Vikings Message Board.Com

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... le-changes

1. Add third-party timeouts.
2. Expand replay.
3. Incentivize two-point plays.
4. Expand game-day rosters.
5. Allow video replay on sidelines.

The plan of an extra-extra point is the stupidest thing ever, and if Goodell does that it will make football seem like a joke. I like the idea of moving it closer better. One other option is making a two point conversion like 8 on 8 or something to open more of the field up.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

I actually really like the "3 point" conversion idea. It would make games more exciting, in my opinion. It would definitely incentivize going for extra points, which to me is more exciting.

I hope they keep it the same. I like it how it is.

dead_poet wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... le-changes

1. Add third-party timeouts.
2. Expand replay.
3. Incentivize two-point plays.
4. Expand game-day rosters.
5. Allow video replay on sidelines.

So basically, increase the amount of commercials.

I'm not a fan of changing the PAT stuff.

I would like to see them fix the 'completed catch' rule thing.
-
Also, I'd like to see the elimination of automatic 1st down penaties for offenses inside the opponents 10yd line. Not fair to get a whole new set of downs when a first down was an impossibility to begin with. Just half the distance and replay the down. Interference in the endzone? spot it at the 1 replay the down.

S197 wrote: So basically, increase the amount of commercials.

LOL! That's about it.

If there is any rule to change it is the "process" rule for a catch. What is the process? why have such a bizarre and confusing rule? It would be very easy to say that I catch involves:

a) two points of the body in bounds
b)possession maintained for two more points of body to contact the ground (whether in bounds of our of bounds).

This would be clear and easy to understand and officiate.

How about being able to replay penalties? It never made sense to me to not allow that. We can use all of this technology to make sure players do the right things, but we can't use the same technology to make sure that refs make the right calls? Seems weird.

Cliff wrote:How about being able to replay penalties? It never made sense to me to not allow that. We can use all of this technology to make sure players do the right things, but we can't use the same technology to make sure that refs make the right calls? Seems weird.

The replay system as it stands, IS USED to make sure the refs made the right call. I get your point about adding penalties as a reviewable act as well.

Cliff wrote:How about being able to replay penalties? It never made sense to me to not allow that. We can use all of this technology to make sure players do the right things, but we can't use the same technology to make sure that refs make the right calls? Seems weird.

I agree for things like offsides or False Start where it is obvious. I would not like reviews on Holding or Pass Interference penalties... way too objective.

PurpleMustReign wrote: I agree for things like offsides or False Start where it is obvious. I would not like reviews on Holding or Pass Interference penalties... way too objective.

I "get" this reasoning to a certain point (I'm not trying to single you out at all; many members feel this way) but to me, if it's already a subjective call, I would rather it be a scrutinized in-game call with all information available. These types of calls have heavily influenced the outcome of games before, so I would like them to make the best call that they can.

I say drop replay and simplify the rules so that a catch is a catch if it looked a catch, a fumble is a fumble if the ball came loose and the runner/passer wasn't down, etc. The more they try to refine, micro-manage and monitor this stuff the more it slows the game down and honestly, it seems like there are as many controversies and questionable calls as ever. There's no way to take the subjectivity out officiating.

... and get off my lawn!

Seriously, when it comes to replay I can take it or leave it but I think the rulebook as a whole is in great need of being simplified.

frosted wrote: The replay system as it stands, IS USED to make sure the refs made the right call. I get your point about adding penalties as a reviewable act as well.

Yeah, I wrote that improperly. I meant that replay is only used to make confirm that a player did the right thing (Actually caught the ball, made it over the goal line, etc). While they don't use it to verify that a player did something wrong (false start, off sides, pass interference). These calls can have just as much impact on a game and are as easily reviewable.

Cliff wrote: Yeah, I wrote that improperly. I meant that replay is only used to make confirm that a player did the right thing (Actually caught the ball, made it over the goal line, etc). While they don't use it to verify that a player did something wrong (false start, off sides, pass interference). These calls can have just as much impact on a game and are as easily reviewable.

I wouldn't mind seeing personal fouls being reviewable. A lot of times at game speed a hit will look a lot worse or malicious than it really was or vice versa. Blow to the head or leading with the crown of the helmet are examples where I think replay can better show exactly what happened.