BB's proposed rule changes: all plays reviewable; goal line cameras; PAT moved back

ctpatsfan77 said:

Every team in the league right now would go for the 9 unless they only needed 7 to win.

Click to expand...

yeah, i thought it was probably a dumb idea.

fnordcircle said:

The Colts also suggested a rule change after everyone got done huffing glue in Irsay's car or something.

Click to expand...

Go figure a dome team would call for a rule that would obviously favor a dome team especially one with a near elite QB.

And let's not forget there is a proposal rule to stop the Patriots where they get rid of the ineligible man rule that the Pats took advantage of in the playoffs. Whenever the Pats win the Super Bowl, it seems the rules committee wants to create rules to stop them from repeating.

fnordcircle said:

I ****ken love dis.

Click to expand...

I don't see the point tbh. How does eliminating the extra point do anything for anybody? They aren't automatic. Just ask Ocho Cinco and the 2006 Bengals or better yet these guys

Not sure I like number 1. Would be concerned that refs would be more likely to err on the side of calling a penalty if it's questionable in any way since it can always be reviewed and reversed. Let the boys play. When the NFL made all scores reviewable, I felt refs would call it a TD if they weren't sure and rely on the replay officials to overturn it.

Rob0729 said:

And let's not forget there is a proposal rule to stop the Patriots where they get rid of the ineligible man rule that the Pats took advantage of in the playoffs. Whenever the Pats win the Super Bowl, it seems the rules committee wants to create rules to stop them from repeating.

Click to expand...

We should hire Polian for the sole reason of representing us at the rules committee meetings. Pay him 10 mill a season **** it you have the dough Kraft.

#4 All Fnords must change their names to Fnard and wear aardvark sweaters sprinkled with phytoplankton so security can more easily identify the aliens that walk amongst us....

rainmaker said:

Not sure I like number 1. Would be concerned that refs would be more likely to err on the side of calling a penalty if it's questionable in any way since it can always be reviewed and reversed. Let the boys play. When the NFL made all scores reviewable, I felt refs would call it a TD if they weren't sure and rely on the replay officials to overturn it.

Click to expand...

That happens though because every scoring play is reviewed automatically. I don't think the refs would do that on penalty calls, because it would still cost coaches a challenge.

Froob said:

I don't see the point tbh. How does eliminating the extra point do anything for anybody? They aren't automatic. Just ask Ocho Cinco and the 2006 Bengals or better yet these guys

Click to expand...

You can recall specific examples because misses are so rare. It's essentially a non-play that is there only to waste time and provide an injury opportunity. If your case is that misses create excitement, imagine how much more exciting it would be if teams missed one every 2-3 games!

Bill proposed that all footballs shall be in the possession of the team with the lowest draft position for the entire season, and he also proposed that no one can measure, weigh, or replace the balls at any time.

Not sure how number 1 would work out. Coach throws flag on 70 yard scoring pass. Basically is trying to find something, anything to negate the play. Offensive lineman comes up to coach and says I was held. Coach says I think my lineman was held I am challenging the play on the field.

I can see the benefit especially if it was around in 07. Sean Ohara and his holding cost his team the first down and now Eli is throwing from 4th and 20. However the Pats are replaying the down in the Saints game with the hold by Solder on the catch by Thompkins.

Maybe that is a little overboard but I think it would slow the game down a little bit.

My proposal would be to be able to challenge any pass interference call, any catch,any fumble, any illegal hits. 12 men on the field etc. maybe offsides and false starts although again I think that slows the game a bit.

I would also like to see them revise what is pass interference. What Baltimore does sickens me. I don't think a receiver should be able to come back for a under thrown ball and get an automatic pass interference call. It puts the defender in a no win situation and it is an unfair advantage of timing between QB and receiver. In no way should a receiver be able to go full speed without turning his head and only he knows the marker where he is going to break the 180. It's near impossible to determine as a cb.

Apparently John Harbaugh has introduced a proposal that disallows Belichick from outsmarting opponents. It should pass handily.

Froob said:

Don't like 3 at all. Just leave the PAT alone. I don't want bad weather games decided on PATs. Not sure what 2 actually does and one is great

Click to expand...

If teams shouldn't be able to win or lose on PATs, why have them at all? They are sort of ceremonial at this point and make for boring television, IMO.

Patriot Missile said:

Not sure how number 1 would work out. Coach throws flag on 70 yard scoring pass. Basically is trying to find something, anything to negate the play. Offensive lineman comes up to coach and says I was held. Coach says I think my lineman was held I am challenging the play on the field.

I can see the benefit especially if it was around in 07. Sean Ohara and his holding cost his team the first down and now Eli is throwing from 4th and 20. However the Pats are replaying the down in the Saints game with the hold by Solder on the catch by Thompkins.

Maybe that is a little overboard but I think it would slow the game down a little bit.

My proposal would be to be able to challenge any pass interference call, any catch,any fumble, any illegal hits. 12 men on the field etc. maybe offsides and false starts although again I think that slows the game a bit.

I would also like to see them revise what is pass interference. What Baltimore does sickens me. I don't think a receiver should be able to come back for a under thrown ball and get an automatic pass interference call. It puts the defender in a no win situation and it is an unfair advantage of timing between QB and receiver. In no way should a receiver be able to go full speed without turning his head and only he knows the marker where he is going to break the 180. It's near impossible to determine as a cb.

Click to expand...

How it would work would need to be ironed out for sure. I'm not sure you'd see a lot of frivolous challenging like this though, as coaches would still be limited to two per game. And I doubt the refs would be able to reverse a call without something egregious.

Oswlek said:

You can recall specific examples because misses are so rare. It's essentially a non-play that is there only to waste time and provide an injury opportunity. If your case is that misses create excitement, imagine how much more exciting it would be if teams missed one every 2-3 games!

Click to expand...

id rather see tied games late and OT. This isnt what you're suggesting but some are complaining it's a non play and automatic so their solution is to make it a non play and automatic. Does nobody see the irony in this?

Joker said:

#4 All Fnords must change their names to Fnard and wear aardvark sweaters sprinkled with phytoplankton so security can more easily identify the aliens that walk amongst us....

Click to expand...

Thats deserving of a flashback of a classic

Froob said:

Don't like 3 at all. Just leave the PAT alone. I don't want bad weather games decided on PATs. Not sure what 2 actually does and one is great

Click to expand...

So what your saying is you don't want football games decided by seemingly non-football plays.

Ok.

Rule #4) Remove the PAT entirely.

I thought Belichick put it nicely in his case for moving the extra point back, saying that when the XP was invented it was never meant to be a 99.5% success rate free point. It was meant to be earned, but as kickers got better and more specialized, it became trivial. So the options really should be to A) make it less trivial by moving it back, or B) just make the extra point automatic unless you want to gamble for the two points. I'm in favor of A as I don't like these weenies getting free points.

I think some system of trading/selling picks for Cap Space would be quite interesting.

Froob said:

id rather see tied games late and OT. This isnt what you're suggesting but some are complaining it's a non play and automatic so their solution is to make it a non play and automatic. Does nobody see the irony in this?

Click to expand...

I don't see any irony. Right now it's a non-play that entails time wasting and injury risk. Making it a legitimate non-play doesn't change much on the field but it eliminates the latter entirely.