Proposed on-the-field rule changes

soflagator

Senior Member
Lifetime Member
Sep 4, 2014
21,140
78,761
The only thing I'd change is the disqualification for targeting. These players only have so much eligibility to play the sport. Taking some of that away, especially in some of these questionable cases, is wrong.

I'd also get rid of the second unsportsmanlike rule, with Joesph's case in the VU game being a perfect example. No player should ever be sitting minding his own business and be told he's being disqualified, in part, because of someone else's mistakes. That's a joke and should be killed first thing tomorrow morning.

Other than that, leave it alone. The NFL has become such a disaster in rule interpretation it's exhausting. Just looking at bizarre calls like yesterday's Eagles/Bears game, or the Ertz TD in the SB where he took twelve steps, crossed the line and the ground caused the fumble and it was nearly called an incompletion should tell you all you need to know. The more a group of people(who may not have ever even played the game) tinker with things to find solutions for extremely rare instances, the worse it gets.
 

soflagator

Senior Member
Lifetime Member
Sep 4, 2014
21,140
78,761
I see it happen all the time. A WR catches a ball slightly out of his reach and goes down 5 yards from a DB. In the NFL, he can get up and run. In college, the DB just looks at him passively and walks away. It's dumb. Make the defense get a guy down, even if that means just touching him when he's laying on the ground.

The issue with that is the amount of fumbles that will inevitably happen directly after they get up. It happens in the NFL with professionals. I can only imagine college kids getting up after a diving interception and having it knocked loose by a now-defender who they didn't know was in pursuit.

In line with Doug, part of football is staying on your feet. The moment you fall, forced by a defender or not, you're down. I actually wish the NFL would go that direction. It would also probably double the amount of replay time.
 
Last edited:

oxrageous

Founding Member
It's Good to be King
Administrator
Jun 5, 2014
36,935
97,630
Founding Member
But in the NFL it is very rare that someone does not touch him immediately, so not so often.
What difference does it make how "rare" it is? If you aren't touched, you can run. And it's not rare at all, not that that has anything to do with the argument.
 

oxrageous

Founding Member
It's Good to be King
Administrator
Jun 5, 2014
36,935
97,630
Founding Member
The issue with that is the amount of fumbles that will inevitably happen directly after they get up. It happens in the NFL with professionals. I can only imagine college kids getting up after a diving interception and having it knocked loose by a now-defender who they didn't know was in pursuit.

In line with Doug, part of football is staying on your feet. The moment you fall, forced by a defender or not, you're down. I actually wish the NFL would go that direction. It would also probably double the amount of replay time.
I'm sending you to Swamp Gas after this one.
 

ThreatMatrix

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Aug 28, 2014
16,540
26,088
Ejections for intentional targeting only. Seems everyone is on board with that one.
I’m on the fence about PI.
And I like one foot in bounds. Just because it’s different than the NFL.
Not a fan of the new fair catch rule. We will call that the Nord rule since he couldn’t coach up players to know when to fair catch.
 

Bushmaster

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Jul 27, 2018
3,246
6,979
If you are down, you are down. The down by contact rule is silly. It isn't down by contact. A defender can rub your elbow with his pinky and its down by contact. Defender had nothing to do with you being down, so make it down, you are down.

PI should be 10 yards from spot of foul or 30 yards, whichever is less. Holding (O and D) should be 10 yards from spot of foul.

10 second clock delay after first down to set the chains.

2 feet or 1 knee/elbow on a catch.

Targeting should be ejection after SECOND infraction. 2 infractions in a game, 1 game suspension. Targeting should only be for defenseless player, otherwise, I am all good with helmet to helmet as long as BOTH players see it coming. Anything with the crown of the helmet would be considered blatant and automatic ejection/game suspension. This is safety for the perpetrator rather than the one getting the punishment. Neck injuries paralysis etc.
 

ThreatMatrix

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Aug 28, 2014
16,540
26,088
The problem I have with holding calls is that they are called soo inconsistently. And can make such a yuge difference. It’s a killer when it’s a BS call or non- call.
If they did anything I’d like to see them focus on getting those calls right.
 

Ancient Reptile

Senior Member
Mar 4, 2015
10,796
11,119
I'd like Soft Helmets and Soft Shoulder Pads. That eliminates targeting and many injuries.


I played Rugby; the tackling can be just as aggressive if not more.


IMO, it’s the equipment not the rules that is the issue.
What possible reason is there for not padding the outside of the helmet? Why deliberately make it a weapon and then penalize players for using it,?
 

oxrageous

Founding Member
It's Good to be King
Administrator
Jun 5, 2014
36,935
97,630
Founding Member
You guys are whimps. Non down-by-contact and one-foot-in-bounds are wussy rules, seemingly made more for Pop Warner football. Anyone who is for them sits to pee.
 

TheDouglas78

Founding Member
Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 12, 2014
16,292
14,720
Founding Member
Agreed 10000%. There can always be improvements, the targeting rules for instance, but if you want to watch the NFL, go watch it.

So I should have said make it like high school where the clock doesn't stop for a 1st?
 

Bushmaster

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Jul 27, 2018
3,246
6,979
You guys are whimps. Non down-by-contact and one-foot-in-bounds are wussy rules, seemingly made more for Pop Warner football. Anyone who is for them sits to pee.

One foot I agree with you.

But the down by contact rule is stupid. How much contact?

What it really boils down to is your opinion is wrong.
 

ChiefGator

A Chief and a Gator, Master of the Ignore list!!!!
Lifetime Member
Nov 9, 2015
7,401
4,168
What difference does it make how "rare" it is? If you aren't touched, you can run. And it's not rare at all, not that that has anything to do with the argument.

It means that the change would not be significant, therefore not that important. Just as if pass interference only happened say two times a year I would not care about changing that rule.

Now it is just my opinion so not that important.
 

Swamp Donkey

Founding Member
7-14 vs P5 Fire Stricklin First
Lifetime Member
Jun 9, 2014
78,161
109,977
Founding Member
I hear you...but the next time you watch a game, the clock literally stops for about 7 to 8 seconds (in real time). They move those chains quickly, it's not much of a stoppage. I would be okay if they changed to rule to only stop it within 5 minutes of each half (end of the 2nd quarter, end of the 4th).

I'm torn on the PI calls. Maybe if the pass is over 15 yards it's a 20 yard penalty? It's an advantage to the defense in CFB. I don't like all the "holding" calls on the D on passing plays and that it's an automatic 1st down - it should only be a 1st down if the 5 yard penalty is enough yards for a 1st down).
I cant imagine people want LESS offense. 3/4 of the SEC games are unwatchable puntfests as it is.
 

Swamp Donkey

Founding Member
7-14 vs P5 Fire Stricklin First
Lifetime Member
Jun 9, 2014
78,161
109,977
Founding Member
I'd also like the two feet in bounds like the NFL.
I've never understood the two feet rule innthe NFL, though it does make for some acrobatic looking catches. you don't have to get two feet into the end zone or two feet over the first down marker.
 

ChiefGator

A Chief and a Gator, Master of the Ignore list!!!!
Lifetime Member
Nov 9, 2015
7,401
4,168
Ejections for intentional targeting only. Seems everyone is on board with that one.
I’m on the fence about PI.
And I like one foot in bounds. Just because it’s different than the NFL.
Not a fan of the new fair catch rule. We will call that the Nord rule since he couldn’t coach up players to know when to fair catch.


Thanks for the input but I think that kickoffs are somewhat dangerous so I actually like the fair catch rule and think the NFL should adopt it.
 

G8trwood

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Nov 29, 2015
4,084
6,041
Part of your body must be in the endzone, no more breaking the plane bs... :)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    Birthdays

    Members online

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    31,642
    Messages
    1,615,698
    Members
    1,642
    Latest member
    fishermb