What rules should be changed???

[sandman]

another NFL rule i don't like it pass interference. it should be 15 yards as it is in college, not spot of the foul.

Well if the guy was going to catch the ball and possibly get 60+ yards, but cant because he was interfered with... Why only give him 15 yards??? You'd see guys getting tackled all the time if that were the case

do you see that in college? no.

[Loaded NightraiN]

another NFL rule i don't like it pass interference. it should be 15 yards as it is in college, not spot of the foul.

Well if the guy was going to catch the ball and possibly get 60+ yards, but cant because he was interfered with... Why only give him 15 yards??? You'd see guys getting tackled all the time if that were the case

do you see that in college? no.

Well most college football players arent to bright... Lets face it they're not there for the education 

One they'd get to the NFL the coaches smarten them up, in that regard any way...

[sandman]

another NFL rule i don't like it pass interference. it should be 15 yards as it is in college, not spot of the foul.

Well if the guy was going to catch the ball and possibly get 60+ yards, but cant because he was interfered with... Why only give him 15 yards??? You'd see guys getting tackled all the time if that were the case

do you see that in college? no.

Well most college football players arent to bright... Lets face it they're not there for the education?

One they'd get to the NFL the coaches smarten them up, in that regard any way...

if the DB is close enough to tackle the receiver, than they are close enough to make a play on the ball.

if it's obvious a WR is gonna make a catch and score, than the DB is probably no where near the play anyway.

too many bad calls are made regarding pass interference. and the penalty frequently sets up the offensive team in a great position to score. a common desperation tactic is to just air it up and hope for pass interference. it just seems cheap.

ironically, the NFL does have a rule against what you are describing. they call it as either "defensive holding" or "illegal contact". you usually see this done by LBs (and sometimes DBs as well) when they know they are about to be beat badly for a pass. and what's the penalty? 5 yards and an automatic 1st down.

[freedom78]

another NFL rule i don't like it pass interference. it should be 15 yards as it is in college, not spot of the foul.

Well if the guy was going to catch the ball and possibly get 60+ yards, but cant because he was interfered with... Why only give him 15 yards??? You'd see guys getting tackled all the time if that were the case

do you see that in college? no.

Well most college football players arent to bright... Lets face it they're not there for the education 

One they'd get to the NFL the coaches smarten them up, in that regard any way...

if the DB is close enough to tackle the receiver, than they are close enough to make a play on the ball.

if it's obvious a WR is gonna make a catch and score, than the DB is probably no where near the play anyway.

too many bad calls are made regarding pass interference. and the penalty frequently sets up the offensive team in a great position to score. a common desperation tactic is to just air it up and hope for pass interference. it just seems cheap.

ironically, the NFL does have a rule against what you are describing. they call it as either "defensive holding" or "illegal contact". you usually see this done by LBs (and sometimes DBs as well) when they know they are about to be beat badly for a pass. and what's the penalty? 5 yards and an automatic 1st down.

I agree that it's often a very cheap penalty that, if judged fairly, could go against the offensive player as often as not.  For example, the call against whomever was covering Moss last weekend...yeah, it favors the offense too much.

[Axl4Prez2004]

^ don't worry, they made up for that with the highly questionable call that later took a touchdown away from Randy.

  Now, Sandman, you mentioned 30% of the overtime games end with one possession.  That's a very misleading statistic.  The important stat to remember is 50-50.  If you win the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning the game.  If you lose the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning.  It's freaking perfect.  If we ever get to the point the offensive side of the ball is given an overall advantage, etc., or vice-versa, then we'll have a problem...but since there is no problem, don't fix it.

  In fact, if we use the math we learned in high school, 20% of the time, overtime has at least 3 possessions.  70% of the games will be 2 or more possessions.  College overtime borders on ridiculous.  In my opinion of course. 

Sudden Death is exciting.   

[sandman]

^ don't worry, they made up for that with the highly questionable call that later took a touchdown away from Randy.

? Now, Sandman, you mentioned 30% of the overtime games end with one possession.? That's a very misleading statistic.? The important stat to remember is 50-50.? If you win the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning the game.? If you lose the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning.? It's freaking perfect.? If we ever get to the point the offensive side of the ball is given an overall advantage, etc., or vice-versa, then we'll have a problem...but since there is no problem, don't fix it.

? In fact, if we use the math we learned in high school, 20% of the time, overtime has at least 3 possessions.? 70% of the games will be 2 or more possessions.? College overtime borders on ridiculous.? In my opinion of course.?

Sudden Death is exciting.? ?

highly questionable? moss dropped the ball! it clearly was not in his control when he landed. that's why he didn't even flinch when it was overturned.

you're 50% figure is not correct when looking at the last five years. and that makes sense since the NFL has made it EASIER for offenses to score in recent years (to make the game more exciting). so now it is clearly a disadvantage.

imagine an AFC champ game in indy that ends up tied at 38. indy wins the toss and because there are much fewer touchbacks these days (since teams now kick from the 30), indy returns the ball to the 40. manning completes a 20 yard pass and vinatieri kicks a 57 yard FG to end the game. are you telling me there isn't a person in world that wouldn't want to see Brady touch the ball at least once in OT??? that would be an absolute disaster. and the rule would be changed the following year.

i agree, sudden death is exciting. but letting something as ridiculous as a coin toss determine who gets the ball first is insane. i wouldn't have as much a problem with it if they used a stat to determine the first possession. like who gained the most yards during the game, or who has the better record, etc.

[D]

I always thought some of the penalty stuff should be changed.

For Instance, If a team is on their own 1 yard line and its first and 10, lets say they get called for holding.

Its normally a 10 yard penalty but where they are already on the one, they basically get away with the penalty scott free. Same with personal fouls.

I think even though the ball stays on the one, they should move the chains and still make it 1st and 20 or 1st and 25 or with a false start 1st and 15.

Baseball should have a pitch clock like the NBA shot clock.

[Loaded NightraiN]

if the DB is close enough to tackle the receiver, than they are close enough to make a play on the ball.

if it's obvious a WR is gonna make a catch and score, than the DB is probably no where near the play anyway.

too many bad calls are made regarding pass interference. and the penalty frequently sets up the offensive team in a great position to score. a common desperation tactic is to just air it up and hope for pass interference. it just seems cheap.

ironically, the NFL does have a rule against what you are describing. they call it as either "defensive holding" or "illegal contact". you usually see this done by LBs (and sometimes DBs as well) when they know they are about to be beat badly for a pass. and what's the penalty? 5 yards and an automatic 1st down.

Well right casue the illegal contact is usually within the first 5-10 yards.... Down field a safety, holds a guys arm or tugs his jersey, when he's beat, why only a 15 yard penalty??

I'm not saying sometimes the calls dont suck, but the penalty is fair.....

Baseball should have a pitch clock like the NBA shot clock.

What would the result of the violation be??

[Axl4Prez2004]

^ don't worry, they made up for that with the highly questionable call that later took a touchdown away from Randy.

  Now, Sandman, you mentioned 30% of the overtime games end with one possession.  That's a very misleading statistic.  The important stat to remember is 50-50.  If you win the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning the game.  If you lose the toss, you have a 50% chance of winning.  It's freaking perfect.  If we ever get to the point the offensive side of the ball is given an overall advantage, etc., or vice-versa, then we'll have a problem...but since there is no problem, don't fix it.

  In fact, if we use the math we learned in high school, 20% of the time, overtime has at least 3 possessions.  70% of the games will be 2 or more possessions.  College overtime borders on ridiculous.  In my opinion of course. 

Sudden Death is exciting.   

highly questionable? moss dropped the ball! it clearly was not in his control when he landed. that's why he didn't even flinch when it was overturned.

you're 50% figure is not correct when looking at the last five years. and that makes sense since the NFL has made it EASIER for offenses to score in recent years (to make the game more exciting). so now it is clearly a disadvantage.

imagine an AFC champ game in indy that ends up tied at 38. indy wins the toss and because there are much fewer touchbacks these days (since teams now kick from the 30), indy returns the ball to the 40. manning completes a 20 yard pass and vinatieri kicks a 57 yard FG to end the game. are you telling me there isn't a person in world that wouldn't want to see Brady touch the ball at least once in OT??? that would be an absolute disaster. and the rule would be changed the following year.

i agree, sudden death is exciting. but letting something as ridiculous as a coin toss determine who gets the ball first is insane. i wouldn't have as much a problem with it if they used a stat to determine the first possession. like who gained the most yards during the game, or who has the better record, etc.

Easy Sandman!  I wasn't trying to be an ass!  Also, I wasn't referring to that first touchdown, I know that wasn't a catch. (it was gorgeous body control) but it wasn't a catch.  I was talking about Randy's "push-off" near the end of the game, which reminds me of the phantom push-off the Seahawk's receiver had in their super bowl game against the steelers.  that called back touchdown changed that game right from the get-go.

Also, may I say I really like D's idea to tack on yards if the call is holding and the ball is on their own 1 yard line.   

Sandman, if the trend continues, which I'd have to see all the numbers to confirm it has, just make the kickoff from 5 yards forward.  I say keep the sudden death aspect, just tweak.  "Last licks" is just so playground. 

Also, to use your Patriot-Colts analogy, what if it was a 2006 Bears team or 2000 or 2001 Ravens defense (teams with shite for offense) and they won the coin toss?  It works both ways. 

I always go back to the historical numbers...50-50.  At one point in my childhood, I think the winner of the toss actually lost more times than they won.  Just my $.02.   

[D]

I think in Overtime each team should get at least 1 possession. I think its bullshit that a team can battle for 60 minutes and not even get an opportunity in overtime.

In OT the defense is already worn down from playing an entire game.

I don't like the college OT putting the ball on the 25, thats dumb, but if a team scores on the opening possession, the other team should get a shot.


In baseball, the penalty would be an automatic ball.

So if the count is 2-1 and u don't get the pitch off, the count automatically goes to 3-1.


Also in College Football, they should only stop the clock on a first down inside 2 minutes of the 2nd and 4th quarters.

The reason games last forever is because they stop the clock for the chains to be set after every first down.

[Loaded NightraiN]

In baseball, the penalty would be an automatic ball.

I dunno... Then you walk in the winning run or something.... Dont like the idea of that...

[freedom78]

imagine an AFC champ game in indy that ends up tied at 38. indy wins the toss and because there are much fewer touchbacks these days (since teams now kick from the 30), indy returns the ball to the 40. manning completes a 20 yard pass and vinatieri kicks a 57 yard FG to end the game. are you telling me there isn't a person in world that wouldn't want to see Brady touch the ball at least once in OT???

I can think of nothing more pleasing than the scenario you just described. 

[Mal Brossard]

NHL: The instigator rule must be abolished.

[Loaded NightraiN]

NHL: The instigator rule must be abolished.

Yeah theres nothing dirty about fighting...

They should worry more about scum bags who go for head shots and break necks

[tim_m]

Yeah that instigator rule is completely ridiculous. I miss the real good fights.

[pilferk]

What would the result of the violation be??

How about an automatic ball added to the count?  Seems a reasonable "penalty"?

[pilferk]

In baseball, the penalty would be an automatic ball.

I dunno... Then you walk in the winning run or something.... Dont like the idea of that...

Exactly...just don't violate the pitch count down.

The only abuse I'd see is automatic walks would no longer require actual pitches to be thrown...and though you RARELY see an intentional walk result in a wild pitch or passed ball, the opportunity is there and it does happen.

[Loaded NightraiN]

^ It might have been last year, a pitcher veged out... The batter got a base hit while being intentionaly walked... Like you said rarley happens but great when it does 

[sandman]

imagine an AFC champ game in indy that ends up tied at 38. indy wins the toss and because there are much fewer touchbacks these days (since teams now kick from the 30), indy returns the ball to the 40. manning completes a 20 yard pass and vinatieri kicks a 57 yard FG to end the game. are you telling me there isn't a person in world that wouldn't want to see Brady touch the ball at least once in OT???

I can think of nothing more pleasing than the scenario you just described.?

ok, except indy fans and patriots haters, there isn't a person in the world that wouldn't want to see both QBs get a shot in OT.

and D made another great point - defenses are spent by the end of the game. one more advantage for offenses.

does it make any sense for baseball to go to a sudden death situation???

[Axl4Prez2004]

imagine an AFC champ game in indy that ends up tied at 38. indy wins the toss and because there are much fewer touchbacks these days (since teams now kick from the 30), indy returns the ball to the 40. manning completes a 20 yard pass and vinatieri kicks a 57 yard FG to end the game. are you telling me there isn't a person in world that wouldn't want to see Brady touch the ball at least once in OT???

I can think of nothing more pleasing than the scenario you just described. 

ok, except indy fans and patriots haters, there isn't a person in the world that wouldn't want to see both QBs get a shot in OT.

and D made another great point - defenses are spent by the end of the game. one more advantage for offenses.

does it make any sense for baseball to go to a sudden death situation???

Sandman, no, baseball's never been played like that.  There is a built-in home field advantage.  Would you want to do the same with football and give each team possessions where the home team always gets the last chance?  I think that would be silly myself.  In an age where they are trying to cut down on the length of games, it would be league suicide.  Just imagine how many times you'd have to go to the booth to review crucial plays.  Here's an idea.  Have a great offense and a great defense.  Less worries that way.  I'd love to see the stats of offensive powerhouses, i.e. 2000 Rams, Manning's 48td year, etc., and '85 Bears, Ravens super bowl def., etc. and see how they fared in overtime games.   

If the "spent defenses" and the "offense having the overall advantage over the defense" arguments were true, the odds of the team who won the coin toss winning the game would be a lot higher than 50% eh?  But it's not.  It aint broke, don't fix it. 

Somebody mentioned 20% of games end on the 1st o.t. possession.  As I mentioned before, in the other 80% of games, about 62.5% of the time, the other team wins.  I love that aspect of the o.t.  There is a huge edge to the team that can stop the other team's advance down the field.  If a team has the ball first, and doesn't cash in, they only end up winning 37.5% of the time. 

Sudden Death O.T. rocks!