Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:11 pm
NFL owners have passed the rule proposal banning the use of ineligible receivers like the Patriots did in the AFC divisional playoffs.
Vikings Message Board.Com
A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://vikingsmessageboard.com/
Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Page 2 of 2
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:02 am
BOO!dead_poet wrote:
It sounds like we may get a change to the extra point rules during the next set of meetings in May:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/ ... story.html
There was also a 30-40-minute discussion about the future of the extra point, and while nothing was decided, all signs point to the NFL enforcing major changes to the play, which has a 99 percent success rate over the last several years.
Competition committee chairman Rich McKay said his group will work with several head coaches over the next 30 days to devise a plan for improving the extra point, and the owners will vote on it at the next round of owners meetings in May in San Francisco.
“I think there’s a clear sentiment that there’s a movement to want change this year,” McKay said. “And the charge I think to us is to come back with a recommended proposal, do it in 30 days and give everyone a chance to vote on it.”
The discussion Wednesday included moving the line of scrimmage up to the 1½-yard line to encourage teams to go for the 2-point conversion, moving it back to the 15-yard line on kicks to make it a tougher conversion, eliminating the kick altogether and forcing teams to go for 2, and giving the defensive team 1 or 2 points if it forces a turnover and return the ball to the end zone.
“I think teams pretty much all said the same thing: It’s time to make this a football play,” McKay said. “And the way to make it a football play is No. 1, allow the defense to score.”
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:49 pm
Boo? They were abusing a loophole to use the rule in a way it clearly wasn't intended to be used. It was as close to cheating you can get without actually cheating. Which the Patriots are great at. Refs should have shut it down at the time.BOO!
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:27 pm
I don't have a problem with them changing it, but if it was a part of the rules, the refs couldn't and SHOULDN'T have shut it down.
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 7:56 am
Yes, "Boo". I don't like to see the sport punishing unconventional, creative thinking that's done within the rules. The rules regarding substitution and formation were perfectly clear. If the Patriots successfully did something unconventional within them, that's to their credit. As DK said above, the refs shouldn't have shut it down because it was legal.Demi wrote: Boo? They were abusing a loophole to use the rule in a way it clearly wasn't intended to be used. It was as close to cheating you can get without actually cheating. Which the Patriots are great at. Refs should have shut it down at the time.
I have to wonder if this rule change would ever have made it to the competition committee if Ozzie Newsome wasn't one of it's members.
Boston sports media blogger Jerry Thornton put it best in the title to his post about it: NFL Considers Changing Rules so Patriots Can't Outhink Them
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:36 am
What a fluff job. Surprised that clown isn't paid by the team. Even the worst homer in the Minnesota media can't touch that.
His team is the best, his coach is a genius, quit picking on us. They're all out to get us, and they only changed the rule to hold us down.
Multiple coaches speak out against it, it's just jealousy! You don't think it has anything to do with the intent of the eligible receiver rule? You don't see anything wrong with an eligible tackle being covered by an ineligible fullback? That seems reasonable to you? And within the framework of the game and how it is intended to be played?
The league doesn't need more rules, it needs less people like Belichick doing his best to win while forcing them to add more rules. The game would be even more unwatchable then it's becoming if every little trick he could come up with was allowed to continue...and other teams to do the same.
His team is the best, his coach is a genius, quit picking on us. They're all out to get us, and they only changed the rule to hold us down.
Multiple coaches speak out against it, it's just jealousy! You don't think it has anything to do with the intent of the eligible receiver rule? You don't see anything wrong with an eligible tackle being covered by an ineligible fullback? That seems reasonable to you? And within the framework of the game and how it is intended to be played?
The league doesn't need more rules, it needs less people like Belichick doing his best to win while forcing them to add more rules. The game would be even more unwatchable then it's becoming if every little trick he could come up with was allowed to continue...and other teams to do the same.
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:25 pm
I was under the impression that the refs failed to enforce the rule as written during the playoffs.
Something about a player who declares as ineligible had to sit out a play before returning as eligible...or vice versa.
There is certainly no shortage of rules in todays game.
Something about a player who declares as ineligible had to sit out a play before returning as eligible...or vice versa.
There is certainly no shortage of rules in todays game.
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:35 pm
It was the sentiment in the title I liked, not so much the post itself.Demi wrote:What a fluff job. Surprised that clown isn't paid by the team. Even the worst homer in the Minnesota media can't touch that.
His team is the best, his coach is a genius, quit picking on us. They're all out to get us, and they only changed the rule to hold us down.
It's completely reasonable. The rules designate a number of players that have to be on the line of scrimmage and eligibility is determined by positioning. Any player can be eligible if they declare and if the formation is lined up correctly. That's basic football.Multiple coaches speak out against it, it's just jealousy! You don't think it has anything to do with the intent of the eligible receiver rule? You don't see anything wrong with an eligible tackle being covered by an ineligible fullback? That seems reasonable to you? And within the framework of the game and how it is intended to be played?
As long as the reporting is done correctly, I see no problem with it at all (by the way, Breeze, if I recall correctly the play you're talking about was one where the rule was broken and that should have been called a penalty. I seriously doubt it was a result of cheating though, more likely just simple confusion).
LOL! In other words, fewer resourceful coaches who are actually creative within the framework of the rules.The league doesn't need more rules, it needs less people like Belichick doing his best to win while forcing them to add more rules.
Got it. Trick plays should not be allowed. make it a rule!The game would be even more unwatchable then it's becoming if every little trick he could come up with was allowed to continue...and other teams to do the same.
Do you really think the tackle eligible play as you're accustomed to seeing it (or the flea flicker or any other trick play) looked much less strange and unorthodox when first used? The whole idea of such plays is to come up with something new, but legal, to confuse the defense. How is what Belichick did any different?
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:03 pm
the 2 point conversion should be eliminated and the extra point should be a 50 yard FG attempt.
Make kickers relevant!
Make kickers relevant!
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 8:23 am
I think they should make it so whereever the ball is placed for the extra point, that is also where they kick the ball off to the other team on the subsequent play. If you want to put the ball on the 20 yd line and have a 30someting yard chip shot, then you can do that, but then you kick off from the 20 yard line. Like wise, if they want to put it out on the 40 and go for a LONG extra point, then they can kick off from the 40 Yard Line. Have to have some limits though, as to not be onside kicking into your opponents endzone after a missed 90 yard extra point attempt.
Re: Five common-sense NFL rule changes
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 12:29 pm
That would be an exciting play with an extra level of strategy. I would get behind that idea.KSViking wrote:I think they should make it so whereever the ball is placed for the extra point, that is also where they kick the ball off to the other team on the subsequent play. If you want to put the ball on the 20 yd line and have a 30someting yard chip shot, then you can do that, but then you kick off from the 20 yard line. Like wise, if they want to put it out on the 40 and go for a LONG extra point, then they can kick off from the 40 Yard Line. Have to have some limits though, as to not be onside kicking into your opponents endzone after a missed 90 yard extra point attempt.