Elimination of the force-out rule on receptions and interceptions

Discussion in 'The National Football League' started by Brando, Mar 30, 2008.

?

Elimination of the force-out rule

  1. For it

    39.5%
  2. Against it

    53.5%
  3. Not sure

    7.0%
  1. Brando

    Brando Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,573
    Likes Received:
    571
    They had a debate on this on NFL Network the other day and thought it would be good discussion. Are you for it or against it?

    IMO, If you don't get both feet in bounds it should be an incomplete pass. I think it would benefit the defense more than the offense. It would definitely help the Officials and make there job easier.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. The Pencil Neck

    The Pencil Neck Subscribed Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    21,264
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Location:
    Moraira, Spain
    I'm all for eliminating that. If you can come down with the ball in-bounds, then it's not complete. Like you said, it makes officiating much easier.

    If you think that change favors the defense too much, then make it like college where you only need one foot in bounds to offset the lack of force-out.
     
  3. kiwitexansfan

    kiwitexansfan Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    9,507
    Likes Received:
    472
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Anything that makes decisions more cut and dry is good for the game. When an official needs to interpret (guess) it opens to many questions and doubts.

    The other side of this it is ridiculous to punish a defender for making a good play by pushing a guy out of bounds in the air. Lets reward a good play but giving them an incompletion.
     
  4. tulexan

    tulexan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    5,080
    Likes Received:
    106
    Some receivers are going to get lit up on the sidelines now
     
  5. rmartin65

    rmartin65 I'm Score

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    7,999
    Likes Received:
    447
    I am against eliminating the rule. You need two feet in. Thats that.
     
  6. Giant Tiger

    Giant Tiger Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    Smiths Falls, Heart of the Rideau Canal-UNESCO Wor
    I agree if a receiver is jumping up to get the ball. But what if a receiver catches the ball in stride along the sidelines & just gets one foot down as he gets pushed out? It's not like landing with one foot in the field as you fall out of bounds.
     
  7. Brando

    Brando Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,573
    Likes Received:
    571
    Some examples on calls in the past.........




    2003

    The only one I can come up with so far I'll keep looking.
     
  8. The Pencil Neck

    The Pencil Neck Subscribed Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    21,264
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Location:
    Moraira, Spain
    You just contradicted yourself.
     


  9. mattieuk

    mattieuk Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,484
    Likes Received:
    177
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Two feet in bounds. Simple, don't like the call challenge it.

    The force out rule just makes the decisions more prone to being controversial. I'm all for making the refs job easier.
     
  10. ObsiWan

    ObsiWan Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    18,648
    Likes Received:
    1,184
    Location:
    League City, Tx
    If a WR jumps and makes the catch and would normally come straight down - in bounds - but a DB holds him up and takes him out of bounds so he can't come down - even if it means the DB carries him for a couple of steps... you guys are okay with that?

    By your assessment, the WR didn't get two feet down.

    I'm against it. Leave the rule as is.
     
  11. mattieuk

    mattieuk Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,484
    Likes Received:
    177
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    But even then he'd have to get one foot down wouldn't he?...

    To be honest, I'm not too sure about the technicalities of the rule, I'm just calling it from a spectator's point of view and the obvious frustration it can cause on plays.
     
  12. texdawg

    texdawg Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    25
    Leave the rule the way it is.

    What if a reciever jumps up to catch a ball 3 yards in play and the defender grabs the reciever in air and carries him out of bounds. The reciever did not have 2 feet in bounds-no catch. Defenders will play to let the reciever catch the ball and try to carry them out of bounds. Extreme example, I know, but how peeved would you be if this happened to your reciever?
     
  13. Brando

    Brando Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,573
    Likes Received:
    571
    I'm okay with giving the CB's and Safeties the extra advantage because of all the rules that favor the offense. Considering the rules already in place to protect the receivers I think it will not pass.
     
  14. ObsiWan

    ObsiWan Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    18,648
    Likes Received:
    1,184
    Location:
    League City, Tx
    That's the example I was trying to site. Our guy is a yard away from the sideline but has to jump and catch the ball. The defender grabs our guy before he can land and carries him one or two steps and drops him out of bounds. That's great catch made into an incomplete pass if this rule change is accepted.

    Leave the force out rule alone.

    You want to help the DBs..?
    - Let them jam WRs up to 10 yds past the LOS instead of the 5 yd.
    - Or let the DBs have one jam, and one only, no matter how far away from the LOS the contact is made.
    - or let them hand-fight all the way down the field... As long as the DB doesn't flat out hold the WR I'm good with letting them battle it out. And if the WR is stronger, he'll create separation. That's the way it used to be.
     
    Brando likes this.
  15. Mafia Informant

    Mafia Informant ain't no snitch

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only DBs who could carry a WR out of bounds would be a roided-up Rodney Harrison and the suplex-machine Brian Dawkins. :whip:
     
  16. Fox

    Fox All Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    753
    Likes Received:
    81
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    I'm against eliminating this rule. Eliminating the rule limits the offenses ability to throw to the sidelines and end zone in my view, and allows defensive backs to play the receiver and not the ball in those instances which I don't like. Defensive backs should be playing the ball, and eliminating the rule gives them a cop out play on the sidelines when they get beat, IMO.
     
  17. Texaninlild

    Texaninlild Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    127
    Location:
    Mansfield, TX
    It is a good rule. To me it isn't that hard to call. If I was a defender and they changed the rule that is all I would try to do is wait for the receiver to go into the air and push him out of bounds or carry him out. The defenders would stop playing the ball around the boundaries.
     
  18. Brando

    Brando Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,573
    Likes Received:
    571
    Rich Eisen,Solomon Wilcots, and Jamie Dukes discuss a few of the proposed rule changes including the force-out rule.

    3:05 seconds into the clip.

    You can tell Solomon played defense......

    nfl.com
     
  19. TexansLucky13

    TexansLucky13 53d Signal Batt

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    4,783
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    Maryland
    Personally I could care less what they do with it, so long as it is reviewable, if it is kept. If a ref can make the call from the sidelines than he can make the call from the review booth as well.

    How often do you see force outs anyways?? No more than once or twice a game I'd say in most cases.
     
  20. Double Barrel

    Double Barrel Modified Simian

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    33,336
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Location:
    Onward, Upward, and back into the Trees
    There is a reason the rule exists in the first place. Leave it as it is, but let it also fall under replay rules. Replay has to be conclusive to overturn, so the call on the field will be key. Refs do a pretty good most most of the time, IMO.
     

Share This Page