The Football Thread

[MHSL82]

Don't allow stiff arms.

Allow stiff arms, there’s no reason where the player with the ball just has to run until tackled. They are not in strait jackets. But like grabbing the helmet would clearly be unfair. Punching a player to bruise his arm, etc. is unnecessary. Stuff arming someone’s neck is already not allowed and doing it “down there” is also subject to penalty but is subjective.

 

[nuraman00]

In basketball you can go out of bounds and come back in as long as you establish yourself.

I've never seen this happen.

 

[nuraman00]

It’s like when Scottie Pippen threw the ball off for players back. He was the first player to touch the ball after that.

I think this is ok, because the player whose back it hit, touched the ball first, with his back.

 

[nuraman00]

Get rid of lateral passes. They're a waste of time.

Every pass must be forward by an inch past the line of scrimmage.

Or maybe past the thrower, not the line of scrimmage. So if you get tackled before the line of scrimmage, you can still lose yards, like before.

If the throw is not forward by one inch, then it's an incomplete pass and the down is over.

 

[MHSL82]

I've never seen this happen.

Now I’m starting to think that you watch football more than basketball. This happens often enough.

 

[MHSL82]

I think this is ok, because the player whose back it hit, touched the ball first, with his back.

So did the defensive player in football…?

 

[MHSL82]

Get rid of lateral passes. They're a waste of time.

Every pass must be forward by an inch past the line of scrimmage.

Or maybe past the thrower, not the line of scrimmage. So if you get tackled before the line of scrimmage, you can still lose yards, like before.

If the throw is not forward by one inch, then it's an incomplete pass and the down is over.

But then we would lose this play:
I feel you want to kill football. this is like someone who thinks that taxes should not exist in here didn’t understand that. I’m not saying you don’t understand football or taxes or anything, I’m just saying it seems like you’re trying to make things simple for no reason besides being simple for someone who doesn’t watch it often. For those who watch football often, these rules are pretty interesting. And makes football interesting. Of course, there are some stupid rules. Ano stupid enforcement, but I feel your suggestion just water it down to be as simple as stupid as soccer. and that is great for soccer because many people love it, it’s just not good for football.

this is like those who complain about learning English. It really isn’t that difficult to be OK at it. There’s not that many rules that you’ll have to learn in order to speak it. Once you learn those few rules and vocabulary, you just tweak your language as you go. Just listen to people speak and figure it out.

Whereas Chinese, it has a different alphabet characters meaning that it’s drawings and not letters. It has sounds exactly the same but mean different words. I know English has words that are sounding the same, but it’s not the same degree. And we don’t have so many intonations where you have to speak up one vowel, speak down another vowel, bouncing another vowel and sustained a sound for another vowel. It’s really annoying for me to ever have to try to speak it.

 

[nuraman00]

So did the defensive player in football…?

Yes, but in basketball, you start a possession out of bounds, sometimes.

You don't start it out of bounds in football.

If after a punt, the opposing team catches it in their own end zone, then I think they start at the 20 yard line. I think.

Is the quarterback allowed to run backwards into his own end zone, without a 2 point safety play?

 

[nuraman00]

Of course, there are some stupid rules.

Which rules are stupid?

 

[nuraman00]

this is like those who complain about learning English. It really isn’t that difficult to be OK at it. There’s not that many rules that you’ll have to learn in order to speak it. Once you learn those few rules and vocabulary, you just tweak your language as you go. Just listen to people speak and figure it out.

English is easier than most other foreign languages, IMO.

Other languages have more tenses. And the rules for conjugating verbs are more complex.

And you have to consider if you are speaking to a "familiar" person, or a not "familiar" person.

 

[nuraman00]

It’s really annoying for me to ever have to try to speak it.

You're the first person I heard who said it's annoying to speak. I learned a new opinion.

 

[nuraman00]

I’m just saying it seems like you’re trying to make things simple for no reason besides being simple for someone who doesn’t watch it often.

Some of my suggestions, yes.

Some, have nothing to do with simplicity. Like the stiff arm thing isn't about simplicity. I don't like how the offensive player can do something that the defensive player will never do.

Also, the drastic change to have a shot clock, and only allow forward passes, would make it NOT like soccer.

 

[nuraman00]

I also didn't know, until the past 12 months, that only certain offensive players can touch the ball.

So linebackers can't be used to run or catch the ball.

Although a tight end can do either (block, or be used as a scorer), depending on what the coach wants for a given play.

 

[MHSL82]

Yes, but in basketball, you start a possession out of bounds, sometimes.

You don't start it out of bounds in football.

If after a punt, the opposing team catches it in their own end zone, then I think they start at the 20 yard line. I think.

Is the quarterback allowed to run backwards into his own end zone, without a 2 point safety play?

Anyone can run into the opposite end zone without a safety if they don’t get tackled or go out of the end zone.

 

[nuraman00]

Anyone can run into the opposite end zone without a safety if they don’t get tackled or whatever end zone.

Thanks.

 

[MHSL82]

Which rules are stupid?

Soccer.

Just kidding. I know that this would make you crazy, but if you fumble into the end zone that you’re trying to get into and out of the end zone, that can be a turnover. So sometimes somebody is jumping towards the end zone and fumbles right before they get there and it goes out of the end zone. Instead of being a fumble out of bounds down at that spot, it becomes the other teams ball at the 20 yard line. I’m not sure if that is both NFL or just college.

That’s the only stupid rule I can think of besides just putting an emphasis on not fumbling. I feel like you already have the risk of turning the ball over by fumbling so that you don’t need an extra incentive of the end zone being a turnover.

They used to have a field goal post on the field, and I imagine that caused a few injuries. In rugby you have to touch the ball to the end zone to score and I think that used to be a rule In football.

There are stupid ways of trying to enforce the rules by determining what is considered a catch and what is not or what is roughing the passer and what is not. They used to have issues with not being able to have instant replay.

There are things that are designed for safety in one situation, but not in others. So, for example, a runner can be hit in a certain way, whereas a quarterback can’t, but if the quarterback becomes a runner by rushing the ball, he’s just like any other runner. There are still some protection of course on where you can hit a player in general, but the emphasis they have on quarterback safety is gone once the quarterback no longer becomes a passer.

There’s a rule against horse collar tackle’s, where they grab the shoulder pads in a certain way around the collarbone. You can’t do that, except for a quarterback or other player, passing the ball inside the pocket, because they determined that it was too hard for the defense to not do that in the pocket. But once they get outside of the middle of the field, they can’t tackle that way. I think it has to do with angles or something. It’s not very common and I don’t see defenders abusing it yet, so I don’t think that is a “stupid rule” just one that I don’t understand very well.

I don’t like how games can any ties, but then again, I understand it because it’s a violent sport. Unless it’s in a playoff game, it’s not really important determinant winner for a given game. If you can’t win the game, your percentage is lower and so everyone’s trying to win unless they want to get a good draft pick.

Speaking about draft picks, the worst team gets the topic. No lottery. I could see how that could be an issue, but this year, the team that was going to get the number one pick one at the last second of the game on a Hail Mary where they would’ve been better off losing the game. The current players want to do well and the coach wants to keep his job. The coach isn’t interested in increasing the chances of his next coach having a good draft pick. The quarterback is an interested in giving the team a better chance of getting a good quarterback in the draft. The same thing, a basketball, I guess, but you can have two point guards in basketball but it’s not common to have two quarterbacks in football. still competing for starting and minutes, but otherwise you might want Weynbeyama (spelling?).

I talked about how a quarterback or other runner can get himself up by sliding and a college quarterback, pretended to slide, but instead around for another 20 yards. That could be a stupid rule in which it could be fixed, but subjectively when the referee feels that the slide is being initiated, that’s when the play is over, even if it is not in fact a slide. Of course, that’s going to be argument on whether he in fact was pretending to slide or not. Sports always has players being two-faced.

Here’s one for you that you probably don’t like, there are certain times, where when a ball is fumbled, the office can advance it, and times were only the defense get rancid. And the reason for this is because I don’t want to many purposeful, fumbles forward or backwards, I suppose. I don’t know the exact rules on this because it doesn’t usually come in to play much. In other words, most times you can advance, just a certain situation where you can’t. You can still recover the ball, but the ball is down there.

There is one interesting rule where if the defender touches the ball after a punt the ball is still alive, but it’s also dead at the same time. What that means is that if the offensive player grabs the ball after the defender touched it, and then he fumbled it, he doesn’t really lose the ball because the play was over where the defender touched it. But if that offensive player returns it for again, then the ball is down wherever the player gets to.

If a defender starts a play before the play is started, it’s called encroachment (?), and sometimes the quarterback basically gets a “free play where the result of the play because it was the defense fault has no negative consequence. So if that was an interception, it doesn’t really matter because the play is over at the time the defender started incorrectly. But if the offense throws or runs for a gain or a touchdown, then he gets that result. That’s why it’s called the Free Play.

One thing I don’t like how they call sometimes it is when they pull the whistle because they believe that the player has forward progress and they determined that he couldn’t go any further. This play a stop there for safety of the players. You obviously shouldn’t be able to pick up a player and run them backwards for 20 yards. Alex Smith lost a game that he would’ve gone to the Super Bowl because the referee blew the whistle while the other team was still going forward and fumbled the ball. They blew the whistle so his fumbled didn’t count. There were two games like this in the playoffs, one was just more important because it was in the fourth quarter.

This is not really a rule issue, but it could be adjusted by adjusting the rule: there was a coach who challenged a play, saying that the player did not catch the ball, even though the player caught it and ran 8 yards with it. He challenged the call because that player fumbled at the end of the play and the whistle had blown. His argument was that the ball came out before the whistle was blown, but that wasn’t challengeable so when he challenged the catch, the whole play was reviewed. The Chiefs lost the ball in that play as well. I get that it’s smart, but it seems disingenuine, that if it’s not challengeable, that should not be challengeable. Or they should open it up to be challengeable and that’s that. But I feel that if he says that he’s challenging to catch. The NFL should be able to say it was a catch.

Just like that example I talked about spiking the ball or taking a knee being important for the quarterback to know, a player should also know that a kickoff is live and so you have to get the ball and down it. There was a game where the receiver didn’t remember that and let the ball just sit and so the defense ran and grabbed it in the end zone for a touchdown. i’m not sure if that is both college and NFL.

Actually, the stupidest rule is that the quarterback for Houston was able to go get basically a fully guaranteed contract in Cleveland despite having 28+ women accused him of sexually assaulting them. (I said basically because I don’t think it actually was fully guaranteed, it’s just a high amount.) I’m not saying that the allegations are true necessarily or that he should never be able to play football, I just thought it was crazy that it seemed that the time where the team would have the most leverage in contract negotiations, they gave him, a crazy contract. And no, he is not as good as the best quarterbacks. He had years left on his contract so in order to walk at his amount being offered, he would have to sit out for a long time. Even then, the team can choose to “franchise“ the player, which means they have to stay with the team for that year. They can do that three times. By the time that all those years are gone, he’s much older. He could sit out the whole way if you wanted to, but then he wouldn’t be owed the money.

 

[MHSL82]

English is easier than most other foreign languages, IMO.

Other languages have more tenses. And the rules for conjugating verbs are more complex.

And you have to consider if you are speaking to a "familiar" person, or a not "familiar" person.

There was a comedian who complained about how a vase needing a gender was stupid. It might not have been a vase, but the point was having an object have to have a gender was stupid.

In Chinese, ta means he or she when spoken. The written word is different for a he or a she, but the spoken word is the same. So when you’re explaining something, and there’s a boy and a girl involved, you have to know who is who by context. when a song is sung, the tones that use are altered in order to fit the song but then once you do that, it’s not clear what they are saying without context. Most times it’s fine because you would imagine that one is not talking about a dog when they are singing about love or something, even though I love my dog. In other words, most often the context is obvious.

 

[MHSL82]

Some of my suggestions, yes.

Some, have nothing to do with simplicity. Like the stiff arm thing isn't about simplicity. I don't like how the offensive player can do something that the defensive player will never do.

Also, the drastic change to have a shot clock, and only allow forward passes, would make it NOT like soccer.

Let me know when you’re able to watch the YouTube video in response to the lateral pass. There are some col plays where one thinks the game is over but there are multiple backwards passes where someone eventually gets loose. I think one has to accept the premise in order to enjoy those, but I think that they are entertaining. Of course if it’s my team losing, it’s upsetting.

I think, allowing more forward passes or only allowing forward passes, would change the game so much that a play really doesn’t have a natural beginning or end, which is what makes football different than soccer, in my opinion. Even basketball can go on forever if the ball doesn’t go out of bounds or in the basket or a foul/travel being called. Football is basically, with the exception of a few plays in history is over pretty quickly. However long it takes for somebody to run 100 yards is basically the longest play except for in crazy situations.

I feel that allowing multiple forward passes it would be like having a transition the whole game of the basketball. Or it’s sort of like when you want to play half court basketball at the gym but somebody suggest having for court. Then you’re going to have some people there designed to be on one side of the court because they’re obviously not athletes. In the real game that wouldn’t happen that way, but it would be a different strategy. If you could keep on just running and then just go to the next player you see. That’s why I was saying it would be like lacrosse or soccer. if there was no such thing as rugby, I could see an argument for having a game that allows what you’re talking about, I’m just saying to take the game that exists and to change it for simplicity sake or whatever, changes it for those people who do enjoy it.

 

[MHSL82]

Some of my suggestions, yes.

Some, have nothing to do with simplicity. Like the stiff arm thing isn't about simplicity. I don't like how the offensive player can do something that the defensive player will never do.

Also, the drastic change to have a shot clock, and only allow forward passes, would make it NOT like soccer.

It’s not the offensive player‘s fault the defense does not want to use a stiff arm because they have no advantage. If you do something that has no advantage, and it could cause injury, it’s unnecessary. But for the offensive player that has the ball, it is necessary to kind of push somebody away because they’re not running in strait jackets. They should be able to keep the other player from tackling you. Either side can do a stiff arm I believe so I’ve never seen a situation where the defense needed to wear. It isn’t unnecessary. When the defense intercepts the ball, the person with the ball can stiff arm. like many other rules, I don’t like making them if it’s not something that practically happens. It’s not like people are going around the field stuff anrming everyone. It’s only one player who does, the player with the ball. The defense knows this, and therefore can maneuver to avoid it.

But I do think if you said it and just go punch, anyone you want, it would happen more often. In fact, the guy that got hurt in the Buccaneers game yesterday it seemed that his neck was pulled for no reason because all it was necessary to get them down even if he had caught the ball was to touch him. But his head was grabbed.

 

[MHSL82]

I also didn't know, until the past 12 months, that only certain offensive players can touch the ball.

So linebackers can't be used to run or catch the ball.

Although a tight end can do either (block, or be used as a scorer), depending on what the coach wants for a given play.

You can declare before the play that someone is eligible to catch the ball. I don’t know if you can declare those players eligible every single play and if any team is ever decided to do it.

The reason why they have certain players ineligible, is it that it would be too easy for a quarterback to pass the ball to someone if anyone can catch it. if you watch a game without that knowledge, I think you would have so many time in the game warriors asking yourself why doesn’t a quarterback to stay with that guy. well, if he could, he would, and there would be no real chance for the defense.

There needs to be limits in order to avoid a free-for-all. If you couldn’t tackle the quarterback, that would be unfair. If you couldn’t pressure him, that would be unfair. If you didn’t have to dribble the ball, that would be unfair. Maybe both sides could do it, but then it would be like a free-for-all.

You need to have boundaries in order to, make a game work. I feel that if you could pass it to anybody in any direction, it would basically be like rugby. I keep repeating myself, but that’s what it is. If you basically just allowed the ball to go out there and then it never ends until you don’t do one of those things that are really easy to avoid not doing (being tackled would be very easy to avoid. If you could just pass the ball any direction). Ye would just never get tackled.

There are certain rules that are in place to avoid someone from abusing a situation. The clock stops when a player is noticeably injured. Well, not the play, but the clock after the play is over stops until the player can get medical attention. People can fake injuries, and so they will stop the clock, but if it’s the last two minutes of the game, they can takeoff some time off the clock, so that the team that is trying to run out the clock isn’t disadvantaged by the injury. It’s not like a penalty because there’s no proof that it’s fake, it’s just to make sure that it doesn’t go unchecked.