Football Rules that Need to Change

[BBTV]

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.

What about either:

Keeping the hash marks as is in the middle of the field, but gradually widening unti you get to the goal line. You spot the ball for the PAT or 2pt on the hash like after a regular play. The PAT is harder, and you get more creative 2pt plays.

Or

Doing the opposite - have wide hashmarks in the middle, and have them narrow towards the goal line. Then, long field goals are harder because the hash marks are wide, you may see the option and other sweep plays, and as they narrow, the "silly play" factor is reduced, maintaining the integrity of the game (as we know it today) inside the red zone.

[Raysfan12]

I would change the feet in bounds rule to one foot as it would reduce the need for instant replay and be easier on the officials not to mention making the league fun again (sort of ).

[Cosmic]

I would change the feet in bounds rule to one foot as it would reduce the need for instant replay and be easier on the officials not to mention making the league fun again (sort of ).

I thought that at first, but would it reduce the number of replays or just shift them to different things? Plays that are not reviewed now because they're obviously not catches being reviewed because there might have been one foot in?

[Mac the Knife]

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.

No, you can't really, because then it becomes something of a judgment call. For instance, if a coach on the sideline tries to 'freeze' the kicker by calling a time out 1/5th of a second before a ball is snapped, the kicker at that point is kind of on auto-pilot. An official's whistle likely isn't going to catch his attention, and the holder isn't going to react quickly enough to yank the ball away.

What about either:

Keeping the hash marks as is in the middle of the field, but gradually widening unti you get to the goal line. You spot the ball for the PAT or 2pt on the hash like after a regular play. The PAT is harder, and you get more creative 2pt plays.

Or

Doing the opposite - have wide hashmarks in the middle, and have them narrow towards the goal line. Then, long field goals are harder because the hash marks are wide, you may see the option and other sweep plays, and as they narrow, the "silly play" factor is reduced, maintaining the integrity of the game (as we know it today) inside the red zone.

Remember the primary purpose of hashmarks is to spot the ball for scrimmage downs. If you do either, you're going to encounter situations in which at some point, somewhere on the field, an offense would likely have to stack all it's receivers on one side of the field or the other, there being no room to put receivers on either side of the offensive line.

[BBTV]

I'm not saying super wide at the widest point, more like college or high school (or a hair wider).

Even if super wide, it opens up the opportunity for fun plays.

[CLEstones]

Defensive Pass Interference. I don't know how you fix it.

A spot foul seems too much of a penalty to the defense. But only a 15 yard penalty from the line of scrimmage seems too lenient for the defense. I don't know a happy medium.

[leopard88]

I'm not saying super wide at the widest point, more like college or high school (or a hair wider).

Even if super wide, it opens up the opportunity for fun plays.

Honestly, I'm all for a return to wide hash marks on the whole field, but I know that isn't going to happen. I'll settle for my PAT plan to spice things up a little bit.

I think having different hashmarks on different parts of the field is a little too over the top. Plays from scrimmage should follow the same ball placement rules whether you are on the 45 or the 5.

[CLEstones]

I would like to see the kick off return to its original location, but move the touchback up to the 25 yard line (as was originally proposed). They can still reduce the head start the kicking team gets, they can still ban the wall and the wedge, while still maintaining some excitement to the return game, forcing coaches and players to make better decisions coming out of the endzone.

This would lend itself nicely to new OT rules, similar to college. Instead of having striping as the 20 and 25 yard line, there would only be striping at the 25, signifying the progression from the touchback, as well as the beginning line of scrimmage in OT.

Not only that, it shortens the field for the offense, increasing the likelihood of more points, something the NFL is fond of.

[jaker52]

Number 1 I agree with 100%

should be as simple as one/two feet being in bounds with control

3/5 I believe need to be mutually exclusive

Should be non contact and one foot in bounds, or two feet and a contact tackle

I believe that the NFL should borrow from the(my opinion) superior game(but not players) of the CFL, and eliminate the fair catch rule, and require 5 yards for the receiver to make the catch and start running

I fully agree with the 5 yards, also move the kickoff back where it was.

[Mac the Knife]

^^^

And the rouge! If we're stealing rules from the CFL, steal the rouge!

[Gothamite]

I would change the feet in bounds rule to one foot as it would reduce the need for instant replay and be easier on the officials not to mention making the league fun again (sort of ).

That's seriously preventing you from enjoying the games?

We already have an imbalance towards offense. I don't think we need to push farther in that direction.

[Germanshepherd]

College overtime rules for NFL.

Onside kicks can be returned by kicking team once defense touches it.

Remove Excessive Celebration rules from college unless it's taunting or really freaking excessive.

Blindfold the kicker and spin him around 15 times before he kicks the extra point. That's entertainment right there.

[BBTV]

The forward pass was the worst thing that happened to the NFL. Eliminate hash marks and the forward pass and now we have a ballgame once again!

[LMU]

Not so much a change to the rules but to statistics... interceptions should be scored like errors in baseball. If a receiver is clearly responsible, it shouldn't count against a QBs stats or QBR.

[BBTV]

Not so much a change to the rules but to statistics... interceptions should be scored like errors in baseball. If a receiver is clearly responsible, it shouldn't count against a QBs stats or QBR.

I don't know - there's plenty of times that a QB should be intercepted, but isn't either because a receiver played defense, or just dumb luck. Those things more than even themselves out.

Are you going to start counting throws that were blatant interceptions that the DB just dropped because he has stone hands? If you're going to start judging on one end, you need to start judging on the other.

[HedleyLamarr]

Who was that guy that suggested that you get a one-play-a-game gorilla during the course of the game?

That idea is way better than the number of feet needed for a reception or yards penalized on DPI.....

[The_Admiral]

That was either BBTV or Infrared. I'm in favor of it just to hear COllinsworth go "HEH, WELL, AAALLLLL, HE REALLY WENT BANANAS ON THAT PLAY, HEH HEH HEH."

[Mac the Knife]

it shouldn't count against a QBs stats or QBR.

WTF is a "QBR?"

[LMU]

it shouldn't count against a QBs stats or QBR.

WTF is a "QBR?"

QuarterBack Rating

[leopard88]

it shouldn't count against a QBs stats or QBR.

WTF is a "QBR?"

QuarterBack Rating

Thanks, ESPN.