News: The NFL is considering some major rule changes: 14 things to know

[Nightman]

Can somebody explain to me why the #1 request is to change the spotting of the ball to the 25 on touchbacks? why is the offense getting a shorter field?

Player safety was cited as the reason. Less KO returns= less injuries.

College has been doing it and the number of touchbacks went up.

 

[fredp22]

got it...tnx

I think we shud leave it alone but if they're that worried do away with the kickoff and put the ball on the 20

 

[jwitten82]

Lol some of those rules would make the game way pass 3 hours.

 

[TwentyOne]

1. Touchbacks no longer at the 20-yard line.
One of the biggest rule changes proposed by the competition committee this year is to change the touchback. Under the proposed new rule, any kickoff that results in a touchback would give the opposing the team the ball at the 25-yard line instead of the 20. As the rule is currently written, teams would only get the ball on the 25-yard line after a touchback on a "free kick," meaning a touchback after a turnover or a punt would still give the opposing team the ball at the 20-yard line.

Lets see: Last year they said that they wanted to protect players and alot of serious injuries happen at the kick return plays. As a solution they changed the kick off spot to be nearer to the oposing end zone. The aim was to have more touchbacks and fewer runbacks.

Now they think about adding to the touchback penalty a few yards. For what ? What will kicking teams now do ? Kicking teams are already closer to the returner thanks to the rule change from last year. That means they are able to close in faster on the return man and so tackle him faster. That means the ballcarrier isnt able to advance like he was able to before the change. Now the kicking team will be penalized by another 5 yds if they kick the ball in the endzone ? What would you do as a kicking team under those circumstances ? Exactly, kick it high and not into the endzone.

Result: More runbacks. More injuries. And exactly the oposite they were trying to achieve years ago.

 

[ErikWilliamsHeadSlap]

Yes, let's give Denver an advantage that no other team has. That's a GREAT idea.

Wont be an issue with Sanchise as their quarterback. Will never get that close.

 

[ErikWilliamsHeadSlap]

Because the air is only thinner in Denver when the Broncos kick the ball? I'm thinking that's not how that works.

But they get the advantage 8 times a year. 8 teams get the advantage once. The other 23 teams have to wait at least a year.

 

[Floatyworm]

Your proposal changes the incentives, in favor of attempting field goals and against going for it on 4th down (or even long 3rd downs). That's bad. It would also lead to things like taking a knee on early downs to move from a 38-yard FG to a 40-yard FG (which is pretty much automatic in today's game). That's really bad. I'm trying to figure out what you think it adds to the game, because I can't think of a single thing.

It would increase scoring....and make coaches coach. You would always have to be aware of the scoring scenerios possible....and give a coach more options.

 

[AbeBeta]

They get paid very well for it. They would play without the money. I don't feel sorry for them.

Yeah, a couple years at minimum salary really makes up for a lifetime of brain injury

 

[JoeKing]

But they get the advantage 8 times a year. 8 teams get the advantage once. The other 23 teams have to wait at least a year.

How is it an advantage if both teams are in the same thin air? If you are saying it's because Denver is more acclimated to the altitude then they also play 8 away games they aren't acclimated to. Bottom line is Denver gets no advantage playing at altitude 8 games a year.

 

[JD_KaPow]

It would increase scoring....and make coaches coach. You would always have to be aware of the scoring scenerios possible....and give a coach more options.

I think it would do the opposite of those things. Since the FG penalty is reduced, coaches will be more likely to kick them than to try to score TDs, which will ultimately reduce scoring. (Also, why is increasing scoring a good thing?) And it would reduce coaching decisions. 4th and 3 at the 34 yard line? Eh, a 5-point FG isn't worth much less than a TD here, and the odds of converting the FG at this distance are higher than the odds of converting the first down, AND the fans and media don't second-guess FG attempts the way they do 4th-down conversion attempts, so it's a no-brainer.

 

[JD_KaPow]

But they get the advantage 8 times a year. 8 teams get the advantage once. The other 23 teams have to wait at least a year.

Sorry, but this makes no sense. They don't ever get an advantage. There are games when FGs are easier for both teams because of the altitude, and there are games where neither team gets a benefit. Both situations are fair. There are no games where this rule would give one team an unfair advantage over their opponents. (It's a terrible idea, by the way, but not for this reason).

Now, does Denver get an enhanced home-field advantage from being used to the altitude? Perhaps. But I would think it would show up LEAST on field goals: the kicker isn't physically taxed during the game in such a way that he would get worn down by the altitude.

 

[ErikWilliamsHeadSlap]

How is it an advantage if both teams are in the same thin air? If you are saying it's because Denver is more acclimated to the altitude then they also play 8 away games they aren't acclimated to. Bottom line is Denver gets no advantage playing at altitude 8 games a year.

Tongue in cheek.

 

[ErikWilliamsHeadSlap]

Sorry, but this makes no sense. They don't ever get an advantage. There are games when FGs are easier for both teams because of the altitude, and there are games where neither team gets a benefit. Both situations are fair. There are no games where this rule would give one team an unfair advantage over their opponents. (It's a terrible idea, by the way, but not for this reason).

Now, does Denver get an enhanced home-field advantage from being used to the altitude? Perhaps. But I would think it would show up LEAST on field goals: the kicker isn't physically taxed during the game in such a way that he would get worn down by the altitude.

Wasn't being serious.

 

[fortdick]

Yeah, a couple years at minimum salary really makes up for a lifetime of brain injury

Two seasons at minimum salary and odds are he won't see the field enough to get brain damage. Kinda hypocritical to be a fan and bemoan the danger to the players, isn't it?

 

[sideon]

booo,dont make this game about a guys Foot.

This made me

 

[KJJ]

Touchbacks going from the 20 to the 25 yard line is another step closer to eliminating kickoffs.

 

[KJJ]

They need to make spot foul PI's reviewable. No penalty in football can change field position like a spot foul PI. If they're going to consider making personal foul penalties reviewable why not spot foul PI's?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

No need for personal attacks and name calling... Consider this a freebie warning.