What rule changes would you like to see...

Kazu2324

Well-known member
Joined:
Feb 10, 2013
Posts:
2,141
Liked Posts:
1,187
Location:
Canada
Will you micro chip their knees and elbows also, so we know if the ball crossed before they were down?

Probably not, but it wouldn't necessarily be the hardest thing to do either. You can have a central monitor that shows when each sensor marked it down at what time. Just compare that with the sensor for the ball. the only thing with putting them on players is the durability while players are hitting each other and whether there's further safety concerns for players having it on them. I'm not a professional or expert in these matters so I don't really know exactly how this would work, but I definitely think that given how good sensors are in many other fields, that this would not be out of the realm of possibility.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
44,428
Liked Posts:
38,978
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
I don't want a coin toss being the major factor in a victory....with OT it is.

Eliminate the coin toss.

In the playoffs or regular season home team gets the ball first in OT. In the Superbowl, team with the better W-L record would get the ball.

Home field should count for something, along with a better record. May give a little extra incentive to win games at the end of the season if you are in contention for the playoffs/superbowl.

First team that scores wins the game in OT.
giphy.gif
 

Burque

Huevos Rancheros
Joined:
Mar 11, 2015
Posts:
15,965
Liked Posts:
10,862
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but I would like the rule around a non recovered fumble after a completed pass to be changed.

The play that happened with AntMill last year was just stupid.

He caught the ball, established possession, went down without being touched, then the ball was fumbled and both the players thought it was incomplete so nobody went and picked up the ball. Once the ball was picked up by the official the play was then ruled over and they ended up doing something stupid like putting it back at the original line of scrimage and costing the down.

That should be changed to the ball being placed at the spot where the receiver went down.

Anyone else remember that confusing and stupid call?
 

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
44,428
Liked Posts:
38,978
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...would-remain-important-if-ot-rule-is-tweaked/

In the NFL, 52.7 percent of teams winning the overtime coin toss (and receiving) win the gameat some point in overtime, according to Ross Tucker of SiriusXM NFL Radio. In college football, the team that wins the coin toss (and defers) wins 54.9 percent of the time.
53% (assuming Ross Tucker is correct) is hardly cause for major change. Especially given the fact that the college OT (which some people argue in favor of) is higher.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
44,428
Liked Posts:
38,978
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but I would like the rule around a non recovered fumble after a completed pass to be changed.

The play that happened with AntMill last year was just stupid.

He caught the ball, established possession, went down without being touched, then the ball was fumbled and both the players thought it was incomplete so nobody went and picked up the ball. Once the ball was picked up by the official the play was then ruled over and they ended up doing something stupid like putting it back at the original line of scrimage and costing the down.

That should be changed to the ball being placed at the spot where the receiver went down.

Anyone else remember that confusing and stupid call?
I remember, and my only argument there would be that it should be placed at the spot of where the ball became dead, and not where the receiver went down. If I recall correctly, AntMill went down at the 8, and the ball became (in my mind) dead at the 4.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
7,621
Liked Posts:
5,873
Location:
Communist Canada
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but I would like the rule around a non recovered fumble after a completed pass to be changed.

The play that happened with AntMill last year was just stupid.

He caught the ball, established possession, went down without being touched, then the ball was fumbled and both the players thought it was incomplete so nobody went and picked up the ball. Once the ball was picked up by the official the play was then ruled over and they ended up doing something stupid like putting it back at the original line of scrimage and costing the down.

That should be changed to the ball being placed at the spot where the receiver went down.

Anyone else remember that confusing and stupid call?
If I remember correctly the problem with that rule was that it was written one way, then had a bunch of addendums attached to make it applicable for the changes in instant replay.

It's similar to many of the rules. Without having consistency with the replay side it's hard to know exactly how to apply the existing rule until it happens. We sorta are stuck learning on the fly with rules that have been completely fine for the past 10-20 years.

Anyway, that specific situation will police itself. I'm 99.9% confident every coach is preaching players to grab every loose ball and show clear possession on each play. Aside from the fact that your team got screwed the coaches and players on the field know exactly how avoidable that situation is, which I'd prefer. Put it on the players to determine the outcome, not the refs.
 

Burque

Huevos Rancheros
Joined:
Mar 11, 2015
Posts:
15,965
Liked Posts:
10,862
If I remember correctly the problem with that rule was that it was written one way, then had a bunch of addendums attached to make it applicable for the changes in instant replay.

It's similar to many of the rules. Without having consistency with the replay side it's hard to know exactly how to apply the existing rule until it happens. We sorta are stuck learning on the fly with rules that have been completely fine for the past 10-20 years.

Anyway, that specific situation will police itself. I'm 99.9% confident every coach is preaching players to grab every loose ball and show clear possession on each play. Aside from the fact that your team got screwed the coaches and players on the field know exactly how avoidable that situation is, which I'd prefer. Put it on the players to determine the outcome, not the refs.


I get that and I am sure AntMill will never make that mistake again, but to me it was a bad call. That should be spotted where the player went down after completing a catch. I feel like the Bears got penalized like thirty yards on that play for no reason.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
7,621
Liked Posts:
5,873
Location:
Communist Canada
I get that and I am sure AntMill will never make that mistake again, but to me it was a bad call. That should be spotted where the player went down after completing a catch. I feel like the Bears got penalized like thirty yards on that play for no reason.
Currently it's completely avoidable by the players on the field, which is what the rules should be trying to do. The less the refs decide, the better.

By the same logic any Eagle player could have grabbed the ball and it would have been a turnover. The rule is written becuase that fumble is not in anyone's possession. It's designed for players to go get the ball and avoid judgement calls.

Saying it 'should have' been a catch, fumble with no recovery that goes back to the fumbling team is getting fairly obscure especially considering a majority of the teams will now run at that ball. If anything this will be a part of all defensive drills especially since the defense typically has more players trailing around those deeper passes.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
7,621
Liked Posts:
5,873
Location:
Communist Canada
Really. What’s so sacred about the coin toss for OT?
The coin toss provides an element of chance. Giving it to the home team, who has had a home crowd advantage the entire game and still tied, is not a logical alternative.

Go to the CFL system or what they do in college. It's not what the old fans want, but at least it's fair. Each offense gets a chance against a tired defense to put up points. Fantasy football fans and betting lines would love this.
 

modo

Based
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
29,193
Liked Posts:
25,142
Location:
USA
The coin toss provides an element of chance. Giving it to the home team, who has had a home crowd advantage the entire game and still tied, is not a logical alternative.

Go to the CFL system or what they do in college. It's not what the old fans want, but at least it's fair. Each offense gets a chance against a tired defense to put up points. Fantasy football fans and betting lines would love this.
I’m not necessarily opposed to a double possession but the team with the coin toss has an advantage even in overtime.

My alternative is for people who don’t want a possession each.

Plus as I stated it gives teams incentives to play to win later in the year.
 

Payton!34

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
2,517
Liked Posts:
1,234
Because 53% win percentage isn’t some of the wall statistic.


Changing pass interference is a bad idea! Defenses would simply maul people on long passes. Why is holding on defense 5 yards but ten on offense? That’s weird and it’s an automatic first down, I do understand that there are a ton of plays that would end up being first downs but not all of them or 3-32 and someone is holding someone not even involved in the play. It’s tough to make everyone happy! That’s for sure! Half of the offensive holding calls are questionable and the other half that go uncalled are questionable too!

Overtime makes zero sense! I don’t know what the answer is but another quarter brings in a lot of tired time to get hurt, idk?!?!?

A catch should be possession with two feet down and it’s a catch! Why do running backs get to fumble at the pylons and goal line all of the time? That’s just a stupid as someone catching the ball and then it pops out bc he lands on some ball boy near the sideline. Runningbacks can’t have the ground cause a fumble so why should it impede a catch? At minimum the ball can move around as long as it doesn’t touch the ground but then you have those catches where the wr puts the ball down on his own after making a catch and then it’s called incomplete. Zach millers career ending catch was a fucking catch if I ever saw one all while almost dying to do it! That alone is proof the rule should be amended.

Pass interference should be helped by being able to challenge it! I know it slows the game down but reviews need to be involved unless everyone in league just bucks up and agrees to the rules and the human element of refs is what is and you live by it! I oersonllly believe trying harder to blow teams out would rectify a lot and not leave it up to a mistake!

Some of these just aren’t simple rules!

Cb’s should be able to push or touch wr’s as much as they want for first five yards and be able to leave a hand touching the wr for ten yards.

The Anthony Miller situation was dumb on all the players! Even if you hear a whistle grab the ball and run towards the appropriate goal! But, that call was stupid as fuck, at worst it should be bears ball where the player lost possession. Simple. The bears are notoriously bad at leaving balls on the ground on both sides really.

Field goals can’t count for anything other than 3 points. Statistically speaking I think it’s even stupid to kick them, but that’s another debate.

No free plays on dead ball fouls.

Just my two cents. But changing pass interference to 15 or even 20 yards is stupid.

I also hate the half the distance bullshit! Put it at the one! There are many times when it’s just smart to plain out hold defensive players in hopes it’s not seen rather than let someone sack your qb or stuff the running back.
 

Starion

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 29, 2012
Posts:
4,220
Liked Posts:
2,669
Location:
Fort Myers, FL
Agree with microchipping the ball. The fact that they cannot tell if the ball actually crossed the LoS or got into the EZ and it's up to the refs who have to guess where the ball is under 22 bodies is ridiculous. We clearly have the technology, just put sensors in all the EZ pylons and for the yard/down markers. If ball is crossed, it'll the markers will light up.

Also, though not to do with the actual game itself, any network/company that shows the same commercial twice in a single commercial break should be never be allowed to show commercials ever again. Getting tired of seeing the same shitty commercial, especially if they're somehow just a minute apart. It should honestly just be illegal.

Agreed on both.

Ball chips would also eliminate or at least make the CHAIN GANG relevant. It's a total joke on how that's considered accurate. It's a pony show to stop the game & march the poles onto the field when spotting of the initial LOS and of the ball is really pretty subjective by refs.

Why is crossing the plane by a sliver of ball a TD when rushing, when a WR practically has to do a dance with the ball when caught for a TD? The improved catch rule helped this a ton, but 1 foot inbounds might just help close this gap & add to some crazy cool highlights. Unsure on this still...just winging it.

No to FGs worth different values - as stated, rewards poor O, or worse...tanking to kill clock then boot long FTW.

I hope they don't eliminate the onside kick or kick returns.

If a coach WINS a challenge there should be zero loss of ability to challenge in the future. Honestly, I'm not sure on this vs. baseball, but in both games, you should be able to win 7 challenges if you're correctly calling out poor initial calls & getting them reversed. Should be able to challenge in final 2 mins if auto fails ya.
Challenges should be shorter and the NY booth refs should be named and put on TV.
IIRC, I heard those booth refs don't always get the same instant replay shots from network that we see on TV. If true, that's a huge prob. Tech should be as good as possible to speed this up. Maybe have each team's tech guy submit a quick clip or two with highlighted area to point out what they want the ref to look at? Again, just spitballing.

Replays improved for fumble recoveries. Stop this archaic piling up and 2 minutes later, guys still fighting beneath the pile for the ball. It's usually clear enough to see who had possession on the ground and was down before piled up on.

Do whatever it takes to eliminate the pussification penalties for "non"-hits on QBs. IMO Floyd's body slam was a continuation of a tackle and should NOT have been a penalty. That was awesome football IMO. Seems a sack needs to involve a plush pillow with a chocolate mint on it for the QB to land on to not be roughing the passer. Similar at times for hits on WRs. They're not all defenseless but it seems that way. Impossible for DBs to be physical unless they allow a full catch first.

A DE flying by and not even touching a QBs helmet = auto 1st down & 15 yards is just terrible BS and should be challengeable to negate a "ghost penalty".
 

Starion

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 29, 2012
Posts:
4,220
Liked Posts:
2,669
Location:
Fort Myers, FL
Instead of a coin flip for OT, have a challenge issued by the visiting team. I'm not serious on these, but it'd be pretty fun...

1) 50 yard dash race by fastest guy on each team holding a ball. Endzone to midfield. Winner gets ball.
2) FG kickoff (no blockers). Both kickers square off and the one willing to kick from the furthest away gets their shot. Make it take it. Miss & give ball to opponent to start. Up to coach/kicker to decide how far to bid. Sure, it'd take an extra few minutes, but would be entertaining as hell.
3) Similar to #2, but QB throwing through the uprights from farthest away.
4) __________(other?)
 

Chicago Staleys

Realist
Joined:
Sep 24, 2012
Posts:
12,838
Liked Posts:
8,582
I would love no punts. You get 4 downs for a first. That’s it! Can’t make it, if not, then it’s a turnover on downs. It completely changes the offensive attack.
 

Chicago Staleys

Realist
Joined:
Sep 24, 2012
Posts:
12,838
Liked Posts:
8,582
Playing offense has become too easy, so anything to help the defense.

Let the DBs make contact with the WRs for up to 10 yards away from the LOS like it used to be.

15pts in a home playoff game against the 30th ranked pass defense.

The Bears offense disagrees with you.
 

Rory Sparrow

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
4,850
Liked Posts:
3,735
I would love no punts. You get 4 downs for a first. That’s it! Can’t make it, if not, then it’s a turnover on downs. It completely changes the offensive attack.

I had a similar thought. Do away with the K-balls, let the kickers doctor up their own footballs, let them use tees. Give them every advantage and on 4th down you either try for the first down or try for a FG, and a missed FG can be downed at the spot with the other team taking possession from that spot, not the LOS or 'spot of kick'.

You'd see more 70 yard FGs, you'd see more returns because offense would need more guys blocking on the FG attempt, more exciting.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,295
Liked Posts:
23,610
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I'm not onboard with that but would prefer the opposing team take over at the LOS instead of the point of the kick.
 

Top