ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
I think the new protection of the passer rules are good. I think by the end of the year, it will balance itself out for most teams. I suspect we'll get stung by it eventually too.
My problem with the penalty is that they've changed the criteria for what constitutes the penalty, but left the punishment the same. The result is a situation where the punishment does not always meet the crime. I think I would probably favor breaking it into two different penalties -- a personal foul and a less severe penalty like a 5 yarder perhaps with an automatic first down or perhaps not. It could be like roughing the kicker and running into the kicker. I think that would be enough to serve the NFL's goal of protecting passers by detering the conduct while also not unduly punishing the defense for trying to make a play. The glancing blow to the helmet in the continuous action of a play could be the 5 yarder, while a blow to the knees or a pile drive well after the pass could be a personal foul.
I think this will never happen. The NFL has decided to go the other way with penalties -- trying to get rid of ALL discretionary referee calls. They objectified the standards for intentional grounding. They did away with the 5 yard facemask. They got rid of the play that allowed a ref to judge whether a receiver was forced out of bounds. And as I understand it they've even given refs instructions on how to call the late hit out of bounds, to make it based on objective criteria about where the feet are. They've tried to do similar things with pass interference, although that will always be a losing battle. Roughing/Running Into the Kicker is pretty much the last vestige of the old judgment-based penalty system, except for certain instances of unnecessary roughness.
So, I don't think the NFL would ever backtrack and develop a 5/15 penalty system for passer protection. I think it would be a good idea, though.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
I think the new protection of the passer rules are good. I think by the end of the year, it will balance itself out for most teams. I suspect we'll get stung by it eventually too.
We have been.
Twice against Buff and once last week.
__________________
"They (Patriots) may be the greatest team ever" - Chris Mortenson, January 18, 2005 on espn.com
To be fair, though, the call on Wright wasn't a result of a "new" rule. Hands to the helmet have been 15 yards + a first down since before the Snow Bowl. (People who say that the "tuck rule" was the wrong call are correct, but not for the reason they think—Charles Woodson should have been called for RTP, for a headslap to Brady.)
__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To be fair, though, the call on Wright wasn't a result of a "new" rule. Hands to the helmet have been 15 yards + a first down since before the Snow Bowl. (People who say that the "tuck rule" was the wrong call are correct, but not for the reason they think—Charles Woodson should have been called for RTP, for a headslap to Brady.)
Excellent point about the Tuck Play.
Why is that never mentioned?
__________________
"They (Patriots) may be the greatest team ever" - Chris Mortenson, January 18, 2005 on espn.com
Because Belichick is a jerk, Brady is a pretty boy who nails supermodels, and everyone from New England is an elitist prick, I think that sums up most of what I hear from opposing fans.
Because Belichick is a jerk, Brady is a pretty boy who nails supermodels, and everyone from New England is an elitist prick, I think that sums up most of what I hear from opposing fans.
You left out because Polian didn't think it was important!
__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.
You left out because Polian didn't think it was important!
And, BTW, NaPolian's Competition Committee reviewed the rule after the 2001 season, and found that no changes were necessary. That doesn't get mentioned, either (in fact, some yokels think the rule was changed after that play. . . .).
__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.