NFL New playing rules approved by Owners; and other proposal decisions (1 Viewer)

[FullMonte]

I agree that would be better but I just hate any change in that respect. I feel like it’s cheap and not football. I’m an old purist I guess.

True. I wish they would just go back to the old kickoff and touchback rules.

 

[Rouxble]

I agree that would be better but I just hate any change in that respect. I feel like it’s cheap and not football. I’m an old purist I guess.

If you score, you kick. I like some of the ideas being thrown around, but I think I also fall on the purist side.

The onside kick is unfortunately dead with the kicking team not having an opportunity to get a running start, maybe a declared onside kick allowing the old five yard running start would be a good change. Outside of Ambush, the opposing team usually knows it’s coming anyway based on the score and game clock. The current rules require eight players on the receiving team to be within 15 yards of the restraining line, make an additional rule that at least one player needs to be outside of that zone to allow a 10v10 fight for the ball.

 

[meily]

Hate these new numbering rules, all of ‘em. Looks like amateur hour out there.

It's so unorganized.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

If you score, you kick. I like some of the ideas being thrown around, but I think I also fall on the purist side.

The onside kick is unfortunately dead with the kicking team not having an opportunity to get a running start, maybe a declared onside kick allowing the old five yard running start would be a good change. Outside of Ambush, the opposing team usually knows it’s coming anyway based on the score and game clock. The current rules require eight players on the receiving team to be within 15 yards of the restraining line, make an additional rule that at least one player needs to be outside of that zone to allow a 10v10 fight for the ball.

I agree with the running start. They should bring that back.

 

[St. Geezy]

I agree with the running start. They should bring that back.

Agree. Unless there is data specifically showing onside kick injuries being high (doubtful), they should allow that play to involve the old rules.

As indicated, there should be a system in place to “declare” you’re going to attempt an onside kick, triggering your ability to go back to the old rules for that one play.

 

[DSnfla]

I saw an idea someone had that I think made more sense than the 4th and 20 rule. The issues he pointed out were that on a 4th and 20, a minor (or incorrect) holding call gives the "kicking" team a new possession and the defense is forced to defend the entire field.

His suggestion was this. Instead of having a 4th and 20 from your own 40, you get one play from the opposing team's 15 yard line. If you get into the endzone on that play, you get the ball on your own 35. If you don't, the defense gets the ball on their own 40. That way, the defense isn't stuck trying to defend over half the field, and if there is a penalty, the ball gets respotted, and you have to try again.

That still opens Pandora's box of bad calls and missed calls like D holding . What needs to be done is make D holding a 10yd foul and no auto 1st down, In fact, any 5yd auto 1st down penalty should be changed to 10yds and no auto 1st. If you want to give kickoffs and onside kicks more life have the receiving team line up 5yds back it would make a 5yd kinda free zone

 

[FullMonte]

That still opens Pandora's box of bad calls and missed calls like D holding . What needs to be done is make D holding a 10yd foul and no auto 1st down, In fact, any 5yd auto 1st down penalty should be changed to 10yds and no auto 1st. If you want to give kickoffs and onside kicks more life have the receiving team line up 5yds back it would make a 5yd kinda free zone

Yes, it does. But a bad or missed D holding call doesn't automatically award the "kicking" team possession. They still have to make the end zone.