- Banned
- #1
marccooper
ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Offline
There was an earlier thread on the proposal to eliminate the rule, perhaps they can be merged but the title needs to be updated.
The NFL owners voted to eliminate the force-out so now defensive players can push offensive players out of bounds before both their feet touch to eliminate a reception.
Apparently this rule was too much of a judgement call (would he have landed in bounds??) and too hard to correctly officiate in general so many supported its elimination.
However, I think with a pass-oriented offense and a big physical young receiver like Colston who will now be less effective and more subject to injury, this is bad for us. Some will argue that we have not benefitted from force-out ruling but I would argue that we have benefitted from the force-out being illegal and thus defensive players being reluctant to blatantly attempt it.
On defense, I think this also may help other teams more. I dont think we have the most physical secondary in the league with the most speed to always be there to knock the receiver out of bounds.
On the whole, I think this rule significantly hurts the value of big sideline receivers like Colston compared to sideline speedsters who get receptions by burning corners and slot receivers and tight ends who are less active on the sidelines, though some tight ends are also used in a way that is vulnerable to force-outs.
As an NFL fan I can understand this rule though I worry about the injury risk. As a Saints fan I don't like it.
The NFL owners voted to eliminate the force-out so now defensive players can push offensive players out of bounds before both their feet touch to eliminate a reception.
Apparently this rule was too much of a judgement call (would he have landed in bounds??) and too hard to correctly officiate in general so many supported its elimination.
However, I think with a pass-oriented offense and a big physical young receiver like Colston who will now be less effective and more subject to injury, this is bad for us. Some will argue that we have not benefitted from force-out ruling but I would argue that we have benefitted from the force-out being illegal and thus defensive players being reluctant to blatantly attempt it.
On defense, I think this also may help other teams more. I dont think we have the most physical secondary in the league with the most speed to always be there to knock the receiver out of bounds.
On the whole, I think this rule significantly hurts the value of big sideline receivers like Colston compared to sideline speedsters who get receptions by burning corners and slot receivers and tight ends who are less active on the sidelines, though some tight ends are also used in a way that is vulnerable to force-outs.
As an NFL fan I can understand this rule though I worry about the injury risk. As a Saints fan I don't like it.