Rules you'd like to change

[Midnightangel]

1) DPI/OPI should be reviewable. This is a penalty that can drastically change field position. At present, the call stands the way the zebra made it. And while we're at it, how about we start being as stringent at calling OPI as we are at calling DPI.

2) As long as the HC is getting his challenges right, keep giving them to him. It's not his fault the ref is having a bad day.

3) Carry unused time outs over to the second half. You've got 2 in your pocket from the first half? You now have 5 for the second half. You should be rewarded for great play in the first part of the game.

 

[BOTSLAYER]

1. I think every thing should be reviewable and common sense should be allowed. Like when Mike Alstott was pushing towards the goal line and what was clearly his ball carrying elbow very clearly came down backwards and before the endzone. The TD call was upheld because the ball was not clearly visible in that hand.

2. Agree

3. No, there are plenty of commercials. Unless you make it 4 total TOs, I would be ok with that.


First I would keep blood samples to test in the future for stuff we did not know people were using (how Lance Armstrong was busted).

Next, until they these guys are back to their normal non PED enhanced size I would remove all protective gear except mouth guards and cups. This will keep people from using their bodies as weapons.

 

[BOTSLAYER]

I think they fixed the Lions rule?

If a coach throws the challenge flag on a play already being reviewed it is no longer reviewed.

 

[JDM]

1. No. It should be subjective, and reviewing subjective calls like most penalties is a bad idea.
2. I'm in favor of this. Or a college style replay assistant who takes care of challenging obvious close plays.
3. No. Three timeouts in a half is enough

 

[BOTSLAYER]

Unless locker rooms are coed, and nobody told me, women should not be in mens locker rooms and men should not be in womens.

There is no reason the press needs to be in there anyways. there are plenty of places to stir up an article and get a quote. I believe it is called a press conference?

 

[JDM]

I think they fixed the Lions rule?

If a coach throws the challenge flag on a play already being reviewed it is no longer reviewed.

I don't think it's an issue. It only effects anything if you throw the flag while the play is in progress, not any situation where a review would occur. If you can't wait until the play is over, you deserve to be penalized (not reviewing may be harsh, but a 15 yard penalty I'm cool with).

 

[buried_in_snow]

Get rid of the HC's having limited challenges to get a call right on the field.

Why the onus is on the HC to determine if a call is correct or not, makes absolutely no sense. That's the ref's responsibility.

And sometimes there's more than 3 shitty calls a game. Why should plays that, typically, come later in the game go unreviewed versus ones earlier?

The NCAAF has replay dialed in pretty much. Do what they do and get it right. And no, it doesn't slow the game down. They're replaying any "iffy" plays while the ball is being set and teams are breaking huddles.

 

[JDM]

For my own suggestions, bring the old kickoff back and use more common sense when calling leading with the head fouls.

 

[packerzrule]

that the ground cannot cause a fumble

I hate that manby pamby shit. Back in the day, you held onto that rock and if it came loose, it was a God Damn fumble. Period

 

[JDM]

that the ground cannot cause a fumble

I hate that manby pamby shit. Back in the day, you held onto that rock and if it came loose, it was a God Damn fumble. Period

If you're already down you're already down. Did they just fight for the ball on the ground?

 

[threelittleturds]

1) I like the idea of the choice to challenge PI, since it is often a massive momentum and field position swing. Although, since it is subjective I think it would rarely be reversed. All you would get is a second opinion on if that much contact was too much contact.

2) Definitely like this idea.

3) Nope, because then some games would go on foreeeeever.

I wish they'd repeal this thing they are adding this year... the thing about flagging runners because they put their head down. That is going to be tragic when some team busts out a big run and then it all comes back just because a RB put his head down. This will just be a penalty they use to help teams win that have shitty rush defenses... like teams that give up 300 yards on the ground in the playoffs.

 

[TDs3nOut]

I dislike how determining what is or is not a catch has gotten so complicated. I'd rather live with some mistaken calls if only for the sake of simplicity. Besides, it's not as if the current rules eliminate mistakes (e.g., Golden Tate "TD catch" against the Packers).

Also, I really think that making PI reviewable is a bad idea. Like someone already mentioned, that is too subjective to determine on replay.

 

[RobToxin]

Get rid of the whole "calling a timeout just as the ball is kicked to ice the kicker". Once both teams have lined up and or set, no one should be able to call a timeout before the ball is snapped.

 

[SonnyCID]

In theory these sound great. We would like to continue to improve the outcome by making sure that every single rule is followed and have the winner decided with less question marks.

But do you we really need to add more rules and stop the clock even more?

As much as I would like for the game to be perfect, I'm tired of rule changes/additions and clock stoppage. At some point you're just going to need to play the game at some level that it was meant to be played, mistakes and all.

 

[SonnyCID]

Get rid of the whole "calling a timeout just as the ball is kicked to ice the kicker". Once both teams have lined up and or set, no one should be able to call a timeout before the ball is snapped.

Would this rule only exist on FGs or would it be any play? And if it were only for FGs, what if the coach or defensive-ST player reads that it's going to be a fake, he cant call a TO to try and stop it?

 

[RobToxin]

Would this rule only exist on FGs or would it be any play? And if it were only for FGs, what if the coach or defensive-ST player reads that it's going to be a fake, he cant call a TO to try and stop it?

He better do so before the players are all set. Otherwise, you play with what you got.

 

[SonnyCID]

He better do so before the players are all set. Otherwise, you play with what you got.

So, would it be on every down or just FGs? Either way you're removing a ton of strategy and giving yet another advantage to the team with the ball.

 

[RobToxin]

Just on kicks. Teams don't tend to abuse that timeout like that on regular offensive/defensive plays.

Want to call a timeout to ice the kicker, you do so before the players get set.

 

[packerzrule]

If you're already down you're already down. Did they just fight for the ball on the ground?

therein lies the point - the Down By Contact rule was modified in the early some 8-10 years ago. Prior to that, if you landed on your arm and the football came loose - it was a fumble.

Hold on to the fucking ball and you wouldn't have to worry about such nonsense

 

[threelittleturds]

Oh, another rule that needs to go is that one where any contact to a QB above the head is roughing the passer. That is ridiculous that if a rusher so much as touches the helmet, its a 15 yard penalty. My 49ers even benefited from that once when some guy trying to get his hand up in the passing lane and came down and grazed Kaepernick's helmet... personal foul, 15 yards (I think it was the NFCCG). It is ridiculous.

I could understand if someone was dropping the hammer on QBs after the pass, but if your hand just grazes the helmet... c'mon...