0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It's part of a 40 year assault on defenses. The NFL kept moving them in and in and in because they thought plays beginning way over on a far hash made the field easier to defend. At one time they proposed just using a hash down the middle for all plays but stopped short of that.I think the college rule is better than either the old or new pro rule. They could adopt that, except start on the 40 or something challenging. Everyone would get at least one possession, which seems to be a fundlemental flaw of the NFL system..
Before they killed off NFL Europe, the NFL used that league to experiment with new rules, one of which was a modified overtime. In NFL Europe OT, each team was guaranteed one possession (regardless of how you scored), and then if the game was still tied after each team had a possession, it became sudden death.Other than just playing out an entire extra quarter, this seemed like the fairest way to have overtime in football. Of course, it wasn't what the NFL wound up adopting.
I don't think the NFL and college need to have all the same rules. College athletes are much less skilled and athletic overall and the rules should reflect that (for example: only need 1 foot down to be in-bounds in college football). However, the college overtime is perfect and should be used in the NFL, except that the possession should start back a little further.
Is that really the OT rule? I thought the playoff OT rule was that if the first team to get possession scored, the other team got one shot to score. But if the first team failed to score and the next team scored, the game was over. Basically ensuring each team gets at least one possession.
Nope, a TD on the opening possession wins the game.NFL Postseason overtime rules
Hmm, I don't know where I got that. Maybe just wishful thinking, I like my idea a lot better than that one.
As we enter the playoffs, a new rule comes in regarding overtime.To refresh your memory, if the receiving team in OT scores a TD, game over. If only a FG, game continues. I hate this rule because it introduces uncertainty in execution. I dont want to see a coach making a huge decision here based on a computer card indicating what to do. To me a rule must be the same in regular season and the playoffs, which the networks would reject for making games too long.
While at one time I felt differently, I've come around to the idea that someone should have to be downed by contact (NFL rule) rather than down because the field happens to have slippery turf and you slip to a knee while making a catch or making a cut.
Nobody would dream of stopping a baseball game in the top of the 10th just because one team had scored, even if they won a coin toss to see who would bat first.
I'd like to see the rule where a player catches a ball while in the air and pushed out of bounds ruled incomplete changed.
I would like to see the NFL change what is considered a "reviewable" call. If a player makes a catch and gets both feet down but it's called incomplete on the field.
This. I just wish I understood what is vs. isn't a reviewable call in the first place. I thought I understood...until the DJ fumble call was overturned in the LSU game. Yeah, I know this thread is about NFL rules.I agree with you about the pass completion rules as well...it is just too complicated. Frankly, I think it should be enough that the ball doesn't hit the ground. None of this "well, he caught the ball, got both feet down in-bounds, but as he was falling out of bounds, the ball moved a little bit in his hands = incomplete pass" crap.
I think they should make the hashmarks in the NFL the same distance apart as they are in the NCAA. I never understood why they made it easier for professional kickers than for college kickers.
The one that bothers me the most is if it's called a catch on the field they can review it... but if it's called incomplete on the field you're fucked. How is that fair? I don't give a fuck about Detroit or Green Bay but that was fucked up.
Page created in 0.361 seconds with 35 queries.