Rule Changes You Would Like to See

Palm Beach Pats Fan · Jan 16, 2020

p8ryts said:
Don't give coaches unlimited reviews, keep it at 2/3

My proposal is for unlimited reviews that are WON. You are only wasting time if the call was correct in the first place, and you shouldn't pay a penalty for correcting a mistake.

Calhoun44 · Jan 16, 2020

I thought of another one:
I absolutely hate the underthrown ball on a well covered receiver that makes the receiver stop/slowdown and the DB runs into him. It is stupid! The DB has the right to run in his current direction if the WR stops and causes contact that is on him. He either has to fight through the contact or tell his ****ty QB to stop underthrowing him. I hate this call, freakin absolutely hate it.

BaconGrundleCandy · Jan 16, 2020

I would love to DPI/OPI eliminated to an extent. Keep the 5 yard rule but allow hand fighting, light grabbing/touching etc ... Again to an extent. Make 1 or 2 clear-cut violations that would lead to a penalty. Both WR/DB could use their physicality & finesse to counter any over aggression. Guys are too skilled, too fast, too big to be bailed out by cheap flags. DBs are bigger than ever. Let them play a bit more.

Also and I've been saying this as far back as a decade ago while asking for the A22. The fans should be allowed to switch pov at home while watching the game at home. Even if it's the A22 angle, give us options. One behind the OL & DL. A22 Eagle eye. Maybe a close, low cut sideline view. There's abt 80 cameras per game. 100+ at the SB. We have the technology. I'd pay an extra $50-75 somewhere to watch all the games like that. 2020 and we're still losing half the field on every play.

chris_in_sunnyvale · Jan 16, 2020

p8ryts said:
No changes to this. No seeding/

Split the difference: Keep the seeding determination as-is, but the site each game is played is determined by record. A wildcard team like 12-4 Denver in 1997 still has to play the extra week while 11-5 division winner Pittsburgh gets the bye, but the AFCCG between them is in Denver.

Regards,
Chris

TinhWoodhead · Jan 16, 2020

Ice_Ice_Brady said:
There could be two variations. One could be pass interference (15 yards) and the other obstruction (spot foul). Obstruction could be something interpreted as extremely obvious, whereas PI could be more incidental. Otherwise you’ll have defensive backs tackling receivers who have them beaten on deep passes.

That would never happen on the Pats (receiver separation)

Ice_Ice_Brady · Jan 16, 2020

TinhWoodhead said:
That would never happen on the Pats (receiver separation)

Someone posted some advanced analytic website claiming Sanu had better separation than Julio Jones, DeAndre Hopkins, and Jerry Rice in his prime. I hope someone can get that link to Brady before he makes his decision.

ctpatsfan77 · Jan 16, 2020

Sicilian said:
Not as easy as you think. The 46 player gameday rule is there to mitigate the disadvantage caused by minor injuries. If one team had 4 players who were too hurt to play (but not hurt enough to go on IR), and the other team had 0, one team would be playing with 4 additional players on their roster. By having 7 gameday inactives, it gives teams some buffer so there's less of the playing field decided by luck.

Two thoughts on this:

BB is actively opposed to expanding the gameday roster (although more on the grounds of it likely leading to too many "gimmick players" than injuries).
That said, I personally would like to see a rule that keeps "healthy scratches" to a minimum. For example, if team A has 4 healthy scratches out of 7 inactives, while team B has 2, then each team gets to activate 2 of those players, so each team would have 48 instead of 46.

ctpatsfan77 · Jan 16, 2020

p8ryts said:
I agree this needs to change some way, allow more players to return if healthy. However, it results from Redskin owner Jack Kent Cooke stashing several players on IR just to keep them from other teams. It's not fair to the players in some respect. maybe increase the number that can return to 6.

To be fair, that was in the pre-salary cap era, too.

I think if you simply increased the limit, with no other changes, it would be rife for abuse. But I'm not sure how to fix it, either.

TinhWoodhead · Jan 16, 2020

How about a rule 1st and goal at the 1, you can’t run it 3 straight time

bresna · Jan 16, 2020

jimnance said:
NFL needs to change OT rules. Every rule they've ever had, including sudden death, is stupid.
It should be like the NBA and MLB:
You keep playing by the same rules/format as you did in regulation. That way no team is victimized by the luck of a cointoss.
You play an extra quarter,but shorter,say 8 or 10 minutes. You play to the end of the clock,just like regulation.
If score is still tied, in regular season it becomes a tie.
In postseason you keep playing 8 or 10 minute periods until there's a winner.
It's very simple. You're keeping the integrity of the game. The same game you battled for 60 minutes to get to.

That'd be great if everyone on the field wasn't already completely gassed by the end of regulation. Football is not like basketball or baseball. These guys play hard for 60 minutes. They hit and get hit. By the end of regulation, they are beat up. Add infinite OT in the playoffs and it might kill someone. If you want to see how it negatively affects a sport like this, watch a re-run of the last OT period in one the 4 or 5 OT NHL playoff games. By the end of those games, the guys are having trouble breathing, much less skating.

captain stone · Jan 19, 2020

4 suggestions off the top of my head I have not heard mentioned:

Stop the clock after every first down made while the chain gang advances then re-spots the sticks...same as college.

Widen the hash marks on the field to their original distance apart, i.e. the same as college still is & the NFL used to be. The obvious advantage here is that there would be fewer opportunities for the incompetent zebras to mis-spot the ball placement.

Lengthen the legal chuck distance from a minimum of 5 yards to a maximum of 10, depending on the yards needed for a first down: if between 0-5 yards, the legal chuck distance remains at 5; if between 5-10 yards, the legal distance becomes the same as the YTG; and if > 10 yards the distance is capped at 10.

And regarding coaches' challenges, they should be determined by the number of timeouts a team has remaining: e.g., if you still have all 3 timeouts, then you should have At Least 3 challenges to use if you so choose; and while a team should Not lose a challenge opportunity (or a timeout) if their preceding challenge was successful, they would lose a timeout (and thus have one fewer challenge opportunity) if a subsequent challenge is unsuccessful.

BTTA · Jan 19, 2020

Announce the 5 yard penalties that preclude a play on the scoreboard, rather than having the ref announce it to the TV audience. There's not enough value in slowing the game down just to tell us something we all saw: that #87 crossed the line or moved early. Have one ref move the ball while another radios the call upstairs, and keep things moving. They can put it on the scoreboard in the stadium, and the TV announcers can tell us what happened (or just scroll it across the bottom of the screen).

BTTA · Jan 19, 2020

Eliminate punting. You get stopped, you turn the ball over. Would reduce blow outs and make almost no lead safe, while seriously increasing the drama of the game. Every series would matter, a lot.

Tottie · Jan 19, 2020

betterthanthealternative said:
Eliminate punting. You get stopped, you turn the ball over. Would reduce blow outs and make almost no lead safe, while seriously increasing the drama of the game. Every series would matter, a lot.

Never in my life did I think about this and to be honest it sounds so interesting. It would be a totally different game and produce totally different game plans. I don't think you can do this but I would love to see it for a season.

Doctor DDS · Jan 19, 2020

Change who gets the ball first in OT from a coin flip to a different variable. My suggestion would be to give it to whomever received the initial kickoff. That would add a little strategy to the receive/defer decision and gives both teams the knowledge about who will be getting the ball first in OT so they can adjust their 4th quarter strategy accordingly. Do I go for 2 knowing that the other team will be receiving the kickoff?

Would also be fine if who receives the OT kickoff is based on something like TOP, turnovers or total yards. By removing it from a random coin flip it would become part of the game strategy and remove the unfairness narrative.

Pat the Pats Fan · Jan 19, 2020

Sicilian said:
These remind me of what my dad always used to say: "I like hockey, but it would be more entertaining if holes opened up in the ice at random and swallowed players."

Holes in the ice...that’s how our games ended on the pond as a kid, our pucks gotten eaten by the remnant ice fishing holes...

captain stone · Jan 19, 2020

captain stone said:
4 suggestions off the top of my head I have not heard mentioned:

Stop the clock after every first down made while the chain gang advances then re-spots the sticks...same as college.

Widen the hash marks on the field to their original distance apart, i.e. the same as college still is & the NFL used to be. The obvious advantage here is that there would be fewer opportunities for the incompetent zebras to mis-spot the ball placement.

Lengthen the legal chuck distance from a minimum of 5 yards to a maximum of 10, depending on the yards needed for a first down: if between 0-5 yards, the legal chuck distance remains at 5; if between 5-10 yards, the legal distance becomes the same as the YTG; and if > 10 yards the distance is capped at 10.

And regarding coaches' challenges, they should be determined by the number of timeouts a team has remaining: e.g., if you still have all 3 timeouts, then you should have At Least 3 challenges to use if you so choose; and while a team should Not lose a challenge opportunity (or a timeout) if their preceding challenge was successful, they would lose a timeout (and thus have one fewer challenge opportunity) if a subsequent challenge is unsuccessful.

Forgot to add: allow Every Single Play to be reviewable.

TB_Helmet · Jan 19, 2020

captain stone said:
Forgot to add: allow Every Single Play to be reviewable.

This falls under “careful what you wish for”. If you think the game is slow now, wait until coaches can throw flags for offensive holding!

p8ryts · Jan 19, 2020

TB_Helmet said:
This falls under “careful what you wish for”. If you think the game is slow now, wait until coaches can throw flags for offensive holding!

making every play reviewable doesn't mean unlimited reviews. keep the same system 2 reviews with a third if one is successful. (maybe you can win two back, not sure). Coaches can use those how they see fit during game. I support that.

p8ryts · Jan 19, 2020

Here's one I would like. Don't know if this is best or another system, but its a step in the right direction.Complete Lazser Down Kit | Sideline Power Not cheap, each team could purchase for their home stadium

Rule Changes You Would Like to See

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Not the kind of guy to say I told you so ...

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

I heard 10,000 whispering and nobody listening

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

He/Him

He/Him

In the Starting Line-Up

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads