DaBruinz

Some of the proposed rule changes are just ridiculous.

http://www.boston.com/sports/footbal.../reiss_pieces/

Protecting SNAPPERS on field goals? WTF?
Preventing teams from loading up one side of the field for on-side kicks? HUH? Isn't that what is SUPPOSED to happen on on-side kicks?

Whomever is proposing these rules needs their head examined. Lets just makes the guys where flag belts instead. JESUS.

Of note, I have no problem with then trying to protect QBs from low hits. However, they need to make hits to the QB a point of emphasis. Way too many QBs too late hits last year. Howeverf, its going to be nearly impossible to enfore the hitting below the knees on a QB because it would eliminate the shoe string tackles where a player gets one hand on the QBs shoe, and knocks the QB off balance.

Also, I have no problem with them broadening the horse collar rule.

Pats726

I am not sure what is behind the LS rule..I think that would be interesting to find out. But one can not line up with the snapper?? I think the onside kick rule is the dumbest...why?? Isn't that the point to GET an onside kick and is that not fair?? That is truly ridiculous. The QB rule as well...pretty strange. Will be interesting to see what comes of them all.

gomezcat

I would agree with you that the onside kick rules seem strange in particular. I assume that the snapper rule is due to them looking through their legs until the ball is snapped, making it hard for them to get in a position to defend themselves. The problem is that kicks drilled over the LS's head would be even harder to block.

__________________
The blog of our recent trip to The States (September and October 2012):


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PATSNUTme

Agree with you on this. Except for the low hit on the QB, therse other proposed rules are dumb. I hope that they are voted down.

There is a rule already preventing people from jumping on the back of the long snapper.

Digger44

I can see someone saying that the LS is the weakest link to get to the kicker, so make that rule to protect the kicker. Second, the LS is at a disadvantage bcs of the time and energy it takes to snap. He can't get set as quickly. Maybe there have been increasing minor injuries to LS. I could see the league tracking that sort of stat. I am not saying I agree, it is football after all.

Joker

Sam Huff and Bronco Nagurski would b!tchslap these namby pamby women trapped in men's bodies coming up with these rule changes. Blame Polian, he's behind all this crap

primetime

The onside kick rule is the strangest. Isn't the point of an onside kick to load up one side of the field?

dhamz

They are also proposing eliminating false starts on WR when they flinch and making holding (or reducing offensive holding calls to be more accurate) a point of emphasis.

OhExaulted1

I second that sentiment. Someone needs to take Polian out to the woodshed.

Scott37

So if this is in place, what's to stop a back from stepping in front of the snap to run/dive for an easy first down if there is no one over the head of the long snapper?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.