Dallas gets the ball first in the second half.

This rule is pretty innocuous. Very rarely do you see the same team kick off to start both halves of play in college football where they use this rule. It does happen, but for the most part it doesn't mean much. Most people won't even notice. Too bad Jerome Bettis is not still playing because I am sure he would screw it up like he did the coin flip.

But in your example, you state that Washington gets to decided to kick in the second half because their QB isn't playing well. That equals the losing coin flip team (WAS) deciding on the 2nd half kickoff, not the winner of the coinflip.
?????

Also, why change this rule?
Teams will never opt to kick in the 2nd half as opposed to receive, even if their offense has been stinking it up. More possessions is always a better thing and every team thinks thy're taking the field with a new, rejuvenated approach on offense after halftime.

Somebody really needs to clarify this rule change.

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

OK, now I am royally confused.

 

[NinePointOh]

In previous years, the winner of the coin toss got to choose to kickoff or receive in the first half, and the loser of the coin toss got to choose to kickoff or receive in the second half -- when they'd undoubtedly choose to receive.

Even if the winner wanted to choose to kickoff in the first half, they'd still end up kicking off again in the second half, because the kickoff didn't alternate from one half to the next -- the team who got to make the decision of whether or not to kickoff is what alternated.

It made the actual decision pointless, because there's no reason you'd ever choose to kickoff. Whoever won the coin toss would inevitably receive in the first half and kickoff in the second half. Under the new rule, however, there is an actual choice -- you can either choose to receive in the first half, or you can defer that decision to the second half, if you think you'd rather have the extra possession later in the game instead of earlier.

In short, the rule change basically allows the winner of the coin toss to say, "I'll receive to start the second half" OR "I'll receive to start the first half," which is something many casual fans thought teams could already do anyway.