Rule changes: No forceout, no 5-yd facemask, coin toss, direct snap fumble

[Fencer]

Kudos to those who said the field just got a bit thinner.

Interesting point about the 2-minute drill -- unless you have great separation from the DB, it might be a little harder to ensure you both make the catch and get out of bounds. But it should be a solvable problem. I'm not expecting many cases where a receiver tries to get out of bound and fails.

"Inappropriate touching" fouls don't help the game. Good job on the facemasking change.

Direct snap rule seems like a triviality.

 

[3.2 Blues]

Too all those who don't like the new force out rule, you realize that they are just bringing the game back to the way it was don't you? This is the way the game is played in high school and college (there is no force out, you are either in or you are not). And you cannot carry a player out as the official will call his forward progress stopped at the point you start carrying him and he is down at that point. This is a great rule change and brings the game back to the basics in my opinion. I hate having a play decided on a judgment call!

 

[Real World]

I dont like the face mask change, so there saying even the smallest of a face mask incidental or not warrants a possible game changing 15 yard penality?

Also, I HATE the force out change, how can you be expected to catch the ball and keep your feet in bounds if the defender has the easy option of just pushing you out?

That is not only stupid but now a HUGE advantage for the defense. I dont like that one at all.

I agree. I liked the two different face mask rules. Let's face it, some are incidental, and some aren't. Dumb move to change a sensible rule.

The force out rule is another dumb change.

 

[Deus Irae]

Too all those who don't like the new force out rule, you realize that they are just bringing the game back to the way it was don't you? This is the way the game is played in high school and college (there is no force out, you are either in or you are not). And you cannot carry a player out as the official will call his forward progress stopped at the point you start carrying him and he is down at that point. This is a great rule change and brings the game back to the basics in my opinion. I hate having a play decided on a judgment call!

1.) 1 foot versus 2 feet

2.) If you've ever played any tackle football, you know full well that it's easy to carry a player out

3.) There can't be forward progress if there's no catch

 

[3.2 Blues]

1.) 1 foot versus 2 feet

2.) If you've ever played any tackle football, you know full well that it's easy to carry a player out

3.) There can't be forward progress if there's no catch

I'll give you the first one (1 foot versus 2) but these are professionals and it should be harder.

I have played tackle football from peewees to college and now officiate high school and college. It is NOT 'easy' to carry a person out of bounds although it is possible. But just because something is possible does not mean it is easy.

And I was addressing the people who were saying what if the receiver is caught at midfield and carried out. First off, the receiver should be fighting like hell to get down to the ground but also if an official sees somebody getting carried over half the field then they will stop the play because of forward progress. If interested check it out here: http://www.nflhs.com/tipsdrills/officiating/officiating_03102000a_db.asp

 

[Deus Irae]

I have played tackle football from peewees to college and now officiate high school and college. It is NOT 'easy' to carry a person out of bounds although it is possible. But just because something is possible does not mean it is easy.

You catch them, wrap them up and then drive them out of bounds, making the pass an incompletion. We did it all the time. Most of the time, a receiver trying to make a jumping catch within 1-2 running steps of the sidelines was coming down out of bounds because that's where he was getting planted by the defender.

And I was addressing the people who were saying what if the receiver is caught at midfield and carried out. First off, the receiver should be fighting like hell to get down to the ground but also if an official sees somebody getting carried over half the field then they will stop the play because of forward progress. If interested check it out here: http://www.nflhs.com/tipsdrills/officiating/officiating_03102000a_db.asp

It's making the officials use a judgment call. The difference now is that it's "did he carry the receiver?" instead of "was it a force out?". And your post didn't mention anything about midfield.

 

[World Champs 3X]

The forceout one is a little odd and aids the D way too much. Atleast give the reciever a chance to earn his pay and make the play.

It's a good change the offense get to many breaks anyways.

 

[RayClay]

I agree. I liked the two different face mask rules. Let's face it, some are incidental, and some aren't. Dumb move to change a sensible rule.

The force out rule is another dumb change.

If Todd Pinkston is still in the league, he probably died of fright just thinking about it.

 

[unoriginal]

Again, sure you can carry the defender. It's part of the tackle. Back when I was playing, we used to do it all the time. The irony involved, of course, is that the official will now be needing to judge whether or not the player was carried.

So much for eliminating judgment.

You use to catch jumping receivers and carry them around? I used to be a defensive back and a receiver, and I've watched a fair amount of football besides, and I've never seen this. I've seen corner backs cut out a jumping receiver's legs from under him and send him windmilling to the ground. I've seen safeties put their shoulder pads right into the small of a jumping receiver's back or right on the hip and temporarily turn someone into a parabola. And I've seen linebackers and safeties drive through a tackle and take a receiver to ground. But I've never seen a defensive back bear hug a jumping receiver and carry him off the field, like a girl lugging a bag of sod.

For one thing, usually receivers are taller than defensive backs, so it'd have to be some kind of fireman's carry.

If you're right and it starts turning into Dancing With The Stars along the sidelines, I'll replace my avatar with crow cake.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

I dont like the face mask change, so there saying even the smallest of a face mask incidental or not warrants a possible game changing 15 yard penality?

Also, I HATE the force out change, how can you be expected to catch the ball and keep your feet in bounds if the defender has the easy option of just pushing you out?

That is not only stupid but now a HUGE advantage for the defense. I dont like that one at all.

I would normally agree, but I saw too many times (Like the end of the Arizona-Cleveland game last year) Where the guy was forced out and the refs just wouldn't call it. So why bother having a rule if you're not going to enforce it anyway? At least this way it's absolutley clear what constitutes a catch and what doesn't.

As for the facemasks, I think if they enforce it in the way I'm thinking they will which is something that would have been a 5 yard is now nothing but the 15s are unchanged I think that's a good thing. Offencive players are allowed to hand check the mask, so why can't D players? But if they start calling every touching of the face mask a 15 that's bad.

 

[LuthierJr]

I have no problem with the snap and facemask rule, but I'm not liking the idea of defenders just being able to shove receivers out of bounds if they jump to get the ball...

 

[Res5Cue]

I love the change to "No forceout" , When was the last time you saw a defender pull up short on a tackle on the sideline pondering if this was going to force this poor reciever out of bounds. Plus this is going to weed out alot of crappy quaterbacks that get saved by jumping recievers on high throws.

 

[godef]

That's only if the ball doesn't touch anyone. If Faulk couldn't handle it, it would still be a fumble. If the center hikes to "no one", it was a 5-yard false start. Now, it's a fumble.

OK that makes more sense.

 

[JR4]

I love the change to "No forceout" , When was the last time you saw a defender pull up short on a tackle on the sideline pondering if this was going to force this poor reciever out of bounds. Plus this is going to weed out alot of crappy quaterbacks that get saved by jumping recievers on high throws.

Good points. Also a reporter indicated that this rule would have affected
16 plays last year. WOW ... if that's right this is hardly a thing to get it a
sweat about. How many plays are there in a year? 20,000?

 

[Gumby]

In addition, any direct snap from center that is untouched by the quarterback now will be a live ball; in the past it was considered a false start and the play was blown dead.

I believe it applies to when the QB is under-center. A shotgun snap has always been a live ball as soon as it leaves the center's hands.

Not sure how you can have a direct snap with the QB under center????
Isn't that contradictory?
How does the ball get past the QB to the direct recipient if the QB is standing there with his hands on the Centers butt?????


Also, was there a special rule pertaining to FG tries? As I am sure I recall (without specific recollection) that at some point the holder miffed entirely (due to wind gusts or errant snaps etc) and the ball was then live and folks were trying to recover and return it. Or did they just selectively enforce this 'false start rule'? Which is one more reason for eliminating it.

 

[LiveShot]

If they got rid of the bars and instead used a lexan face mask with small holes in it a player couldn't "face mask" anyone. No bars and holes too small and lexan is bullet proof.

 

[neuronet]

I think these are all good rule changes. There will be fewer penalties overall.

As for the push out rule on the sidelines causing more injuries, umm, have you ever seen what they do to a receiver in the middle of the field? Why should it be different on the sidelines? This adds consistency, and removes a subjective element to the call, which is GREAT.