|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
in the Middle of the field, but at the out of bounds marker... it's become ridiculous. I believe the rule should be, when considering spots, and forward progress, that where the ball is when the players body goes out of bounds
Is he serious?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89 |
Quote:
Quote:
in the Middle of the field, but at the out of bounds marker... it's become ridiculous. I believe the rule should be, when considering spots, and forward progress, that where the ball is when the players body goes out of bounds
Is he serious?
You know, I think he is.
How does a league celebrating its 100th season only recognize the 53 most recent championships?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815 |
I read an article yesterday, can't remember who wrote it...well known ESPN personality...he had some ideas that actually sounded pretty good.
* No defender can play more than 8 yards off the LOS...this will limit big hits by the safety.
* Allow the O a 12th person...a non eligible blocker to help with pass protection/run blocking...
* Since those 2 help the O...allow bump and run until the ball is thrown and no more half ass inteference calls. Allow the defenders to defend.
* Don't allow the QB to run. Once he crosses the LOS, it is a dead ball. (I would still allow a QB sneak in 4th one type situations)
* No more calls against defenders who simply touch a QBs head...
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the "must continue the catch process to the ground" and bang-bang fumbles seems to conflict with each other.
We've all seen a WR make a catch, have two feet down and then roll to the ground and then lose control a second later and then it be called incomplete. I think it's okay, but needs more refinement.
But then, you'll have a WR make a catch, have two feet down and then before he can roll to the ground the defender knocks the ball loose and it's a fumble.
If it's a catch and fumble before he gets to the ground, why is it not a catch the other way?
By what you described, that's the refs not doing their job.
If you catch the ball, get both feet down, then roll to the ground, then lose the ball? That's a catch and if still in bounds and untouched, it's a fumble.
Catch, two feet, "football move" is a completed catch.
The refs get this wrong all the time, see Calvin Johnson a few years ago, a game you were probably at.
If you catch a ball as you are going out of bounds, get two feet in, and are bobbling the ball, or at least not having it secured in your hands, I also believe that isn't a catch but the refs are getting that one wrong all the time too.
I would just like to see universal agreement, and consistency on this type of stuff.
Same goes with QB hits, defenseless receivers, etc... I don't care what you decide just be consistent with it, because right now I think a lot of these players, even the all pro/vets are confused at what's right and what's wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
No offense, but those are rule proposals stink and are ignorant. Not allowing your FS to play deep to protect against big plays? Allowing 12 men on offense? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259 |
Yea I'm not down for that either...
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815 |
Quote:
No offense, but those are rule proposals stink and are ignorant. Not allowing your FS to play deep to protect against big plays? Allowing 12 men on offense?
Sorry, I don't think so. Big hits over the middle happens because the safety is 18 yards off the line.
You want to protect the QB, give him protection rather than this pansy ass flag throwing.
Sometimes you have to think out of the box.
Sorry man....they may be bold proposals, and you may not like them, but I wouild say they are far from ignorant.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Peen, it's more than thinking outside the box.
How about we think "outside the box of only worrying about player safety?" How do you defend the deep part of the field if you don't allow safeties to play deep? How do they provide cover 3 help outside the hashes to corners on deep passes? Who is left to stop a RB if he breaks through the LOS.
That rule change is ridiculous and was made by someone who doesn't understand the game.
Then, we have the proposed rule of playing 12 on 11? Sheesh, the offense already has been given plenty of unfair advantages.
If those rules were to occur, games would turn into exhibitions, similar to the games that retired players play prior to the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234 |
I'm going to go retro and cement my "geezer status" ... I'm tired of watching field goals and think they should be de-empasized, so I would: 1.) Reduce the width of the goalposts by a few feet. 2.) Widen the hashmarks on the field, like back in the 60's to cause wider, tougher angles on FGs when the ball is spotted to one side or the other. 3.) Outlaw side-winder / soccer style kicking on FGs or kickoffs (I miss KO returns being an important - and fun - part of the game.). IMO, soccer style kickers kick deeper and more accurately. BTW, there would be no square-toe boots allowed for kicking, and no sledgehammer shoe inserts allowed (ala Tom Dempsey). On offense, I'd outlaw the helmet mics that allow QB's to get the playcall from the sideline or booth. If you don't have a QB that can call plays, then you'll need to employ hand signals or messenger guards like Paul Brown did way back in the day. On Defense, I'd do away with the 5-yard chuck rule and allow contact with WRs as long as the ball isn't in the air. Roughing, or contact to the head or lower leg of the QB penalties that are deemed to be accidental or incidental would be 5 yd penalties and not an automatic 1st down. There would be no review. The call on the field is the call that stands. If that causes problems, get better refs, or get more of them on the field. I'm available for the commissioners job ... 
Last edited by Dave; 11/23/13 09:30 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136 |
Fine line between thinking outside of the box and Insanity
I'm with the purist those rule changes are pretty well Bozo material.
Especially the 8 yard thing.
At first I was against all this Defensive flags for hitting...but now after a couple of years I see how the they have conformed to the rules. Still can hit and displace the ball just have to do it the right way. Sure the Refs get it wrong and usually against us - No call on Harrisons hit on MoMass...Flag on Gipson hit. One of them was withing the rules oddly the one who was flagged.
Many old vets were not complaining cause they would state when they played sure they did a lot of illegal things but using the HELMET was not done much - Most hits were with Shoulders...and the football was Good n hard...this is what I'm seeing more n more.
You want to protect the QB...ban the spread offense not add an unfair advantage of Numbers. That is what football is about. If you don't have a stud LT n RT you got to keep some body in to chip block...not this all out nobody back there then they cry about their QB getting hurt! It rather simple...its called MAX PROTECT...every team has it in their vocabulary and use. They choose not to utilize it... Don't cry to me!
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 497
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 497 |
The rule I don't want to see is anything having to do with penalizing teams for bullying each other at the line of scrimmage. The game has been so diluted and watered down that it is ridiculous.
No hard hitting. No end zone celebrations. No bad mouthing each other at the line. Might as well put skirts on the players and tell them to act like ladies.
Never have hope. You won’t be disappointed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
I just wonder how you would handle non-calls that might have been interference.... I'd also give the booth the option to not only say yes it was a penalty or not, I'd give them the authority to change it from defensive to offensive if that was warranted. That said, I'd allow more hand fighting when the ball is in the air, as long as there is no grabbing or holding, I'd like to see them let the guys fight for the ball a little.
I can't see how you can. Flag needs to be thrown and then reviewed. I do agree with the hand fighting. NFL wants parity, give something back that has been taken away from the DBs over the years. To be honest, I personally don't like the "It's a passing league now" league. (Probably because we haven't had a capable QB in over 20 years)
Quote:
As far as the hitting the head of the QB... I think there should be a 5 yard version with no automatic first down when it's pretty clear the guy was just trying to hit his throwing arm or swat at a pass.. then a 15 yard version and automatic first down when there was more malicious intent..
I like that too, but reviewable from the booth.
“Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.” -AOC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
College football uses, the NHL uses it. MLB of course doesn't use it, but they're 20 years behind anyway.
It's my understanding that next year in MLB is getting closer. All reviews would be from NY office, but they have a stupid challenge system in place. So that will leave the NFL with the lamest and longest review system. (Maybe they just want to get those extra commercials in....seriously)
“Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.” -AOC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882 |
I'd actually like to see this one changed this year if possible:
Rule 28b - Section 5 - All hits to the head of the QB will receive a 15-yard personal foul penalty, except Browns QBs.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif) “...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1 |
I'm fine with flagging defensive players that clearly lead with their helmet. There was a really bad one in the Tennessee/Oakland game yesterday that would have easily been an ejection in NCAA.
I just have a problem with the ones that aren't so blatent.
I hate the inconsistency on the calls for hits to the head against QB's. Your hand accidently grazes the helmet. 15 yards, then you have no flag on a very cheap play by the steelers. Be consistent.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
I'm fine with flagging defensive players that clearly lead with their helmet. There was a really bad one in the Tennessee/Oakland game yesterday that would have easily been an ejection in NCAA.
I just have a problem with the ones that aren't so blatent.
I hate the inconsistency on the calls for hits to the head against QB's. Your hand accidently grazes the helmet. 15 yards, then you have no flag on a very cheap play by the steelers. Be consistent.
Wasn't there even an edict to the refs...."When in doubt, throw the flag?" Not that I agree with the philosophy, but come on refs!
“Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.” -AOC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm fine with flagging defensive players that clearly lead with their helmet. There was a really bad one in the Tennessee/Oakland game yesterday that would have easily been an ejection in NCAA.
I just have a problem with the ones that aren't so blatent.
I hate the inconsistency on the calls for hits to the head against QB's. Your hand accidently grazes the helmet. 15 yards, then you have no flag on a very cheap play by the steelers. Be consistent.
Wasn't there even an edict to the refs...."When in doubt, throw the flag?" Not that I agree with the philosophy, but come on refs!
You didn't read the small print. When in doubt, throw the flag, if it's a Manning, Brady, Brees, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,184 Likes: 18
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,184 Likes: 18 |
Quote:
One thing that has always bothered me ... when a player goes out of bounds the clock should always stop. I realize it does the last so many minutes of each half, but it's really annoying to see the clock running just seconds after someone steps out of bounds.
If we are going to stop the clock the final few minutes of each half, then why wouldn't we always do it? Either do it or don't.
Games would take FOREVER to complete if that was the rule. I like it how it currently is. I don't want to sit for 4+ hours for a football game to be completed every week. I love football as much as the next guy, but sitting there with the clock stopped after half of the plays does not interest me at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836 |
Quote:
JC,
The one thing that irks me seemingly every year is the half-the distance mark-off on penalties. If the yardage isn't there to do the full mark-off, put it on the 1, just like P.I. in the endzone. A personal foul shouldn't turn into a 6 yard penalty just because I'm only on my 11 yard line.
I agree, especially on the other side of the field. I'm still waiting for defenses to start murdering QBs in these situations since it will only move the ball from the 4 yard line to the 2.
I also agree with the helmet to helmet reviews... ball carriers are making themselves smaller to protect their legs (ironically, because of the helmet to helmet rule) and inducing the very thing that the league is trying to eliminate.
I wouldn't mind having two choices for Offensive Holding - 5 or 10 yards.
TO's have to be called before the kicker becomes set... If you want to ice him - fine, but no more waving off kicked FGs - it's stoooopid.
I agree with reviewing PI calls - WRs are getting way to crafty at inducing interference and the questionable calls ruin the game.
Also - WTH was wrong with the rules for "catching a ball" before? How do we go from secure the ball and come down with two feet -to- catch the ball, come down with two feet, make a "football move" and return to the sideline and make love to your coach without the ball ever flinching from your clutch?
Lastly - what is wrong with a "horse-collar" tackle? In a league that is trying to protect it's players this seems like about the safest way to bring someone to the ground.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361 |
I agree with that.
I think that if a penalty cannot be completely enforced. then it should be enforced to the 1.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,585 Likes: 815 |
Quote:
Lastly - what is wrong with a "horse-collar" tackle? In a league that is trying to protect it's players this seems like about the safest way to bring someone to the ground.
No it isn't. The problem is guys end up with serious leg/knee injuries as the player gets bent backwards on his own legs. Defenders also tend to end up falling on the back of the tackled players legs.
Earlier I posted some rules changes I read that made some sense to me. Here are a few I propose.
1. Reduce the number of refs on the field. Seems you could get a well called game with 5 on the field. Maybe even 3.....just to keep law and order out there and call the most obvious of calls and get away from all the crap calls made every Sunday.
2. Look at reducing the size of helmets. If you don't want people hitting with their heads, don't let them wear something that encourages them to do so.
On a tanget here.....has there ever been a study that looks at what caused the consussion? Are most caused by players hitting another player in the head with their helmet? Are they caused by players slamming their heads to the ground? Maybe by getting hit in the head by some players knee. Also...are their positions more apt to get a concussion? If we have those answers maybe rules could be geard around the whys of that rather than just say you can't touch a QB head with your hand, no matter how slight.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,025 Likes: 1 |
TO had one of the ugliest leg injuries because of a horse-collar tackle.
I think it's cheap, and I'm glad they took it out of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836 |
Quote:
TO had one of the ugliest leg injuries because of a horse-collar tackle.
I think it's cheap, and I'm glad they took it out of the game.
No crap? Wow, I guess I've never seen any injuries because of this. Every time I see one now the player looks like their legs come out from under them and they land on their ass. My bad.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Yeah FATE, too often when they land on their asses it's on their own feet. Ouch.
btw, congrats on accepting the facts and not arguing your original point like 50 idiots might have done. Welcome to the board.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
'Helmet off' rule needs a minor tweaking: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/29/helmet-off-rule-needs-a-minor-tweaking/Quote:
That memorable goal-line collision late in Thursday night’s game has brought into a focus a safety rule that, in this instance, came into play only after the ball carrier had absorbed a brutal blow to the head.
Steelers rookie running back Le’Veon Bell, who generated 136 total yards from scrimmage on 23 touches, was touched as violently as any football player ever can be as he tried to score the potential game-tying touchdown. Caught in a Malachi Crunch of Ravens, Bell’s helmet came off an instant before he crossed he crossed the plane with the ball for what would have been his second score of the night.
Replay review reversed the call, because Bell’s helmet was off before the ball kissed the front of the white line that borders the end zone.
The rule is as simple as it is unyielding. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 states, “An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended,” followed by 18 specific instances of “when.”
At part (r) — the 18th and final “when” — the rule says “when a runner’s helmet comes completely off.”
A safety provision adopted several year back, it’s as black-and-white as a rule can get. Helmet off? Play over. Period.
It doesn’t matter where the player is. Helmet off receives the same treatment as knee down.
And so it was easy for referee Clete Blakeman (who has had an eventual 10 days) to look at the video and determine that, when Bell’s helmet was “completely off,” the ball wasn’t yet touching the goal line.
But something seems unfair and unnatural about the result. Though not airborne, Bell was lunging forward but not yet down. The rules, however, say he was down because his helmet came off.
Moving forward, this specific situation should prompt the NFL to consider modifying the rule to include the phrase “unless the player is in the process of going to the ground.” Indeed, if a player’s helmet comes off while he is going to the ground, no one is going to stop what they’re doing because a player’s helmet has come off. The action will continue until the guy is down; killing the play does nothing to help protect him at that point.
While the officials got the “helmet off” portion of the play right under the current rules, it appears that Ravens cornerback Jimmy Smith may have gotten away with an illegal ramming of the crown of the helmet on Bell. Linebacker Courtney Upshaw also apparently attempted to ram Bell with the crown of Upshaw’s helmet from the other direction, but Upshaw ultimately delivered only a glancing blow.
Lost in the outcome of the play is the fact that it almost didn’t happen at all. With Bell lined up behind quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and anticipating the snap, Bell started to lean forward and nearly lost his balance, which would have drawn an illegal procedure penalty and killed the entire play before it happened.
Based on how Bell and Smith possibly are feeling today, maybe they wouldn’t have minded that alternative outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11,334 Likes: 1836 |
Quote:
'Helmet off' rule needs a minor tweaking:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/29/helmet-off-rule-needs-a-minor-tweaking/
Quote:
That memorable goal-line collision late in Thursday night’s game has brought into a focus a safety rule that, in this instance, came into play only after the ball carrier had absorbed a brutal blow to the head.
Steelers rookie running back Le’Veon Bell, who generated 136 total yards from scrimmage on 23 touches, was touched as violently as any football player ever can be as he tried to score the potential game-tying touchdown. Caught in a Malachi Crunch of Ravens, Bell’s helmet came off an instant before he crossed he crossed the plane with the ball for what would have been his second score of the night.
Replay review reversed the call, because Bell’s helmet was off before the ball kissed the front of the white line that borders the end zone.
The rule is as simple as it is unyielding. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 states, “An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended,” followed by 18 specific instances of “when.”
At part (r) — the 18th and final “when” — the rule says “when a runner’s helmet comes completely off.”
A safety provision adopted several year back, it’s as black-and-white as a rule can get. Helmet off? Play over. Period.
It doesn’t matter where the player is. Helmet off receives the same treatment as knee down.
And so it was easy for referee Clete Blakeman (who has had an eventual 10 days) to look at the video and determine that, when Bell’s helmet was “completely off,” the ball wasn’t yet touching the goal line.
But something seems unfair and unnatural about the result. Though not airborne, Bell was lunging forward but not yet down. The rules, however, say he was down because his helmet came off.
Moving forward, this specific situation should prompt the NFL to consider modifying the rule to include the phrase “unless the player is in the process of going to the ground.” Indeed, if a player’s helmet comes off while he is going to the ground, no one is going to stop what they’re doing because a player’s helmet has come off. The action will continue until the guy is down; killing the play does nothing to help protect him at that point.
While the officials got the “helmet off” portion of the play right under the current rules, it appears that Ravens cornerback Jimmy Smith may have gotten away with an illegal ramming of the crown of the helmet on Bell. Linebacker Courtney Upshaw also apparently attempted to ram Bell with the crown of Upshaw’s helmet from the other direction, but Upshaw ultimately delivered only a glancing blow.
Lost in the outcome of the play is the fact that it almost didn’t happen at all. With Bell lined up behind quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and anticipating the snap, Bell started to lean forward and nearly lost his balance, which would have drawn an illegal procedure penalty and killed the entire play before it happened.
Based on how Bell and Smith possibly are feeling today, maybe they wouldn’t have minded that alternative outcome.
That was a vicious hit. Wow. My wife is just learning the game and after a look of befuddlement she just burst out with "Another stupid rule - that's why I can't watch this game" lol
I doubt that the rule will be adjusted since it would be so rare that it would be enforced. I can see it now - players caught in a scrum at the goal line would just rip the runners helmet off.
"Personal foul - half the distance to the goal" lol
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,225 Likes: 15
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,225 Likes: 15 |
I'm tired of seeing these giant PI plays that get major yardage. As the game evolves more toward passing they're getting extraordinarily common. Ultimately it's unfair to the defenders.
However I do agree that 15 yards on PI is not a deterrent. I don't know exactly what solution is. However, I can brainstorm.
Maybe remove the "Must make a play on the ball" requirement, if the defender isn't hanging on to the receiver, why call him on it?
All PI plays under 15 yards are "Spot of the foul". Plays exceeding 15 yards are "15 + half of the yardage of the foul exceeding 15 yards (rounded up)"
So if you PI 20 yards from the line of scrimage... it'd be 17 yards.
However if you made a huge PI foul 48 yards away it'd be a 32 yd penalty total.
I fear this might muck things up though because the officials would have to bring a calculator on to the field with them...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
I have zero faith in the NFL officials, who come across as some of the least intelligent people involved in pro sports, to be able to do such advanced math.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Quote:
I have zero faith in the NFL officials, who come across as some of the least intelligent people involved in pro sports, to be able to do such advanced math.
I watch football on all levels from peewee to pros, and I swear, the NFL refs make more mistakes than any others.
The change I would like to see is same rules for everybody.......too bad that will never happen.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
I have zero faith in the NFL officials, who come across as some of the least intelligent people involved in pro sports, to be able to do such advanced math.
We need to bring back the refs that called the games when the official refs were on strike or whatever. Sure, they couldn't break up a squabble/fight - but least there seemed to be less no-calls... I am not trying to make excuses or anything for our team, but there have been beyond several, clear as day, noticeable no-calls being made. Our defense get held often, and is never called. It just doesn't make any sense...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234 |
I'm okay with no-calls if it works both ways. Its like a home plate umpire calling balls and strikes - all you ask is that they be consistent. In general, I think we see too many ticky-tack calls and flags for inconsequential infractions that had no part in a play. The no-call on the Campbell fumble, however, was so blatant that I really don't see how it was missed. For the most part though, I'd like to see a lot less of the zebras when I watch a game. Unfortunately, a lot of them seem to think the game is about them getting facetime on TV.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,030
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,030 |
I would love for the pass interference rules/hand checking rules to be moved back to where they were before Peyton's whining had them changed after the Pats loss. The calls are entirely too subjective and have a huge impact on the outcome of a game. However, I would bet on snow cones in hell before I would lay a dime on this happening.
Against logic,the most effective armor is willful ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 433
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 433 |
I would like all passes by our opponents,to be ruled incomplete.They also should only be allowed FGs instead of TDs....it's our only chance at having a winning team otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
There must be some rule that states "if the team with orange and brown is ahead, make up penalties. If its in the fourth quarter, do as necessary to spot ball at orange and browns one yard line"
I think this rule is in section BS - subdivision national fixed league, subsection: protect tv ratings.
I would like this rule repelled immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361 |
I would like to reiterate:
Hits to defenseless receivers should be reviewed so that we don't get the garbage calls like we had today. Again.
The NFL was trying to get full time officials at one point ....... and I think that it;s about time to revisit that. Their officiating has become quite a joke all too often.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,096 Likes: 294
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,096 Likes: 294 |
After watching the game today.. Browns Pats game...I would like to see the Intentional grounding rule changed....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
I still want to see non-TD calls in the end zone reviewed. I don't remember the game but yesterday a HC had to throw the red flag to get a non-TD call reversed to a TD.
If the NFL is so determined to get TD calls correct why are they not concerned to get non-TD calls correct as well?
It's mind blowing to me. If they think the refs can get a TD call wrong they have to believe they can also get a non-TD call wrong.
Any scoring or near scoring play should be reviewed
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
JC At this point, I would worry more about the refs calling and enforcing the current rules as opposed to changing any. It would seem difficult for them to see and throw flags and honestly, game after game now of no-calls, bad calls and missed calls, I'm sick of it. The New England game crossed the line. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276 |
I'd like it if some website like PFF reviewed the officiating of every game.
Haden was getting 1 very long bs PI call every game for a while there. I remember being happy when one of them was only 15 yards instead of the usual free touchdown.
I'd like to know if this is just a Browns thing or if it is rampant. I'm not sure which would bother me more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
i agree. Its time for full time refs. I understand that the majority of the refs currently have other jobs and this is basically a "hobby". So there would be a huge turn over, i don't think that would be a bad thing. It just doesn't sound like our game yesterday was the only one, its sounds like the refs had 3 or 4 other clunker games that are getting discussed in national media. The browns are overlooked of course....
I think the college system seems to work without too many hiccups. Every play is reviewed. Even those head to head shots on a defenseless receiver to decide whether to eject the player.
Those 15 yard game changers need to be reviewed, same with the spot foul PI. It just can't be up to the refs on the field- they have proven their incompetence time after time. It will take a high profile game with these game changing decisions for anything to be done about it. But since the refs are peeking at the right time with the playoffs looming- it could happen. Could you imagine the uproar if the calls against the browns in the final two minutes occured in a championship game or superbowl--- yikes.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Rule Changes You Would Like to See
Next Year
|
|
