PDA

View Full Version : Two other rule changes



pbatrucker
03-26-2010, 07:11 AM
Nothing found for Chiefs-football Blackouts-changes-%E2%80%A6-thursday-cup-o%E2%80%99chiefs #more-12863 (http://www.bobgretz.com/chiefs-football/blackouts-changes-%E2%80%A6-thursday-cup-o%E2%80%99chiefs.html#more-12863)

PawnshopMarimba
03-27-2010, 03:40 AM
Not to hi-jack the thread, but the playoff overtime rule change sounds utterly convoluted, and will only serve to confuse casual fans. It sounds like something my high school friends and I used to call a, "High-dea"; that is, a concept that sounds really great after you've had a few drinks or a joint, but once you're sober, you realize just how ridiculous it actually is.

"Yeah, so.. like... dude, what if instead of sudden death overtime, they, like, had the coin toss, you know, and whoever won the toss got the ball and, like, if they score a touchdown, well... the game's still over, but if they have to kick a field goal, like, the other team gets a chance to get the ball. You know what I'm sayin'?"

"No. What happens if the team who wins the coin toss has to punt on their first possession and the other team scores?"

"Uhh.. then they win, dude!"

"Even if they kick a field goal?"

"Yeah, man, why not?"

"So why does the team who gets first possession HAVE to score a TD to end the game, while the team that lost the toss can win on either an FG or or TD if the first team doesn't score?"

"Uhhh... well.... hmmm..."

Honestly, what is so horrible about NCAA's OT rules that the NFL can't borrow it? Is it pride? Obviously, in the NFL they should start the possession at midfield instead of the opposition's 20, but good lord, that rule set makes for incredible games, and both teams get a guaranteed chance at the ball in the extra frame. There's no cheap, "First team to score wins, even if it's a bullsh*t luck play, or fueled by a terrible referee call" and no bizarre hard-to-follow, "first team to score wins UNLESS it's a field goal... " nonsense.

I'm no fan of sudden death, but at least the premise is cut and dried, and easy to follow.


Sorry.

As to the other rule changes, they seem to fall in line with everything the league's been doing in re: to player safety over the past decade.

I can appreciate protecting the players, but at some point you're going to strip the game of some of its excitement. They need to be careful. Muffed PR plays are exciting, and often a major momentum shifter. I don't really care for the vagueness of terminology in this rule change in particular. The returner must be granted a "reasonable amount of time" to reclaim the ball without interference? What the hell does that mean? That's a subjective time frame, meaning that the definition of "a reasonable amount of time" will be completely different for each official, meaning that there will be absolutely no consistency in the rule's enforcement.

Actually, it will probably manifest itself in the same way the Roughing the Passer rule does. Successful teams/players will get the benefit of the doubt while everyone else (ie: Kansas City) will tend to get the short end of the stick on enforcement.

Rules should be rules in professional sports, not ambiguous and nebulous concepts that can be interpreted an infinite number of ways. It muddies the waters and sets up for allowing biased calls.

rbedgood
03-27-2010, 05:42 AM
Honestly, what is so horrible about NCAA's OT rules that the NFL can't borrow it? Is it pride? Obviously, in the NFL they should start the possession at midfield instead of the opposition's 20, but good lord, that rule set makes for incredible games, and both teams get a guaranteed chance at the ball in the extra frame. There's no cheap, "First team to score wins, even if it's a bullsh*t luck play, or fueled by a terrible referee call" and no bizarre hard-to-follow, "first team to score wins UNLESS it's a field goal... " nonsense.


What's wrong with the NCAA OT rules? Really. Well for starters the removal of kick-offs and punts is horrible. The whole both teams get the ball with a short field is a joke.

The perfect solution is a full OT period...but due to the risk of injury, etc. I can see why they don't do that. The next best thing is probably sudden death. But I am so glad they aren't going to ruin the game with the travesty that is the NCAA OT rules.

Chiefster
03-27-2010, 09:34 AM
I find this completely ridiculous:

BUTTER FINGERS ON PUNT RETURNS – If a punt returner makes a fair-catch signal and muffs the ball, he is entitled to what the league is now calling a “reasonable opportunity” to catch the muff before it hits the ground without interference of the coverage team. The ball will be rewarded at the spot of the interference, but there will be no penalty yardage marked off.

jtandcrew
03-27-2010, 12:01 PM
I agree Chiefster! If he cant catch it especially after a fair catch is called why should he have 1st right for it? Completely stupid!

PawnshopMarimba
03-27-2010, 11:54 PM
What's wrong with the NCAA OT rules? Really. Well for starters the removal of kick-offs and punts is horrible. The whole both teams get the ball with a short field is a joke.

The perfect solution is a full OT period...but due to the risk of injury, etc. I can see why they don't do that. The next best thing is probably sudden death. But I am so glad they aren't going to ruin the game with the travesty that is the NCAA OT rules.


I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I don't care to see punts and kickoffs in an overtime period. At all.

Sudden death overtime tends to be anti climactic in the NFL's current era of amped up offensive assault. More often than not it's just one team working their way down to the opposition's side of the field with maybe one big play then methodically aligning themselves closer to the goal line and in the center of the field with HB dives to position for a 3rd down field goal to end it. Pretty boring, really. If a team gets to the other's 35 yard line, you can more or less change the channel; it's typically over unless your place kicker's named Lin.

A full period would be okay... I guess, but you're bound to get some lop sided scores. Also boring.

The college system pretty much ensures a wild finish with some gutsy play calling and lots of scoring which I think most people would rather see. It's the most consistent method of delivering an exciting OT period. And if a game has to go long, it should be nothing short of nail biting all the way through, no matter what.

Like I said, I wouldn't have it start at the 20, but at midfield. That gives a defense plenty of room to make some important stops.

AussieChiefsFan
03-28-2010, 12:20 AM
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I don't care to see punts and kickoffs in an overtime period. At all.

Sudden death overtime tends to be anti climactic in the NFL's current era of amped up offensive assault. More often than not it's just one team working their way down to the opposition's side of the field with maybe one big play then methodically aligning themselves closer to the goal line and in the center of the field with HB dives to position for a 3rd down field goal to end it. Pretty boring, really. If a team gets to the other's 35 yard line, you can more or less change the channel; it's typically over unless your place kicker's named Lin.

A full period would be okay... I guess, but you're bound to get some lop sided scores. Also boring.

The college system pretty much ensures a wild finish with some gutsy play calling and lots of scoring which I think most people would rather see. It's the most consistent method of delivering an exciting OT period. And if a game has to go long, it should be nothing short of nail biting all the way through, no matter what.

Like I said, I wouldn't have it start at the 20, but at midfield. That gives a defense plenty of room to make some important stops.
That would mean a touchback on almost every kick.

PawnshopMarimba
03-28-2010, 12:58 AM
That would mean a touchback on almost every kick.

Again, there are no kickoffs. The offense would start the drive at the 50 yd. line.

AussieChiefsFan
03-28-2010, 01:11 AM
Again, there are no kickoffs. The offense would start the drive at the 50 yd. line.
Then that would make it easier for the coin toss winner to win the game which is what they're trying to change.

Chiefster
03-28-2010, 01:20 AM
I agree Chiefster! If he cant catch it especially after a fair catch is called why should he have 1st right for it? Completely stupid!

Exactly; about the dumbest rule I ever read.

PawnshopMarimba
03-28-2010, 01:53 AM
Then that would make it easier for the coin toss winner to win the game which is what they're trying to change.

lol. No, man.
The way college overtime works is, in short, like this.

Team A starts with the ball at the opposing team's 20 yard line. There are obviously no punts. It's 4 down territory. They get their chance to score, and regardless of whether they do or don't (FG or TD or nothing) Team B gets the ball at Team A's 20 yard line and has an equal opportunity to match or beat what Team A did with their possession.

So, if Team A kicks a field goal on the first drive of OT, then Team B matches with a field goal, the game resumes. If Team A kicks a field goal and Team B scores a touchdown, the game ends.

matthewschiefs
03-28-2010, 01:56 AM
lol. No, man.
The way college overtime works is, in short, like this.

Team A starts with the ball at the opposing team's 20 yard line. There are obviously no punts. It's 4 down territory. They get their chance to score, and regardless of whether they do or don't (FG or TD or nothing) Team B gets the ball at Team A's 20 yard line and has an equal opportunity to match or beat what Team A did with their possession.

So, if Team A kicks a field goal on the first drive of OT, then Team B matches with a field goal, the game resumes. If Team A kicks a field goal and Team B scores a touchdown, the game ends.

Its the worst overtime IMO I would have no problem with it if they did not start the teams already in field goal range.

AussieChiefsFan
03-28-2010, 02:07 AM
lol. No, man.
The way college overtime works is, in short, like this.

Team A starts with the ball at the opposing team's 20 yard line. There are obviously no punts. It's 4 down territory. They get their chance to score, and regardless of whether they do or don't (FG or TD or nothing) Team B gets the ball at Team A's 20 yard line and has an equal opportunity to match or beat what Team A did with their possession.

So, if Team A kicks a field goal on the first drive of OT, then Team B matches with a field goal, the game resumes. If Team A kicks a field goal and Team B scores a touchdown, the game ends.okay

PawnshopMarimba
03-28-2010, 02:38 AM
Its the worst overtime IMO I would have no problem with it if they did not start the teams already in field goal range.

Which is why, for the NFL, I'm suggesting they start at the 50. There's room for the D to make a play, and an FG isn't guaranteed.

Eydugstr
03-28-2010, 08:07 PM
I find this completely ridiculous:

BUTTER FINGERS ON PUNT RETURNS – If a punt returner makes a fair-catch signal and muffs the ball, he is entitled to what the league is now calling a “reasonable opportunity” to catch the muff before it hits the ground without interference of the coverage team. The ball will be rewarded at the spot of the interference, but there will be no penalty yardage marked off.

Agreed. "Reasonable opportunity"...that's pretty vague. My guess is we'll see some controversial calls/plays because of that.

PawnshopMarimba
03-29-2010, 12:24 AM
Agreed. "Reasonable opportunity"...that's pretty vague. My guess is we'll see some controversial calls/plays because of that.


I re-read the rule today, and I don't have as much of a problem with it now. I didn't catch the "before the ball hits the ground" part.

I was picturing a scenario where a guy completely muffs a punt, it bounces 5 yards upfield and he has a free pass to dive after it where no one else can touch him.

Since most punts slide right through a guy's hands and go straight to the turf, I don't think the rule change is going to make *that* much of a difference.

We'll see, though.

lucky_lefty
03-29-2010, 11:22 AM
Well can someone answer this for me because I've yet to find anyone who can give me an honest answer....With the new rule change, say I kick a FG, cool, I have to kick it off. Now if I kick an onside kick and recover the ball, is the game over? Technically, the other squads offense never got on the field. Just wondering

yashi
03-29-2010, 12:04 PM
Well can someone answer this for me because I've yet to find anyone who can give me an honest answer....With the new rule change, say I kick a FG, cool, I have to kick it off. Now if I kick an onside kick and recover the ball, is the game over? Technically, the other squads offense never got on the field. Just wondering

I'm not 100% sure but I'm pretty certain that is how it works.