spring owners meeting

[Vince Lombardi]

Thought this was kind of an interesting idea that they'll be discussing:

• Owners will consider a proposal that would allow one defensive player designated by the team to have a radio communication device inside his helmet. The device would permit the defensive coordinator to communicate with a key player in his huddle, in much the same manner coaches now communicate with the quarterback.

Possible changes to overtime could be interesting also.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2810754&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab4pos1

[yourfavestoner]

I love the pass interference changes that the 49ers are proposing.

[Schenkel23]

• It appears the league will alter the manner in which teams report injuries during the week. The standard designations with which everyone has become familiar -- "out," "questionable" or "doubtful" -- would be used only on Friday, not beginning on Wednesday each week. Until Friday, teams would identify if a player practiced during the week, and to what extent.

I'm liking that idea.

[Vince Lombardi]

I love the pass interference changes that the 49ers are proposing.

yea I do too. I've seen way too many good games get blown because of teams purposely just trying to get interference calls or refs making bad calls.

[Bengals1690]

yea I do too. I've seen way too many good games get blown because of teams purposely just trying to get interference calls or refs making bad calls.

but then the refs will make bad judgement calls, and people will still blame them. IMO, there are only 2 things that need to be changed: Roughing the Passer calls, and a better overtime thing.

[Vince Lombardi]

but then the refs will make bad judgement calls, and people will still blame them. IMO, there are only 2 things that need to be changed: Roughing the Passer calls, and a better overtime thing.

They already make bad judgement calls. The problem now is that if they make one it's all or nothing. If a team throws a bomb and there's some incidental contact and a ref calls it it could end up penalizing a team 60+ yards and possibly costing them the game. If the ref makes that call with the proposed change he could decide it was only a 15 yard interference penalty, instead of a spot penalty.

[Staubach12]

Better overtime and roughing the passer would be my top priorities. The pass interfierence would take a second to that. All are very important needless to say (though I wouldn't suspect a change in the overtime rules this year).

[Bengals1690]

They already make bad judgement calls. The problem now is that if they make one it's all or nothing. If a team throws a bomb and there's some incidental contact and a ref calls it it could end up penalizing a team 60+ yards and possibly costing them the game. If the ref makes that call with the proposed change he could decide it was only a 15 yard interference penalty, instead of a spot penalty.

i understand that, but if a team is throwing a long pass (over 15), the DB could intentioanlly (sp?) foul to save a big pickup. Pass interference is a hard foul to call. IDK there are good spots in both ways.

[myinnerself]

The college overtime system is the best. In the NFL they could start from the 35 instead of the 25 and do the same system. The current Sudden Death system is terrible.

[Vince Lombardi]

i understand that, but if a team is throwing a long pass (over 15), the DB could intentioanlly (sp?) foul to save a big pickup. Pass interference is a hard foul to call. IDK there are good spots in both ways.

You've got a valid point, but I think any intentional fouls would most likely be called as spot fouls. Regardless, either way there are gonna be messed up calls. I just think if there's a choice of 15 yards or spot it could minimalize the refs having an impact on the outcome of the game. I could be completely wrong though...

[duckseason]

So have they gotten around to discussing whether or not they'll institute the new rule where all QB's must wear a protective bubble lined with razor wire?

[skinzzfan25]

i understand that, but if a team is throwing a long pass (over 15), the DB could intentioanlly (sp?) foul to save a big pickup. Pass interference is a hard foul to call. IDK there are good spots in both ways.

That's what they taught me last year for football xD

If you get beat deep, just trip them cause it's only a 15 yard penalty :)

[fenikz]

and most the time when you trip em it looks as if your feet just got tangled and they dont call anything :)

[princefielder28]

I like that idea, give it to the MLB or Safety

[yourfavestoner]

The college overtime system is the best. In the NFL they could start from the 35 instead of the 25 and do the same system. The current Sudden Death system is terrible.

I hate college overtime. It isn't real football. It's a scrimmage where field position doesn't even matter.

[Star Wideout]

That's what they taught me last year for football xD

If you get beat deep, just trip them cause it's only a 15 yard penalty :)
If you were beat though how would you be in position to trip the receiver?

unless you mean when you realized they were in a better position to catch the ball.

also what is the exact date the owners meeting starts, don't think they said in that article?

[Bengals1690]

I hate college overtime. It isn't real football. It's a scrimmage where field position doesn't even matter.

college overtime is better than the NFL overtime, just because it gives both teams a chance. But in the NFL, they should at least kick it off.

[yourfavestoner]

college overtime is better than the NFL overtime, just because it gives both teams a chance. But in the NFL, they should at least kick it off.

Meh...agree to disagree then. I just feel that if my team wasn't able to stop the opposing team when it really mattered, then they didn't deserve to win the game in the first place. That doesn't even take into account all the opportunities my team probably had during regulation to avoid overtime in the first place.

[duckseason]

Meh...agree to disagree then. I just feel that if my team wasn't able to stop the opposing team when it really mattered, then they didn't deserve to win the game in the first place. That doesn't even take into account all the opportunities my team probably had during regulation to avoid overtime in the first place.
The problem is that it isn't fair to say one team has to stop the other, without ever finding out whether the other team could make a stop. If your team deserves to lose because they couldn't make a stop, then so does your opponent. This is especially a problem in those 31-31 games where both offenses have been moving the ball at will all day. It's also pretty weak that the team only needs to get to the 35 yard line and kick a FG. Overtime is usually anti-climactic in the NFL. I'm not in favor of adopting the college format, but I think both teams should have to kick the ball off at least once. It would level the playing field, and make things much more interesting. The fact that the team to win the toss ends up winning the game 62% of the time is more than enough of a reason to change the format.

[Vince Lombardi]

The problem is that it isn't fair to say one team has to stop the other, without ever finding out whether the other team could make a stop. If your team deserves to lose because they couldn't make a stop, then so does your opponent. This is especially a problem in those 31-31 games where both offenses have been moving the ball at will all day. It's also pretty weak that the team only needs to get to the 35 yard line and kick a FG. Overtime is usually anti-climactic in the NFL. I'm not in favor of adopting the college format, but I think both teams should have to kick the ball off at least once. It would level the playing field, and make things much more interesting. The fact that the team to win the toss ends up winning the game 62% of the time is more than enough of a reason to change the format.

maybe they should keep OT the way it is but disallow field goals. First team to score a TD wins. Atleast that way they have to mount a real drive.

[duckseason]

maybe they should keep OT the way it is but disallow field goals. First team to score a TD wins. Atleast that way they have to mount a real drive.
I think that's a good compromise. I would actually be in favor of that.

[WMD]

Aren't they trying to make it so Spiking the Ball is a penalty?

[THIZZorDIE]

You've got a valid point, but I think any intentional fouls would most likely be called as spot fouls. Regardless, either way there are gonna be messed up calls. I just think if there's a choice of 15 yards or spot it could minimalize the refs having an impact on the outcome of the game. I could be completely wrong though...

Thats right, Its just about minimizing the impact of referees in the outcome of the game. I dont think it will pass, The leaggue will just tell them to stick with the patriot act.

[draftguru151]

Aren't they trying to make it so Spiking the Ball is a penalty?

Spiking it not in the end zone, which is still dumb to get rid of.

[THIZZorDIE]

I think that's a good compromise. I would actually be in favor of that.

I think that is a really good rule. There goes early turnovers turned into FG's.

[WinslowBodden]

I love the pass interference changes that the 49ers are proposing.

I'm not, you can stop a touchdown and get a 15 yard penalty instead of a 40-60 yard spot penalty... not getting a 6 point penalty because you got burned and abused the rule already is enough.

[draftguru151]

I'm not, you can stop a touchdown and get a 15 yard penalty instead of a 40-60 yard spot penalty... not getting a 6 point penalty because you got burned and abused the rule already is enough.

I didn't see the specifics of the rule they are trying to get, but isn't it 15 yards or something for incidental contact and it would still be a spot foul for normal contact?

[Vince Lombardi]

I didn't see the specifics of the rule they are trying to get, but isn't it 15 yards or something for incidental contact and it would still be a spot foul for normal contact?

yea, it's at the ref's discretion which one it is.

[Vince Lombardi]

also what is the exact date the owners meeting starts, don't think they said in that article?

today through Wednesday

[MartinD]

The problem is that it isn't fair to say one team has to stop the other, without ever finding out whether the other team could make a stop. If your team deserves to lose because they couldn't make a stop, then so does your opponent. This is especially a problem in those 31-31 games where both offenses have been moving the ball at will all day. It's also pretty weak that the team only needs to get to the 35 yard line and kick a FG. Overtime is usually anti-climactic in the NFL. I'm not in favor of adopting the college format, but I think both teams should have to kick the ball off at least once. It would level the playing field, and make things much more interesting. The fact that the team to win the toss ends up winning the game 62% of the time is more than enough of a reason to change the format.

There was an experiment in NFL Europe a few years back where overtime was as per NFL rules, except that both teams had to have at least one possession in overtime - if the team that got the ball first scored, the other team at least got a chance to respond (and maybe win the game if the first team only kicked a field goal).

Martin

[Draft King]

I actually love the college system for OT. Despite what some think, I think it's an interesting concept that will add some excitement to the game.