5 yard neutral zone at the line of scrimmage, 2.5 per side. Hell if they are going to an 18 game schedule and expanded play-offs they might as well give these guys a head of steam before the collisions really begin.
5 yard neutral zone at the line of scrimmage, 2.5 per side. Hell if they are going to an 18 game schedule and expanded play-offs they might as well give these guys a head of steam before the collisions really begin.
Chop block rule is an interesting one, considering the current emphasis on avoiding hits to the head, and the whole Meriweather-hit-'em-in-the-knees thing.
Inside 4 minutes left in 2nd & 4th quarter if defense commits a penalty and time has elapsed, put the time back on the clock - reset the clock for the next play to where it began the prior play. too many times i've seen teams driving to tie or win and the defense commits a penalty and the offense loses 5 or 6 seconds that ticked off during the play on which the penalty was committed....
1. Eliminate kickoffs and PATs. Teams automatically start from the 20 yard line immediately after touchdown. Touchdowns are worth 6 points. Eliminate 2 point conversion.
2. Reduce time between plays to 25 seconds instead of 40.
2. There are no separate offensive and defensive teams. Same players have to play both sides of the ball. How to enforce this ? Make it so that if a player steps off the field, he cannot step back in for the remainder of the game. This also means that guys like kickers, punters etc. have to be part of the playing team and not specialists.
I like where you are going with the pass interference thing, but let's really equalize it. Make it a negative spot foul. If the Jets are on the 50 and offensive pass interference is called at the NE 25 it should be a 25 yard penalty on the Jets. If offensive pass interference is called in the end zone, give the Jets the ball on their 1, again assuming the play started on the 50. Plus loss of down of course.
I'd put no cap on roster sizes at all, but still have a salary cap.
If a guy gets injured he doesn't play until he is healthy, it's stupid that you need to end someone's season cause they're injured for 8 weeks. You could still have a gameday roster of whatever but even that is a bit silly imo. Maybe have a rule that every healthy player has to be active and has to play at least 1 snap? It would help develop rookies like Josh Boyce who wouldn't get much of a chance otherwise.
Finally, make things like PI/Holding etc reviewable, it's extremely unfair when a team gets a massive yardage gain on a bull**** PI call
Also, I believe I heard Jonny Kraft on pre-game this week saying he didn't know why there's a rule that you can only activate 45 guys in a given week. Seemed to think you should be able to activate all 53 guys on your, you know, active roster. Kind of made sense.
I remember an interview (probably on WEEI) with Belichick where he was asked about this, and he said he liked the restricted gameday roster because otherwise you'd have so many specialists that it would get a little ridiculous. I think he likes having to find players who are willing to perform multiple roles, it's in his wheelhouse.
Eliminate the extra point and only give teams 1 point for a TD, that way people will stop criticizing soccer for being too low scoring. FG's are 1/4 point.
A couple that might help out defenses and balance things a bit:
- Ball gets placed at the point it was thrown from on an incomplete pass rather than the line of scrimmage.
- Go metric and make the field 100 meters rather than 100 yards, with 10 meters rather than 10 yards to a first down. Now the offense has to go just a bit further to get first downs and touchdowns.
In terms of challenges, make it limited only by how many you get wrong and are upheld (e.g., 2). The whole idea is to get the call correct, right? If four calls are wrong, why be limited to only being able to challenge three of them?
I'm on the fence about roster sizes. Will it just result in more specialists? For example, when the league had 40-man rosters punters and kickers were also often position players. We've already seen many teams keep two roster spots for kickers (one for kickoffs, one for field goals); if the roster is expanded will that result in two punters on a team (one that specializes in getting it down inside the 20 and one that just kicks it as long as possible)? I do like the idea of expanding the number of in-season IR designations.
I actually had an idea along these lines many years ago. every year of service a player accrues with a team allows them to count 10% less against the cap, so a guy like Wilfork would be at a point where his cap hit would only count for about 20% against the cap the first year of his new deal, and eventually count nothing. This way teams could keep their best players and the ones who have become a big part of their team's identity.
- When a team on offense or defense gets a penalty, and there is not enough room to march it off, allow the other team the choice of 1/2 the distance to the goal, or making the opposing team lose a down.
- Can only go for the PAT or 2 pt conversion if a down is available
- penalties on PAT's/FG on the defensive team are marched off ~after~ the kick off if successful.
- each team is allowed to reverse one call against them per game.
I actually think moving to an 18 week schedule with 2 bye weeks for each team would accomplish nearly the same for the league. But by your plan I still think they stagger the weeks and that would be 21 weeks of TV revenue.
They did two bye weeks in a 16 game season before, so it shouldn't be that far of a stretch to do it if, really when, they expand to 18 regular season games.
Here's a radical notion. Allow an unlimited # of players on short-term IR so that teams don't have to shelve guys for the entire season when they could eventually be back, not alone completely watering down the talent level, but forcing teams to try and push guys back early or have them play injured.
In a time when player safety is an issue, you'd think this wouldn't be so radical.
Love the theory. It helps players and makes a better quality on field product.
Critics say teams will be just stashing players there off the 53. I say BFD. Since IR players still count against the cap let teams manage their player portfolio.
What fan would not want to see the very best players on the field in post season?
Also, I believe I heard Jonny Kraft on pre-game this week saying he didn't know why there's a rule that you can only activate 45 guys in a given week. Seemed to think you should be able to activate all 53 guys on your, you know, active roster. Kind of made sense.
BB has been against this. He says the limitation forces teams to find & develop players with more attributes where as 53 allows narrow specialists. As a fan I want 53, best product on the field.
BB has been against this. He says the limitation forces teams to find & develop players with more attributes where as 53 allows narrow specialists. As a fan I want 53, best product on the field.
That's what I thought I heard as well. It's funny though, you'd think he'd love the idea, since then he could list every player as "Active" regardless of injury
Love the theory. It helps players and makes a better quality on field product.
Critics say teams will be just stashing players there off the 53. I say BFD. Since IR players still count against the cap let teams manage their player portfolio.
What fan would not want to see the very best players on the field in post season?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
