PDA

View Full Version : NFL Rule changes?


Sloopy
01-04-2012, 05:11 PM
Just a fun little thread that branched off from a post I made in another thread...

I know some people were excited that BP was finally fired and thus ousted (for the moment) from the competition committee. Many had hope that this might result in the undoing of the evil BP spread through the NFL with the rules he made while on the committee.

Unfortunately this probably doesn't happen, but I do have hope for the possibility of moving towards more of an equilibrium in the rules. A balance that could possibly be created by making a few key rule changes.

The NFL has been very wary of creating to many rules that help defenses but regardless...

The question here is simple. Would you like to see the NFL:

A. Make some key changes in favor of the defense, thus evening it out.

B. Just get rid of the BP rules.

C. Keep things the way that they are.

If you have any possible rule changes I would love to here them... I'll throw in a few that I was thinking of just to get it started:

I try to follow some of the same logic that is used for some of the current offensive favoring rules when coming up with these.

1. In regards to holding:

PI results in the ball being spotted where the penalty occurred and a first down (the assumption being that if the PI didn't occur the receiver would catch the ball for the first down).

Following the same logic, a holding penalty results in a ten yard penalty (assumed sack) however the down is replayed. It would be nice to see this turn into a loss of down penalty (similar to an intentional grounding) as the loss of yardage and loss of down would make more sense as an assumed sack.

2. In regards to offensive pass interference:

I would like this to change to more of what it is in high school football. You could leave it a ten yard penalty but, again, make it a loss of down penalty.

3. In regards to helmet-to-helmet hits:

I personally feel this more than any is a rule that needs to be retracted but seeing as the league is now so concerned with "safety" it will likely be here to stay. Still, I would like to see some of the onus for these hits being put on offensive players as well. As the rules stand now, the penalties only affect defensive players (15 yards penalty, suspensions, fines etc).

Now I'm not trying to completely excuse certain players but I think in certain cases the offensive player puts themselves at risk (see players lowering their heads to plow forward or Colt McCoy running then throwing at the last second).

However, I think that if the league is truly worried about safety and not just trying to add another penalty that gets the offense a free first down, the rule needs to be tweeked slightly.

This is a safety rule and thus it should have no baring on the actual game. Still, you need a deterrent... So I propose that the defensive player simply be ejected from the game no in-game penalty, no first down. HOWEVER, seeing as the rule is a safety rule, the offensive player is also ejected... hear me out, this would prevent players with concussions from even possibly slipping past evaluators and playing with a concussion.

From here fines and suspensions can be handed out as seen to be necessary although it would be nice to see offensive players who lower their heads etc. be punished as well if they put themselves in a dangerous situation.



These kinds of changes wouldn't fully balance it out but would go a long way to taking away some of the advantage that offenses in this league have.

descendency
01-04-2012, 05:17 PM
Remove the 5 yard illegal contact rule.

bucfan12
01-04-2012, 05:18 PM
Helmet to helmet hits are something Refs need a lot of training and film watch and instruction on.

I know the game is at full speed, but the Refs should get a 2nd pair of eyes from the replay officials in the booth when 1 is questioned. In my opinion, a lot of shoulder to shoulder and helmet to shoulder hits are getting called as Personal Fouls.

PackerLegend
01-04-2012, 05:19 PM
Remove the 5 yard illegal contact rule.

This is something I was going to say 3rd and 20 and its an automatic 1st down.

bucfan12
01-04-2012, 05:19 PM
Remove the 5 yard illegal contact rule.

Agree on that as well. Almost very little contact in holding. You can't play defense anymore it seems./

Sloopy
01-04-2012, 05:22 PM
Helmet to helmet hits are something Refs need a lot of training and film watch and instruction on.

I know the game is at full speed, but the Refs should get a 2nd pair of eyes from the replay officials in the booth when 1 is questioned. In my opinion, a lot of shoulder to shoulder and helmet to shoulder hits are getting called as Personal Fouls.

At least some way of discerning between what seem to be intentional leading with the helmet and hits that start at the chest and slide up to the helmet

Remove the 5 yard illegal contact rule.

I would like to see this as well, or at least a change to it. Unfortunately I really don't see a team removing rules already in place...

Basileus777
01-04-2012, 05:23 PM
I'd start with removing all automatic first downs from penalties. If the yardage is enough to get the first down then fine, but there's no reason or need for it to be automatic. 5 yards and a replayed down is more than enough compensation for something like illegal contact, anything more is ridiculous.

Sloopy
01-04-2012, 05:25 PM
I'd start with removing all automatic first downs from penalties. If the yardage is enough to get the first down then fine, but there's no reason or need for it to be automatic.

Unless of course they are willing to make some concessions to automatic fourth down penalties in the defenses favor :P

CJSchneider
01-04-2012, 06:05 PM
The hair outside the helmet rules needs to be adjusted.

boknows34
01-04-2012, 06:19 PM
They need to review all close calls in the endzone that may result in a touchdown, not just the ones that the officials have originally called a touchdown. Call it the ''Titus Young rule''.

The Lions were out of challenges and it cost them 4 points on that drive, in a game where they ended up losing by that same 4-point margin. Mike Pereria on FOX said he didn't like the current ruling and it makes common sense to review plays, like Young's catch, that were ruled incomplete but are close enough to check to see he had both feet inbounds.

descendency
01-04-2012, 06:20 PM
I'd start with removing all automatic first downs from penalties. If the yardage is enough to get the first down then fine, but there's no reason or need for it to be automatic. 5 yards and a replayed down is more than enough compensation for something like illegal contact, anything more is ridiculous.

Id say that there needs to be some reasonable changes to how a first down rule is implemented.

I also am a big fan of a clear path foul in the NFL. I know most won't be, but I've seen enough penalties that are only done to stop scores. It's really annoying.

boknows34
01-04-2012, 06:24 PM
Would also change defensive PI to 15 yards and automatic first down, unless its totally blatant where I'd keep it at the spot of the foul. There are too many 40 and 50 yd penalties on some ticky-tack flags.

phlysac
01-04-2012, 07:17 PM
I always hated a team getting 30-40 yards "spot-of-the-foul" on a minor interference.

Jango
01-04-2012, 07:18 PM
Would also change defensive PI to 15 yards and automatic first down, unless its totally blatant where I'd keep it at the spot of the foul. There are too many 40 and 50 yd penalties on some ticky-tack flags.

How on earth is a referee expected to make a distinction between a 'blatant' PI and accidental one? Subjectivity has, in my opinion, no place in the rules of a sport like football. Doing so will just lead to endless speculation and debate about why that crucial PI call last sunday was only a 15 instead of the 55 spot foul, for example. It's why I always thought the force out rule was pretty silly; how can official in real time determine whether or not the receiver was going to get both his feet down in bounds? Objectivity should be paramount to all new rule changes that may or may not be implemented into the NFL, in my opinion.

BaLLiN
01-04-2012, 07:23 PM
I want consistency, if you are going to call something one way it has to be called that way across the board. That incomplete Greg Jennings TD was stupid, Its clear Calvin Johnson had a TD two years ago yet his was incomplete and Jennings's was complete? give me a break.

ElectricEye
01-04-2012, 07:48 PM
I think taking away the Bill Polian rules is a good starting point. The 40 yard interference penalties that automatically assume the receiver was going to catch the ball simply need to go. Illegal contact needs to be adjusted for sure too.


Holding resulting in a loss of downs is an interesting idea, but I would need to think that one over a bit. The rules as they currently stand favor offenses for sure.

Helmet to helmet hits need to be taken out of the game, but I'm not sure liberally penalizing borderline calls really fixes that. I've seen some really bad "defenseless receiver" calls this year too. Not saying that they shouldn't have these rules, but the enforcement of them is defiantly poor right now.

Caulibflower
01-04-2012, 08:12 PM
Defensive PI should be like it is in college - 15 yards. None of this 40+ yard stuff. No guarantee the receiver's going to catch it, and it's still a positive play for the offense. If the DB's beat and has to interfere, that's still a positive play for the offense. No need to give them half the field for it. Something as simple as that could encourage DBs to be more aggressive while playing the ball, too. As the rules are now, most guys just have to chase throws and try to swat them down. Really takes away from what those matchup battles could be. I'd also try to find a way to make less PI calls in general. Call if it he grabs the receiver's jersey, hits him before the ball gets there, or obviously shoves him. I hate those calls where a DB puts his hand on a guy's side and the refs flag him for it. The receivers do it just as much, and I don't think it takes anything away from the game to allow receivers and defenders to battle for position. If it's two guys trying to be in the same place, I don't think contact should be penalized. As it is, they tend to referee it like receivers have a right to be anywhere they want to be, and defenders have to play the ball. Don't care for it.

I like the idea of holding penalties being a loss of down, but if I were to do that I'd make it a 5-yard penalty. Seems similar on the effect of the game as intentional grounding. Could the penalty be different on running plays and passing plays? Or returns? Because the effect on the game differs situationally.

I actually would kind of like to see catches only have to have 1 foot in-bounds. If you have possession and are in the field of play, I don't see why both feet have to touch. Only takes one to go out of bounds, why two to be in? If the ball only has to break the plane to be a score, why say both feet have to be down? But that's just me. Also don't like the "Has to make a football move for it to count as possession" rules. If a guy catches a ball and then immediately fumbles it... it wasn't an incomplete, he just fumbled it immediately. To me, if a guy grabs the football and clearly controls it, there's no reason to say he has to take a step or something for it to count as a catch. Just seems like another rule designed to give offenses mulligans. It's the receiver's job to secure the ball as soon as possible, and if a defender gets there before he can cover up and knocks the ball out... that's a good play for the defense. We all know what I'm talking about here. Guy catches a curl route or something, turns, and-POP balls coms flying out, but because it happened "fast" the refs call it an incomplete. But in reality, the guy caught it and then it got knocked out. I mean, it seriously seems like the arguments are of the "well, there's no way he could've held onto that" variety, which, to me, is just a positive for whatever defender was there to hit him as soon as he...caught..the ball.

For clarity, I don't mean plays where the ball was still moving, but the ones where the ball is obviously secured. If a guy is palming the ball, a la Calvin Johnson, that, to me, is control and therefore a catch. Anything else is just requiring something in addition to the catch itself for the catch to count.

Sloopy
01-04-2012, 08:33 PM
Defensive PI should be like it is in college - 15 yards. None of this 40+ yard stuff. No guarantee the receiver's going to catch it, and it's still a positive play for the offense. If the DB's beat and has to interfere, that's still a positive play for the offense. No need to give them half the field for it. Something as simple as that could encourage DBs to be more aggressive while playing the ball, too. As the rules are now, most guys just have to chase throws and try to swat them down. Really takes away from what those matchup battles could be. I'd also try to find a way to make less PI calls in general. Call if it he grabs the receiver's jersey, hits him before the ball gets there, or obviously shoves him. I hate those calls where a DB puts his hand on a guy's side and the refs flag him for it. The receivers do it just as much, and I don't think it takes anything away from the game to allow receivers and defenders to battle for position. If it's two guys trying to be in the same place, I don't think contact should be penalized. As it is, they tend to referee it like receivers have a right to be anywhere they want to be, and defenders have to play the ball. Don't care for it.

I like the idea of holding penalties being a loss of down, but if I were to do that I'd make it a 5-yard penalty. Seems similar on the effect of the game as intentional grounding. Could the penalty be different on running plays and passing plays? Or returns? Because the effect on the game differs situationally.

I actually would kind of like to see catches only have to have 1 foot in-bounds. If you have possession and are in the field of play, I don't see why both feet have to touch. Only takes one to go out of bounds, why two to be in? If the ball only has to break the plane to be a score, why say both feet have to be down? But that's just me. Also don't like the "Has to make a football move for it to count as possession" rules. If a guy catches a ball and then immediately fumbles it... it wasn't an incomplete, he just fumbled it immediately. To me, if a guy grabs the football and clearly controls it, there's no reason to say he has to take a step or something for it to count as a catch. Just seems like another rule designed to give offenses mulligans. It's the receiver's job to secure the ball as soon as possible, and if a defender gets there before he can cover up and knocks the ball out... that's a good play for the defense. We all know what I'm talking about here. Guy catches a curl route or something, turns, and-POP balls coms flying out, but because it happened "fast" the refs call it an incomplete. But in reality, the guy caught it and then it got knocked out. I mean, it seriously seems like the arguments are of the "well, there's no way he could've held onto that" variety, which, to me, is just a positive for whatever defender was there to hit him as soon as he...caught..the ball.

For clarity, I don't mean plays where the ball was still moving, but the ones where the ball is obviously secured. If a guy is palming the ball, a la Calvin Johnson, that, to me, is control and therefore a catch. Anything else is just requiring something in addition to the catch itself for the catch to count.

This is the one I would really like to see, and I agree about 5 yards. Sacks rarely go for 10 yards. I am not sure what would be the answer to the run. I do find that most holding calls occur on pass plays or after the player has run through the hole on a run play (i.e. a receiver holding downfield).

Maybe on a run play where the ball has already passed the LOS it could just be a loss of down and the ball is placed at the original LOS?

badgerbacker
01-04-2012, 08:41 PM
1. In regards to holding:

PI results in the ball being spotted where the penalty occurred and a first down (the assumption being that if the PI didn't occur the receiver would catch the ball for the first down).

Following the same logic, a holding penalty results in a ten yard penalty (assumed sack) however the down is replayed. It would be nice to see this turn into a loss of down penalty (similar to an intentional grounding) as the loss of yardage and loss of down would make more sense as an assumed sack.

2. In regards to offensive pass interference:

I would like this to change to more of what it is in high school football. You could leave it a ten yard penalty but, again, make it a loss of down penalty.

3. In regards to helmet-to-helmet hits:

I personally feel this more than any is a rule that needs to be retracted but seeing as the league is now so concerned with "safety" it will likely be here to stay. Still, I would like to see some of the onus for these hits being put on offensive players as well. As the rules stand now, the penalties only affect defensive players (15 yards penalty, suspensions, fines etc).

Now I'm not trying to completely excuse certain players but I think in certain cases the offensive player puts themselves at risk (see players lowering their heads to plow forward or Colt McCoy running then throwing at the last second).

However, I think that if the league is truly worried about safety and not just trying to add another penalty that gets the offense a free first down, the rule needs to be tweeked slightly.

This is a safety rule and thus it should have no baring on the actual game. Still, you need a deterrent... So I propose that the defensive player simply be ejected from the game no in-game penalty, no first down. HOWEVER, seeing as the rule is a safety rule, the offensive player is also ejected... hear me out, this would prevent players with concussions from even possibly slipping past evaluators and playing with a concussion.

From here fines and suspensions can be handed out as seen to be necessary although it would be nice to see offensive players who lower their heads etc. be punished as well if they put themselves in a dangerous situation.



These kinds of changes wouldn't fully balance it out but would go a long way to taking away some of the advantage that offenses in this league have.

For your holding example, they would have to create a new penalty of "holding to prevent a sack" to distinguish it from other holding calls. There shouldn't be a loss of down if a receiver is holding 20 yards down the field on a running play or if there is holding on a punt return. Also, if they did add the loss of down I think 5 yards would be a more suitable punishment.

I agree with you on changing Defensive PI to a flat 15 yard penalty.

In regards to helmet to helmet, I don't think you are quite thinking through your "eject the victim" idea. If this was the case, I'm pretty sure you would see a lot of superstar QBs getting thrown out of close games when some 4th string LBer goes for a headshot. I can see requiring a concussion test to be administered to headshot victims before they can return, but you can't just assume everyone has a concussion and throw them out.

Brent
01-04-2012, 09:03 PM
make it like college, 15 yards for PI, not spot of the foul.

Sloopy
01-04-2012, 09:20 PM
For your holding example, they would have to create a new penalty of "holding to prevent a sack" to distinguish it from other holding calls. There shouldn't be a loss of down if a receiver is holding 20 yards down the field on a running play or if there is holding on a punt return. Also, if they did add the loss of down I think 5 yards would be a more suitable punishment.

I agree with you on changing Defensive PI to a flat 15 yard penalty.

In regards to helmet to helmet, I don't think you are quite thinking through your "eject the victim" idea. If this was the case, I'm pretty sure you would see a lot of superstar QBs getting thrown out of close games when some 4th string LBer goes for a headshot. I can see requiring a concussion test to be administered to headshot victims before they can return, but you can't just assume everyone has a concussion and throw them out.


I see what you mean but no matter what rule you make, there will always be players/teams who try to bend them or use them to their own advantage.

The reasoning for the ejection of both players would be:

A. for the players safety. If the NFL is really worried about player safety this SHOULD be the rule. While many concussive symptoms are present immediately, the only way to be sure that one does not have a concussion is through observation over a period of time. Even if a player is cleared, why take the risk?

B. Makes this penalty seem less like another offensive advantage. Rarely are accidents (in any walk of life) 100% the result of one persons actions. Yet these penalties strictly target the defensive player and don't take into account any compiling actions of the offensive player.

For example: In soccer, if a player dips their head below the waist (IIRC how low) to make a play on the ball, they receive a penalty for "dangerous play" as they have put themselves in a situation where they could sustain serious injury.

I don't think it can be so simply put as both should be ejected and there would probably have to be a lot of wording based on different scenarios. Still, the current rule needs to be changed

OzTitan
01-04-2012, 09:48 PM
The only problem I see changing PI to a static yardage rather than a spot penalty is it will possibly make refs more inclined to call it since it isn't as devastating, plus it might actually increase passing yardage slightly since it will extend drives like PI does but with more field left.

I like the sounds of modifying the illegal contact 5y penalty to be more defensive friendly. If something isn't done soon there is a risk of devaluing the QB position in the NFL IMO - it's gotta remain a very hard position to do well at or who cares about elite skills if average is good enough? That's a bit of a long term alarmist view but it could happen without some serious thought put into balancing the game again. The best time to act is when the inbalance is young.

jrdrylie
01-05-2012, 08:44 AM
I don't like the fact that some pass interference calls result in a 40-yard penalty. But it needs to stay that way. I've told this story before, it's about the ACC Championship Game between Wake Forest and Georgia Tech. On about half of Georgia Tech's play, Reggie Ball threw the ball as far as he could to Calvin Johnson. Wake knew they couldn't stop him, so they did everything they could to interfere with him. They pushed him out of bounds. They pulled his arms down. They even tackled him five seconds before the ball arrived. Why? Because it is better to have a 15-yard penalty called on you than it is to be beat for a 60-yard TD.

Caulibflower
01-05-2012, 04:20 PM
Just remembered one I read somewhere and thought it was a great idea. Instead of moving the kickoffs up five yards, which really doesn't do anything but reduce the number of kickoffs, just have the kicking team line up on the 30 yard line and run it like a normal play where they can't move until the ball is in motion. Kickoffs aren't any safer; the league just made it so there are less of them. I love the return game, and it's a shame that only half the kickoffs were returned last year. So if you want it to be safer, slow down the coverage teams. That seems to me like it would work just as well. Football isn't a safe game - we all know that. No sport is. There's always the possibility of injury. But I think the difference between gunners running full speed from the 30 and having to start from the 30 would be fairly significant, and wouldn't deprive us of so many exciting plays.

SuperPacker
01-05-2012, 05:36 PM
I dont agree with taking away the spot for PI. If a guy is beat, then he purposely interferes with him it should not only be a 15 yard penalty. Then you would just see blatant PI down field on long throws when the defender is beat.

If you're a cornerback 40 yards down field and the QB throws a ball to the receiver which you think will be caught you could just tackle the receiver before the ball got to him and it would only be a 15 yard penalty.

That seems absurd to me.

Raiderz4Life
01-05-2012, 05:43 PM
Bring back the clothes line.

descendency
01-05-2012, 06:44 PM
I dont agree with taking away the spot for PI. If a guy is beat, then he purposely interferes with him it should not only be a 15 yard penalty. Then you would just see blatant PI down field on long throws when the defender is beat.

If you're a cornerback 40 yards down field and the QB throws a ball to the receiver which you think will be caught you could just tackle the receiver before the ball got to him and it would only be a 15 yard penalty.

That seems absurd to me.

You're right. On 40 yard pass plays, if the penalty is 15 yards then it is mathematically to your advantage to interfere.

I hate the spot foul, but it's necessary, sadly.

edit: Another thing that is not intuitive is that it is beneficial to offensively interfere with the DB. The 10 yard penalty is a joke. It needs to be 10 yards and a loss of down.

They need to review all close calls in the endzone that may result in a touchdown, not just the ones that the officials have originally called a touchdown. Call it the ''Titus Young rule''.

The Lions were out of challenges and it cost them 4 points on that drive, in a game where they ended up losing by that same 4-point margin. Mike Pereria on FOX said he didn't like the current ruling and it makes common sense to review plays, like Young's catch, that were ruled incomplete but are close enough to check to see he had both feet inbounds.

Just review all plays that might be controversial and call it the "Kevin Faulk" rule. (4th and 2) If college can do it, so can the pros. The bulk of plays won't have to be reviewed, but obvious "critical" plays should be stopped and reviewed.

I want consistency, if you are going to call something one way it has to be called that way across the board. That incomplete Greg Jennings TD was stupid, Its clear Calvin Johnson had a TD two years ago yet his was incomplete and Jennings's was complete? give me a break.

I still think that CJ dropped touchdown was a drop. I never felt like he had control of the ball. Just my opinion or maybe we are talking about two different plays.

brat316
01-05-2012, 06:51 PM
here is the rule they should make. Force all players to wear all the pads, even mouth piece. So many guys play without knee and thigh and tail pads. A lot of concussions can also be reduced by wearing proper chin and mouth piece.

descendency
01-05-2012, 06:58 PM
here is the rule they should make. Force all players to wear all the pads, even mouth piece. So many guys play without knee and thigh and tail pads. A lot of concussions can also be reduced by wearing proper chin and mouth piece.

I agree with you, but I agree with JoePa more. Just remove the padding and the violent hits will go away.

I stand by the removing the 5 yard contact rule. That would do more to remove concussions than any other rule change. When WRs and DBs are much closer together, there will be far fewer violent hits. Hits to the head won't be nearly as bad. The really bad hits are the ones where the DB is running full force and launches into the receiver. That would basically be stopped.

But the NFL isn't on a safety crusade, they're just selling a more sellable product.

Iamcanadian
01-05-2012, 07:09 PM
I don't think there will be any significant changes to the rules because BP wasn't the only one who wanted the changes that happened, a majority wanted every change that was put forward.
The only change possible is the process in a catch rule, sooner or later this rule will decide a playoff game or the Super Bowl and the howls will go up around the football nation, maybe enough to bring some sense to the NFL.

Sloopy
01-06-2012, 07:59 AM
here is the rule they should make. Force all players to wear all the pads, even mouth piece. So many guys play without knee and thigh and tail pads. A lot of concussions can also be reduced by wearing proper chin and mouth piece.

This. There is a reason why it is required at the Pee Wee level.

wogitalia
01-06-2012, 09:15 AM
For mine the main rules I'd like to see changed/added are as follows...

Pass Interference - Should just mimic the college rules here for DPI. 15 yards or spot of foul, whichever is the lesser.

Illegal Contact - Again, should copy college rules, contact should be legal between receiver and defender until the ball is in the air and always be legal behind the LOS.

Review of every red zone play - So any plays made within the redzone are reviewed and if there is any evidence to suggest an incorrect call has been made.

Personal Fouls should all be reviewed - There were so many "helmet to helmet" hits this year that was just completely wrong and it is way too harsh a penalty on the defense for often making a perfect defensive play(Saints vs Giants game comes to mind instantly). It is easy to review a personal foul and determine if it is correct. This would encompass defenseless players, face masks and any other. We have the technology so get it right, things like when a QB has their helmet grazed by a hand would then be overturned. At least this way only the actual helmet to helmet and genuine roughing the passers, etc, are going to impact the game, especially when considered these are ejectable offenses often. (All this is based on the fact that the NFL will never remove a rule).

Kickoffs moved back 10 yards - They are fun to watch and every touch back is a downer as a fan.

Personal foul calls can be challenged - This would complement the above rule and be particularly useful for where a clear face mask is missed, it's probably not needed if the above is implemented but I don't see any reason why not, the reasons for those are clear and often wrong and again, the penalty is just so harsh.

OPI should be a loss of down penalty - For obvious reasons imo.

Get rid of celebration penalties - I think they should be exclusively for if someone uses a prop, anything else goes for mine, it's meant to be fun.

Not sure on the holding idea, if you did implement it, it would have to be something similar to the NCAA DPI rules, spot of foul or loss of 5/10. I'd actually like a behind the LOS and in front of the LOS difference, so 5 yard penalty and loss of down behind the LOS(assumed sack) and 10 and loss of down in front of the line, or something similar.

Most of the rules are fine as they are which is a real credit to the NFL, the personal foul stuff they've created a real mess on just because they are the hardest thing to get right amongst everything else and are wrong in most games and carry the harshest penalties.