PDA

View Full Version : Proposed 2012 NFL Rule Changes


majestrate
03-22-2012, 10:14 AM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7720081/nfl-owners-vote-replay-injury-list-rule-changes

So far, looks like:


Eliminate referees from instant replay reviews
Expand what the booth official rules on
Allow a player to return during season from IR
Expanding the postseason overtime rule to the regular season
Making a horse-collar tackle on a QB inside the pocket a 15 yd penalty (currently no penalty)
Expansion of defenseless player rules to protect defensive players against crackback blocks to the head, or being blocked by an opponent headfirst (currently only protected by low crackback blocks)
Moving the trade deadline from after the 6th week of games to after the 8th week of games
Allowing teams to have 90 players on the offseason and training camp rosters, before the first cut; counting unsigned draft choices

What is a crackback block? -- http://football.about.com/cs/football101/g/gl_crackback.htm

Rey
03-22-2012, 10:21 AM
Those are some pretty intriguing proposals...

Dutchrudder
03-22-2012, 10:50 AM
I like all of the proposals except the Over time rule, that one was dumb to begin with. Here's the simple solution to NFL overtime, first team to score a touchdown wins. That's it. No FGs, no extra points, no confusing possession rules, just TD. It would be awesome to watch teams in the Red Zone on 4th down go for it. Goalline stands in overtime would be epic. FGs are lame, this league is built on touchdowns.

I have said for a long time that IR needs to be changed to an MLB DL type of listing, where the team regains a roster spot, but the player must be out a designated period of time. 8 weeks kind of makes sense, but I do hope they put a caveat in there about them being able to return early for the playoffs if they are placed on IR within the last 7 weeks of the season.

Texaninlild
03-22-2012, 11:10 AM
I prefer the playoff OT rule to the long standing one.

infantrycak
03-22-2012, 12:01 PM
I like all of the proposals except the Over time rule, that one was dumb to begin with. Here's the simple solution to NFL overtime, first team to score a touchdown wins. That's it. No FGs, no extra points, no confusing possession rules, just TD. It would be awesome to watch teams in the Red Zone on 4th down go for it. Goalline stands in overtime would be epic. FGs are lame, this league is built on touchdowns.

Your rule would be fine with me but I like the playoff overtime rule they instituted better than the old one.

Thorn
03-22-2012, 01:20 PM
I'm fine with all of them, especially the four below.

Allow a player to return during season from IR

Expanding the postseason overtime rule to the regular season

Moving the trade deadline from after the 6th week of games to after the 8th week of games

Allowing teams to have 90 players on the offseason and training camp rosters, before the first cut; counting unsigned draft choices

GP
03-22-2012, 01:30 PM
Not a fan of the ticky-tack proposal below:

Expansion of defenseless player rules to protect defensive players against crackback blocks to the head, or being blocked by an opponent headfirst (currently only protected by low crackback blocks)

I mean, the game is going to slow down sooooo much. Every ref will be trying to look for any sign of an illegal block. They're already looking for so much in the first place, this just adds another thing for them to knee-jerk on.

welsh texan
03-22-2012, 02:07 PM
Not a fan of the ticky-tack proposal below:

Expansion of defenseless player rules to protect defensive players against crackback blocks to the head, or being blocked by an opponent headfirst (currently only protected by low crackback blocks)

I mean, the game is going to slow down sooooo much. Every ref will be trying to look for any sign of an illegal block. They're already looking for so much in the first place, this just adds another thing for them to knee-jerk on.

Agree here, not exactly the same thing but the number of Special Teams plays getting called back last season was so frustrating, I know some of it was down to our team committing too many block in the back fouls but its way too strict.

As I see it, these guys all get paid really well, get padded really well, with excellent medical care. They've been paid through university (whether they chose to take advantage of the education available to them or not) and have chosen to be out there taking their chances.

I don't mind some anti-concussion rules and things of that nature, but when we start giving the zebras all these different reasons to throw flags it gradually ruins the game. Hell, I've only been watching NFL for 8 seasons and the game has changed noticeably in that time so it must be horrible for older guys who've been watching since black and white.

As for the overtime rules, good move, IR rules are also good, allows the teams a bit of freedom to deal with injuries.

Scooter
03-22-2012, 04:48 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7720081/nfl-owners-vote-replay-injury-list-rule-changes

So far, looks like:


Eliminate referees from instant replay reviews
Expand what the booth official rules on
Allow a player to return during season from IR
Expanding the postseason overtime rule to the regular season
Making a horse-collar tackle on a QB inside the pocket a 15 yd penalty (currently no penalty)
Expansion of defenseless player rules to protect defensive players against crackback blocks to the head, or being blocked by an opponent headfirst (currently only protected by low crackback blocks)
Moving the trade deadline from after the 6th week of games to after the 8th week of games
Allowing teams to have 90 players on the offseason and training camp rosters, before the first cut; counting unsigned draft choices

What is a crackback block? -- http://football.about.com/cs/football101/g/gl_crackback.htm

this one would've been added years ago but fans were having too much fun watching hines ward earhole bigger defenders. they had to wait until he retired.

Lucky
03-22-2012, 05:34 PM
Allow a player to return during season from IR

How big is the IR list then? Would anyone ever get get cut? I think this rule would be abused, with guys going on IR for a hangnail. Maybe a special IR list where one player at a time can be reserved?

Double Barrel
03-22-2012, 05:45 PM
My OT rule would be both teams get at least one possession. That's all.


As I see it, these guys all get paid really well, get padded really well, with excellent medical care. They've been paid through university (whether they chose to take advantage of the education available to them or not) and have chosen to be out there taking their chances.

That's a bit of misunderstanding. Full discloser, I'm the dad of a player on scholarship, but that also gives me a little insight. These kids fulfill scholarships by working their butts off 11 months out of the year. Workouts are not voluntary (spring training just kicked in last Monday), and their summers are almost non-existent.

Free education you say? Well, consider the billions brought to these universities by college football, and universities are clearly turning a profit on the work of these athletes. "Free" is defined as "without cost or payment". But they have to WORK to keep those scholarships, and they have to EARN them accordingly.

Academic scholarships certainly have none of the demands put on them that athletic scholarships require. Add to this the long term health implications of playing college ball to the mix, as well.

Not ranting on you, welsh texan, but rather jumping off on your point. :)

srrono
03-22-2012, 06:28 PM
QB horse collar should stay the same. Pass rushers while engaged with blockers all the time reach out with one hand and grab QB shoulder pads from behind. This will give Qbs another advantage. How much more help does the Offense need?
Cant hit QB in head or at Knees cant grab by collar. What is left area from thigh to pecs?

jaayteetx
03-22-2012, 06:37 PM
QB horse collar should stay the same. Pass rushers while engaged with blockers all the time reach out with one hand and grab QB shoulder pads from behind. This will give Qbs another advantage. How much more help does the Offense need?
Cant hit QB in head or at Knees cant grab by collar. What is left area from thigh to pecs?

Agreed, the reason for the rule is prevent injury and when your in a stationary position in the pocket, how much of an injury risk is there? Has to be very little, if any.

steelbtexan
03-22-2012, 06:48 PM
Hate the expanded horse collar/crackback rules.

More of Goodell changing the way the game is played for the worse.

Rey
03-22-2012, 07:07 PM
Agreed, the reason for the rule is prevent injury and when your in a stationary position in the pocket, how much of an injury risk is there? Has to be very little, if any.

I know we use hyperbole and we use words loosely, but qbs aren't really stationary in the pocket. Even the least mobile qbs slide and move around and try to avoid pressure.

Rey
03-22-2012, 07:10 PM
Hate the expanded horse collar/crackback rules.

More of Goodell changing the way the game is played for the worse.

I don't like the rule by itself, but since the roughing penalties are so skewed towered the defense I actually like this as balancing things out.

Fili
03-22-2012, 08:27 PM
Only if the IR rule changed in '11...:trophy:

jaayteetx
03-22-2012, 08:53 PM
I know we use hyperbole and we use words loosely, but qbs aren't really stationary in the pocket. Even the least mobile qbs slide and move around and try to avoid pressure.

Yes, you are correct but a DT tugging at a qb's shoulder pads while said qb is "sliding and moving" still does not bring the injury risk up, imo. Those injuries occur when your in sprint moving forward and someone tugs you down from behind. I mean, really, can anyone ever recall a qb getting hurt on something similiar to what they are proposing to eliminate?

Fred
03-22-2012, 09:13 PM
QB horse collar should stay the same. Pass rushers while engaged with blockers all the time reach out with one hand and grab QB shoulder pads from behind. This will give Qbs another advantage. How much more help does the Offense need?
Cant hit QB in head or at Knees cant grab by collar. What is left area from thigh to pecs?

No. JJ Watt hit Dan O in the thighs and got a 15 yard penalty when Dan O managed to duck his head down far enough that their helmets lightly grazed.

I think the D Coordinators need to start teaching pass rushers to only hit the passing arm. Would cause a lot of fumbles. If he secures the ball, keep yanking on his arm until you get him on the ground. But do not touch his head/torso/legs. Probably lots of QBs with ripped tendons or broken bones in their passing arms, but it is the only way to tackle them without getting a penalty.

Or quit screwing around and go ahead and put pink tutus on all the QBs. The defenders can't touch the QB, but they get a sack if they can pull some sequins off the skirt fringe.

welsh texan
03-23-2012, 06:50 AM
My OT rule would be both teams get at least one possession. That's all.




That's a bit of misunderstanding. Full discloser, I'm the dad of a player on scholarship, but that also gives me a little insight. These kids fulfill scholarships by working their butts off 11 months out of the year. Workouts are not voluntary (spring training just kicked in last Monday), and their summers are almost non-existent.

Free education you say? Well, consider the billions brought to these universities by college football, and universities are clearly turning a profit on the work of these athletes. "Free" is defined as "without cost or payment". But they have to WORK to keep those scholarships, and they have to EARN them accordingly.

Academic scholarships certainly have none of the demands put on them that athletic scholarships require. Add to this the long term health implications of playing college ball to the mix, as well.

Not ranting on you, welsh texan, but rather jumping off on your point. :)

Interesting to get the perspective, DB, thanks. Obviously university sports over here is a completely different animal, turning out for the soccer team at uni was more about the drinking session afterwards, with no crowd in attendance and no scholarship available.

I still think that the league is a little too focused on watering down the sport right now, and that given the reason of protecting players from injury, they do have a heck of a lot of reward, all things told, for being out there and the education is just a small facet of it.

Good luck to your son btw, lets hope to see him trotting out at Reliant in battle red at some point in the future!

Seņor Stan
03-23-2012, 07:40 AM
I like all of the proposals except the Over time rule, that one was dumb to begin with. Here's the simple solution to NFL overtime, first team to score a touchdown wins. That's it. No FGs, no extra points, no confusing possession rules, just TD. It would be awesome to watch teams in the Red Zone on 4th down go for it. Goalline stands in overtime would be epic. FGs are lame, this league is built on touchdowns.

I have said for a long time that IR needs to be changed to an MLB DL type of listing, where the team regains a roster spot, but the player must be out a designated period of time. 8 weeks kind of makes sense, but I do hope they put a caveat in there about them being able to return early for the playoffs if they are placed on IR within the last 7 weeks of the season.

I'll take it one step further. I'd like to eliminate all kickers. Period. No punts, no field goals, just go 4 downs until they other team stops you or you score a touchdown. Not just in overtime, but the whole game.

Porky
03-23-2012, 07:59 AM
I like #3, and 4 a whole lot. That new playoff OT rule is not perfect but it's a whole lot better than the regular season one and it's very similar to something I have been proposing for years. I can definetely live with it and it's a mojor step in the right direction for me.

And I do believe that if you have someone that's going to lose 8 games due to injury, and it's game 2, why should you have to lose them for the whole year just to add a someone else?

Rey
03-23-2012, 08:11 AM
Yes, you are correct but a DT tugging at a qb's shoulder pads while said qb is "sliding and moving" still does not bring the injury risk up, imo. Those injuries occur when your in sprint moving forward and someone tugs you down from behind. I mean, really, can anyone ever recall a qb getting hurt on something similiar to what they are proposing to eliminate?

I'm starting to get over all these safety rules. Players have done a good job of adjusting for the most part. And the fact that they are trying to balance it out a little bit with the crackback blocks is a good idea IMO. A defenseless player is a defenseless player, even if that player is on defense...

As far as this particular proposed rule, I think someone can sustain an injury if they are pulled down by the back of their collar even if they are standing still...Let alone starting the process of moving out of the pocket...

Horse collar is probably one of the worst ways to get tackled...

Rey
03-23-2012, 08:12 AM
I love the new OT rule...

It's perfect IMO.

ObsiWan
03-25-2012, 10:42 AM
How big is the IR list then? Would anyone ever get get cut? I think this rule would be abused, with guys going on IR for a hangnail. Maybe a special IR list where one player at a time can be reserved?

Do players on IR count against the salary cap? If so, that will limit how many players that can be "stashed" on this temp IR list.

CloakNNNdagger
03-25-2012, 10:50 AM
IR'ed players still count against the salary cap. When a player goes on injured reserve, his full salary cap figure counts against his team's salary cap unless otherwise specified in the player's contract. A "split" contract, usually for a late-round draft pick or an undrafted rookie, calls for that player to get half his salary if he is placed on injured reserve.

If this rule is implemented, there should probably be a minimum number of weeks that a player must be placed on the list before returning.....and a limit to how many moves could be made.

Back in the 1970's, IR rules stated that you had to IR players for 4 weeks before you could reactivate them. You also were limited as to how many moves you could make in one year......~6. This was established to keep teams from stocking young talent that weren’t “field-ready.” Of course, this was before the salary cap which would make it more difficult to do so. And it wasn’t until 1989 that the Practice Squad was established.

Oz Texan
03-26-2012, 07:43 AM
The places you can hit the QB are getting rediculously close to the size of the MLB strike zone.

GP
03-28-2012, 10:31 AM
Whoa! This is a bit of a huge change on the rules:

AdamSchefter Adam Schefter
All turnovers now will be subject to review like scoring plays. No coaching challenged will be needed.

Marvin Lewis probably pushed for this one. He blew all his challenges in the playoff game against us, which lost him two timeouts that he couldn't use. LOL.

I guess challenges will be used for (1) If a player stepped out of bounds, (2) If a pass was actually a catch or an incompletion, and (3) To challenge the spot of the ball. Are there any other challenge scenarios I am missing?

MistaRed
03-28-2012, 10:35 AM
Guess we'll see less challenges now. Scoring plays and turnovers are automatically reviewed.

GP
03-28-2012, 10:45 AM
Guess we'll see less challenges now. Scoring plays and turnovers are automatically reviewed.

Yeah, this is headed to a day when they decide EVERY questionable call can be reviewed with no need for a challenge from the HC.

Little by little, inch by inch, you're going to see the challenge system done away with. Coaches are going to argue that it's not fair to make them gamble a timeout on questionable calls.

Goodell will realize that longer games means more revenue because they can sell more commercial time as a result. LOL.

NCTexan
03-28-2012, 11:01 AM
I like the automatic review on turnovers. Mainly for all the moaning and whining it'll cut down on.

Thorn
03-28-2012, 11:13 AM
There'll never be another 3 hr game, they'll all be over that now. The TV networks will eventually have to schedule 3.5 hours instead of 3. Perhaps that's the intent though....more commercials during those times the refs and whatnot are looking at plays under the hood.

CloakNNNdagger
03-28-2012, 11:29 AM
Whoa! This is a bit of a huge change on the rules:

AdamSchefter Adam Schefter
All turnovers now will be subject to review like scoring plays. No coaching challenged will be needed.

Marvin Lewis probably pushed for this one. He blew all his challenges in the playoff game against us, which lost him two timeouts that he couldn't use. LOL.

I guess challenges will be used for (1) If a player stepped out of bounds, (2) If a pass was actually a catch or an incompletion, and (3) To challenge the spot of the ball. Are there any other challenge scenarios I am missing?

Since the NFL defines "turnover" as a loss of possession of the ball via a fumble or interception, I wonder if the review will be performed with a fumble recovery or if there are multiple possessions within a play which ultimately does not result in a "final" loss of possession. Probably so, but the policy interpretation could go either way without clarification.

infantrycak
03-28-2012, 12:20 PM
There'll never be another 3 hr game, they'll all be over that now. The TV networks will eventually have to schedule 3.5 hours instead of 3. Perhaps that's the intent though....more commercials during those times the refs and whatnot are looking at plays under the hood.

Two things counter-balance the automatic review. Probably less coaching challenges since many of those were over turnovers. The more important one is if they make it all booth review. That should be a faster than the ref doing it with all the having to trot off the field, etc.

Thorn
03-28-2012, 12:26 PM
Two things counter-balance the automatic review. Probably less coaching challenges since many of those were over turnovers. The more important one is if they make it all booth review. That should be a faster than the ref doing it with all the having to trot off the field, etc.

True. There's already enough interuptions in the game as it is, anything to lessen that is welcome.

NCTexan
03-28-2012, 12:30 PM
Two things counter-balance the automatic review. Probably less coaching challenges since many of those were over turnovers. The more important one is if they make it all booth review. That should be a faster than the ref doing it with all the having to trot off the field, etc.

Looks like they at least considered that. Hopefully they put those changes in too.



Eliminate referees from instant replay reviews
Expand what the booth official rules on

GP
03-28-2012, 12:36 PM
There will be a day when every call made by a ref will be reviewed.

I can see the day when illegal blocks are reviewed. Maybe 10 or 20 years down the road, but still...somebody is going to bang that drum loud enough and show that hundreds of ill-advised illegal blocking calls were costly to the team penalized for those calls.

The NFL. Gotta' love it.

Double Barrel
03-28-2012, 12:46 PM
There'll never be another 3 hr game, they'll all be over that now. The TV networks will eventually have to schedule 3.5 hours instead of 3. Perhaps that's the intent though....more commercials during those times the refs and whatnot are looking at plays under the hood.

I don't think so. When you are at the games, you realize how much time is spent between drives waiting for "tv time outs". Games could be 2-2.5 hours long if not for all the damn commercials.

So there is plenty of time to compress and expand as needed. Networks will just use the delay in booth reviews to maximize commercials, but will make up the difference between drives and team time outs.

They've got this stuff down to a science these days.

Dutchrudder
03-28-2012, 12:59 PM
A preview of the NFL in 2075:

http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr14/themishkin/GIFs/tMoUI.gif

ChampionTexan
03-28-2012, 01:27 PM
Since the NFL defines "turnover" as a loss of possession of the ball via a fumble or interception, I wonder if the review will be performed with a fumble recovery or if there are multiple possessions within a play which ultimately does not result in a "final" loss of possession. Probably so, but the policy interpretation could go either way without clarification.

You mean kind of like how every play a RB is ruled to have broken the plane of the goal line is automatically reviewed, yet plays where a RB is ruled not to have broken the plane - even though visual evidence indicates otherwise - still require a coaches challenge (other than in the last two minutes of the half/game)?

If that's what you mean, then it's a very good question. Although it does kind of even things out, as the non-scoring play not getting automatic review will always favor the defense, and the non-turnover play not getting automatic review will always favor the offense.

GP
03-28-2012, 01:32 PM
A preview of the NFL in 2075:

http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr14/themishkin/GIFs/tMoUI.gif

The guy rolling on the ground appears to be seriously injured.

He will sue the NCCL (National Cushioned Container League) for his injuries which include "Loss of ability to stand up without help" and "Blood rushing to my head" syndrome.

Seņor Stan
03-28-2012, 01:38 PM
Two things counter-balance the automatic review. Probably less coaching challenges since many of those were over turnovers. The more important one is if they make it all booth review. That should be a faster than the ref doing it with all the having to trot off the field, etc.

This. Plus, why do they need a "booth" review anyway. They can have a centralized location where a few individuals monitor all games/reviews. No need for it to be in the stadium itself. Saves on travel, meals, lodging etc.

CloakNNNdagger
03-28-2012, 01:46 PM
You mean kind of like how every play a RB is ruled to have broken the plane of the goal line is automatically reviewed, yet plays where a RB is ruled not to have broken the plane - even though visual evidence indicates otherwise - still require a coaches challenge (other than in the last two minutes of the half/game)?

If that's what you mean, then it's a very good question. Although it does kind of even things out, as the non-scoring play not getting automatic review will always favor the defense, and the non-turnover play not getting automatic review will always favor the offense.

That's exactly what I was asking.:)

badboy
03-28-2012, 01:48 PM
I like all of the proposals except the Over time rule, that one was dumb to begin with. Here's the simple solution to NFL overtime, first team to score a touchdown wins. That's it. No FGs, no extra points, no confusing possession rules, just TD. It would be awesome to watch teams in the Red Zone on 4th down go for it. Goalline stands in overtime would be epic. FGs are lame, this league is built on touchdowns.

I have said for a long time that IR needs to be changed to an MLB DL type of listing, where the team regains a roster spot, but the player must be out a designated period of time. 8 weeks kind of makes sense, but I do hope they put a caveat in there about them being able to return early for the playoffs if they are placed on IR within the last 7 weeks of the season.agree with your TD rule but do like all the other changes. The trade deadlines was tabled to May.

Double Barrel
03-28-2012, 03:10 PM
A preview of the NFL in 2075:

http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr14/themishkin/GIFs/tMoUI.gif

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You should send this to the NFL commish!

MSR :fostering:

infantrycak
03-28-2012, 03:34 PM
You mean kind of like how every play a RB is ruled to have broken the plane of the goal line is automatically reviewed, yet plays where a RB is ruled not to have broken the plane - even though visual evidence indicates otherwise - still require a coaches challenge (other than in the last two minutes of the half/game)?

If that's what you mean, then it's a very good question. Although it does kind of even things out, as the non-scoring play not getting automatic review will always favor the defense, and the non-turnover play not getting automatic review will always favor the offense.

It is an interesting question. They have already stated the intention on turnovers. If it is ruled an interception it will be reviewed. If it is ruled a incompletion (the DB didn't have possession) it will not be an automatic review. Effectively what CnD is asking about is a double turnover. So I would think if the ruling on the field is two turnovers then it would be reviewed.

CloakNNNdagger
03-28-2012, 06:05 PM
NFL still considering changes to trade deadline, roster rules (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/28/nfl-still-considering-changes-to-trade-deadline-roster-rules/)

The NFL has not yet decided whether to change its bylaws to move the trade deadline and tweak some roster rules, with owners deciding today that they need more time to consider the proposed changes.

Four different proposed bylaw changes were tabled at today’s meeting of the owners and will be taken up again when the owners get together in May.

“We just felt like there was some really good input, we’d table them and vote on them in May,” Competition Committee Chairman Rich McKay said.

Those four bylaws involved:

1. Moving the trade deadline from Week Six to Week Eight.

2. Increasing the offseason and training camp roster limit from 80 to 90.

3. Allowing one roster exemption per week for a player who’s inactive with a concussion.

4. Allowing a player who’s put on injured reserve early in the season to return to the field after eight weeks, rather than having all players on injured reserve automatically out for the season.

McKay said he didn’t sense much resistance from NFL owners to any of those bylaw changes, but he did hear from owners who wanted more time to consider all the implications of changing those bylaws, and he said the owners also wanted to give the NFL Players’ Association time to weigh in on its thoughts about changing roster rules.

Rey
03-28-2012, 06:17 PM
Can anyone give me a logical reason that they don't increase regular season team rosters beyond the extra spot for the emergency qb? If you are bringing ten more players to camp why not add another 2 or 3 regular season roster spots and active gameday spots?

Or if not that, expanding the practice squad by a few spots?

18 games seems like a when rather than an if. It'd be nice to have a few extra guys during the season.

CloakNNNdagger
03-28-2012, 07:53 PM
Can anyone give me a logical reason that they don't increase regular season team rosters beyond the extra spot for the emergency qb? If you are bringing ten more players to camp why not add another 2 or 3 regular season roster spots and active gameday spots?

Or if not that, expanding the practice squad by a few spots?

18 games seems like a when rather than an if. It'd be nice to have a few extra guys during the season.

Football, way back when, had 9 round drafts. Then in the 50's, 30+ rounds. Then in the 60's, 17. Now, at 7 rounds we're almost back to where we started.

The Bears' chairman is on record as saying that he is not for even expanding the preseason roster, let alone the regular season roster. And why? M-O-N-E-Y. They don't want to dig into their profits anymore than they have to. With the mandate of teams having to spend most of their cap in cash beginning next year, it would make sense to at least do it next year.