Football Rules that Need to Change

[tBBP]

My opinion of the current rulebook:

*This also pretty much sums up my thoughts on the current state of the NFL product in general.

[BBTV]

My proposals...

1. One-foot inbounds = catch/interception.

2. Eliminate the extra point kick. Instead, spot the ball as for a 2-point conversion. If you can run it in from there, you get 2 points; if you pass, 1 point.

3. Reduce value of field goals tried from inside the 25-yard line from 3 points to 2. Give 4 points for a 50+ yarder if you're feeling generous.

4. Add the Defensive Return (2 points) to conversion tries.

5. Either move kickoffs back to the 30 yard line, or have touchbacks bring the ball out to the 25 instead of the 20.

6. Make fair catches a foul (Illegal Procedure, enforceable from the spot).

1. I like the dragging of feet to come down with the ball. What happens if a guy catches the ball at the hash marks then hops on one foot out of bounds - would that be an incomplete pass?

2. I don't like that at all. It's not that I like the extra point kick as is, but I see no reason to change the value of a pass vs run. Besides, if it was a two point game, the defense would know that the offence can't run, and all kinds of bizarre formations could occur - like having all 11 defenders guarding 5 eligible receivers.

3. This is down right silly and against the very nature of the game. If anything, long-distance field goals should be worth less. Why on earth would you reward a team for not being able to move the ball closer to the goal line? What if you are going for a TD but get stopped close to the goal line. Should you snap the ball 30 yards back in order to kick a longer field goal? The game is silly as is since you only need to get to the 35 any more to have a reasonable chance at 3 points. It's just wrong to give any incentive to offenses to stall and not attempt to advance the ball.

4. cool

5. cool

6. Totally dangerous. Even with a halo, if you're looking up to catch a ball you could still get drilled without being ready. There's nothing wrong with a fair catch.

#3 gets brought up quite often, and I cringe every time I see it. I think it's the absolute worst thing you could do to the game.

6: The Canadian game has survived for a quite long time without major injuries with not being able to fair catch the ball, and taking the rules straight over I dont see it being an issue in the NFL

Canadians are more polite in general, and wouldn't drill an unsuspecting receiver while he isn't even looking. Americans are dicks and wouldn't think twice about it.

I don't see the benefit gained by removing the fair catch, other than if you just like seeing players get destroyed. They could just catch and instantly take a knee (if they have enough time to take the knee before getting knocked in to next week).

[AnPheitseog]

My proposals...

1. One-foot inbounds = catch/interception.

2. Eliminate the extra point kick. Instead, spot the ball as for a 2-point conversion. If you can run it in from there, you get 2 points; if you pass, 1 point.

3. Reduce value of field goals tried from inside the 25-yard line from 3 points to 2. Give 4 points for a 50+ yarder if you're feeling generous.

4. Add the Defensive Return (2 points) to conversion tries.

5. Either move kickoffs back to the 30 yard line, or have touchbacks bring the ball out to the 25 instead of the 20.

6. Make fair catches a foul (Illegal Procedure, enforceable from the spot).

1. I like the dragging of feet to come down with the ball. What happens if a guy catches the ball at the hash marks then hops on one foot out of bounds - would that be an incomplete pass?

2. I don't like that at all. It's not that I like the extra point kick as is, but I see no reason to change the value of a pass vs run. Besides, if it was a two point game, the defense would know that the offence can't run, and all kinds of bizarre formations could occur - like having all 11 defenders guarding 5 eligible receivers.

3. This is down right silly and against the very nature of the game. If anything, long-distance field goals should be worth less. Why on earth would you reward a team for not being able to move the ball closer to the goal line? What if you are going for a TD but get stopped close to the goal line. Should you snap the ball 30 yards back in order to kick a longer field goal? The game is silly as is since you only need to get to the 35 any more to have a reasonable chance at 3 points. It's just wrong to give any incentive to offenses to stall and not attempt to advance the ball.

4. cool

5. cool

6. Totally dangerous. Even with a halo, if you're looking up to catch a ball you could still get drilled without being ready. There's nothing wrong with a fair catch.

#3 gets brought up quite often, and I cringe every time I see it. I think it's the absolute worst thing you could do to the game.

6: The Canadian game has survived for a quite long time without major injuries with not being able to fair catch the ball, and taking the rules straight over I dont see it being an issue in the NFL

Canadians are more polite in general, and wouldn't drill an unsuspecting receiver while he isn't even looking. Americans are dicks and wouldn't think twice about it.

I don't see the benefit gained by removing the fair catch, other than if you just like seeing players get destroyed. They could just catch and instantly take a knee (if they have enough time to take the knee before getting knocked in to next week).

So you're saying my point isn't valid, because of sterotypes? fantastic

Removing the fair catch will increase the amount of kicks returned simply because they wont have a choice, and also will reward kickers for kicking it out of bounds because then there wont be a chance of a return

[Mac the Knife]

Why does everyone want to make the extra point more convoluted? Just move it back ten yards and call it a day. Also, goalposts are getting 4 feet narrower next season. Field goal misses and extra point misses will go up.

I'd not heard anything about goalposts being narrowed... and it seems that the NFL wouldn't do this just a year after having its 32 teams spend thousands of dollars on goalposts that extended 5 feet further skyward on either side. What's your source for this?

But what really makes me cringe when I see this one is that it punishes good drives. As fun as it would be to see teams run backwards on 3rd and 10 with a 3/4 point deficit, I think the beauty of the field goal is that the reward for a better drive is an easier kick. Therefore, I feel they should all be the same value.

It doesn't punish good drives. It punishes not finishing good drives.

Canadians are more polite in general, and wouldn't drill an unsuspecting receiver while he isn't even looking. Americans are dicks and wouldn't think twice about it.

That gave me a chuckle for some reason. Thanks for that.

[Sport]

Why does everyone want to make the extra point more convoluted? Just move it back ten yards and call it a day. Also, goalposts are getting 4 feet narrower next season. Field goal misses and extra point misses will go up.

I'd not heard anything about goalposts being narrowed... and it seems that the NFL wouldn't do this just a year after having its 32 teams spend thousands of dollars on goalposts that extended 5 feet further skyward on either side. What's your source for this?

I guess I misheard. Turns out they're only doing it for the probowl and seeing how it goes, but there's a good chance the narrower goal posts will be implemented in the future.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/14/report-goal-posts-could-be-narrowed/

My point still stands. No need to make the rules all goofy when there's a simple fix that doesn't change the fundamentals of that aspect of the game.

[illwauk]

If a false start penalty gets called during a field goal attempt and it misses, the opposing team should get the ball from the spot of the kick. It's the same problem there used to be with offsides being called on the kicking team during an onside kick... you're essentially penalizing them by awarding them another chance to kick from a little further back.

[leopard88]

My change to extra points --

Require the ball to be placed on the 2 yard line even with the spot where the ball crossed the plane of the goal line or the pass was caught (if caught in the end zone), but no farther out than the middle third of the field. That would add two interesting elements to the extra point when the TD is scored near the sideline:

1. Tougher angles for kicks, as in the old days before the hash marks were moved in.

2. Wide and short sides of the field for 2-point conversions.

For illustration purposes, the widest point of placement would be even with the hashmarks on this field diagram:

[OnWis97]

I actually kinda liked the original proposal I heard for extra points. TD is 7. No bother kicking. Team can go for an extra (i.e., to make it 8). If they miss, the TD becomes 6. It's the same thing except no chance of a missed PAT (as opposed to 1% chance).

I don't actually think the PAT is a problem that needs fixing, but if so, I'd rather do it like this. The problem with making it harder is that we increase the importance of kickers, which most fans don't want.

I know there was a time when a significant number of PATs were missed but kickers have become much better and that's not going away.

[leopard88]

I actually kinda liked the original proposal I heard for extra points. TD is 7. No bother kicking. Team can go for an extra (i.e., to make it 8). If they miss, the TD becomes 6. It's the same thing except no chance of a missed PAT (as opposed to 1% chance).

I don't actually think the PAT is a problem that needs fixing, but if so, I'd rather do it like this. The problem with making it harder is that we increase the importance of kickers, which most fans don't want.

I know there was a time when a significant number of PATs were missed but kickers have become much better and that's not going away.

I would be fine with leaving it the way it is. However, if the NFL is intent on doing something to shake things up, I think my idea is interesting without being overly disruptive. If you move the kick back significantly, you take the fake out of the game (not that you see that many fake PATs, but I remember the Ravens running one a few years ago).

[Lee Noire]

I actually kinda liked the original proposal I heard for extra points. TD is 7. No bother kicking. Team can go for an extra (i.e., to make it 8). If they miss, the TD becomes 6. It's the same thing except no chance of a missed PAT (as opposed to 1% chance).

I don't actually think the PAT is a problem that needs fixing, but if so, I'd rather do it like this. The problem with making it harder is that we increase the importance of kickers, which most fans don't want.

I know there was a time when a significant number of PATs were missed but kickers have become much better and that's not going away.

Not sure I like that idea. If the kick is missed you lose a point that was already granted by virtue of the touchdown. Because under this rule there is no extra 7th point, only 7 point TDs, so how can they take away from the TD?

I think the 7 point TD thing is great, but if there must be a penalty for missing the kick for 8 make it something like having to be further back on the kickoff. That way instead of losing a point earned via TD, if you risk kicking for 8 and miss, the other team gets better field position.

[BBTV]

The solution to pat and fg is to narrow the goalposts. Kickers are so much better and stronger now then they were when those goal posts were designed. It would make the game more true to its original intent.

[2001mark]

Rewarding more points for longer FGs is not logical - rewarding teams who can't move the chains & or letting teams rack up more points with shorter series taking less time off the clock? No dice.

I'd love to see in my lifetime NCAA pass interference in the NFL, though allowing for crazy stupid PI being rewarded the spot. So if a DB is tangled up/holding/etc it's 15yds. If a DB takes guy's head off or clips or something ridiculous, the call remains spot as rule is now.

[hailstateunis]

Rewarding more points for longer FGs is not logical - rewarding teams who can't move the chains & or letting teams rack up more points with shorter series taking less time off the clock? No dice.

I'd love to see in my lifetime NCAA pass interference in the NFL, though allowing for crazy stupid PI being rewarded the spot. So if a DB is tangled up/holding/etc it's 15yds. If a DB takes guy's head off or clips or something ridiculous, the call remains spot as rule is now.

Good idea in theory, but the last thing the NFL needs is more judgement calls.

[Mac the Knife]

If a false start penalty gets called during a field goal attempt and it misses, the opposing team should get the ball from the spot of the kick. It's the same problem there used to be with offsides being called on the kicking team during an onside kick... you're essentially penalizing them by awarding them another chance to kick from a little further back.

Only problem is that a False Start is a dead ball foul (i.e., one that technically happens before the play begins). And since a Down runs from snap to snap, it's a penalty that's technically assessed on the down before the kick.

[AnPheitseog]

And oh, re the extra point.

Borrow a rule from rugby that it must be taken perpendicular to the spot of the touchdown, so if someone wants to have an easy kick, score in the centre, and if it's a sideline touchdown, then well it'll be a hard kick.

Also with this rule, the kick can be as far away as the kicking team desires to improve their angle, but it's making it further and more difficult

[leopard88]

And oh, re the extra point.

Borrow a rule from rugby that it must be taken perpendicular to the spot of the touchdown, so if someone wants to have an easy kick, score in the centre, and if it's a sideline touchdown, then well it'll be a hard kick.

Also with this rule, the kick can be as far away as the kicking team desires to improve their angle, but it's making it further and more difficult

The rugby kick is what inspired my proposal (see above). The differences under my proposal are that (1) the ball would always be spotted at the 2 and (2) the kick couldn't be taken any farther toward the sideline than the point of a 1/3-2/3 split of the field (i.e., the high school hashmarks).

[OnWis97]

And oh, re the extra point.

Borrow a rule from rugby that it must be taken perpendicular to the spot of the touchdown, so if someone wants to have an easy kick, score in the centre, and if it's a sideline touchdown, then well it'll be a hard kick.

Also with this rule, the kick can be as far away as the kicking team desires to improve their angle, but it's making it further and more difficult

The rugby kick is what inspired my proposal (see above). The differences under my proposal are that (1) the ball would always be spotted at the 2 and (2) the kick couldn't be taken any farther toward the sideline than the point of a 1/3-2/3 split of the field (i.e., the high school hashmarks).

As long as we don't get too crazy with hashmarks (i.e., college or narrower) this is an OK tweak. Part of me feels uncomfortable with a "center" TD being better than a "sideline" TD but it could make for interesting playcalling (and paths to the endzone on long bombs).

[smzimbabwe]

The main reason for making long field goals worth more points is distance makes the kick harder, yet those same people don't seem to support making long touchdowns worth more, even though the same reasoning is there. I am strongly against making longer field goals worth more.

I would like to see the heads of the NFL and NCAA come together and standardize the rules for all levels. No more "in college, that would have been a catch/penalty/touchdown/etc., but it's not in the NFL".

[leopard88]

And oh, re the extra point.

Borrow a rule from rugby that it must be taken perpendicular to the spot of the touchdown, so if someone wants to have an easy kick, score in the centre, and if it's a sideline touchdown, then well it'll be a hard kick.

Also with this rule, the kick can be as far away as the kicking team desires to improve their angle, but it's making it further and more difficult

The rugby kick is what inspired my proposal (see above). The differences under my proposal are that (1) the ball would always be spotted at the 2 and (2) the kick couldn't be taken any farther toward the sideline than the point of a 1/3-2/3 split of the field (i.e., the high school hashmarks).

As long as we don't get too crazy with hashmarks (i.e., college or narrower) this is an OK tweak. Part of me feels uncomfortable with a "center" TD being better than a "sideline" TD but it could make for interesting playcalling (and paths to the endzone on long bombs).

I only envision one small mark on each side of the field at the 2, perpendicular to the goal line. I think NFL kickers would still make the majority of the kicks even at the widest angle, but I also like the idea of it being a factor in play calling.

Added bonus -- if a team is going for two, play calling will be impacted by having wide and short sides of the field.

[Billy B]

The solution to pat and fg is to narrow the goalposts. Kickers are so much better and stronger now then they were when those goal posts were designed. It would make the game more true to its original intent.

This is the easiest and best solution. You shouldn't be able to get to the 30 yard line and have a relatively easy kick.

If a false start penalty gets called during a field goal attempt and it misses, the opposing team should get the ball from the spot of the kick. It's the same problem there used to be with offsides being called on the kicking team during an onside kick... you're essentially penalizing them by awarding them another chance to kick from a little further back.

Only problem is that a False Start is a dead ball foul (i.e., one that technically happens before the play begins). And since a Down runs from snap to snap, it's a penalty that's technically assessed on the down before the kick.

I was thinking about this one this weekend. I think the kicking team should get a delay of game penalty if they kick the ball after they commit a dead ball penalty or call time out.