PDA

View Full Version : Do you agree with this proposed rule change?



Frankenchief
08-17-2014, 01:39 PM
I do, totally.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/16/worst-rule-in-football-robs-possession-from-the-bucs/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

One of these years, the NFL needs to take a look at one of the worst rules in the game.


In Tampa on Saturday night, Buccaneers quarterback of the past and future (but not present) Mike Glennon (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/8374/mike-glennon) found rookie wideout Mike Evans (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/9296/mike-evans) on third and 15. Evans, from Texas A&M, ran like his former college quarterback through the Miami defense to complete a 42-yard play.


The ruling on the field was a touchdown, but replay showed that Evans had fumbled the ball before breaking the plane. It landed in the end zone and then rolled out of bounds before anyone recovered it. By rule, however, it’s not a touchdown but a touchback.


It’s a horrible rule. If the ball had gone out of bounds at the one-inch line, possession would have stayed with the Buccaneers. But because the ball crossed the plane, failure to recover by the offense and failure to recover by the defense became an automatic recovery for the defense.


If the defense, which has surrendered enough field position to put the offense on the doorstep of the end zone, fails to recover tha fumble and the ball goes in the end zone and then out of the end zone, then the defense shouldn’t be rewarded with possession. If the same thing happens anywhere else on the field (except in the offense’s own end zone), the offense keeps the ball. Taking the ball away simply because the ball came loose and entered the end zone and exited the end zone makes no sense.

jap1
08-17-2014, 05:48 PM
Along the same lines of the argument that the defense had surrendered field position, I would argue that all the offense has to do is hold on to the ball. If you cannot do that at th most crucial point of the field, you should be punished. Right now, as a player, you have to calculate the risk of reaching out with the ball to cross the goalline or keep it tucked in and try to fight your way through the defender. Changing the rule means the offensive player doesn't have to worry about fumbling. Stick the ball out everytime, because worst case you will have the ball on the one inch line and can try again. Also, anytime you fumble and it goes into the end zone it is a forward fumble, which means the offense is gaining and advantage from a fumble.

The rule is good. Leave it.

TopekaRoy
08-17-2014, 08:01 PM
...Changing the rule means the offensive player doesn't have to worry about fumbling. Stick the ball out everytime, because worst case you will have the ball on the one inch line and can try again...

The rule is good. Leave it.

Actually, the worst case is that the opposing defense recovers the ball in the end zone and gets possession at their own 20 yd line, but I am inclined to agree with you.

I think we should probably keep the rule as it is, but another option would be for the offense to retain possession and spot the ball at the 5 or 3 yd line (and loss of down, of course). This would give the defense incentive to try to recover the ball in the end zone and not just let it roll through, while still retaining the incentive for the offense not to fumble in the first place.

Frankenchief
08-17-2014, 11:00 PM
Along the same lines of the argument that the defense had surrendered field position, I would argue that all the offense has to do is hold on to the ball. If you cannot do that at th most crucial point of the field, you should be punished. Right now, as a player, you have to calculate the risk of reaching out with the ball to cross the goalline or keep it tucked in and try to fight your way through the defender. Changing the rule means the offensive player doesn't have to worry about fumbling.
Wrong! If he fumbles and the other team recovers in the end zone it's a touch back. This rule only applies to offensive fumble that goes out of bound on the sides.

Seek
08-18-2014, 03:02 PM
I never liked it. I think it should be the same as going out of bounds. Who ever mainted control last gets it at the spot of the fumble.

Frankenchief
08-18-2014, 05:42 PM
Exactly.

tornadospotter
08-19-2014, 11:56 PM
Do not Fumble the Ball! If it was a forced fumble? Great job defense.

Frankenchief
08-20-2014, 06:20 PM
Do not Fumble the Ball! If it was a forced fumble? Great job defense.

So if it's a fumble out of bounds on the playing field the other team should get the ball no matter what, right?

tornadospotter
08-22-2014, 12:38 AM
Do not fumble! But I also think it should go to the team that last had clear possession, made a move to advance the ball Not just gain the ball while also going out of bounds. A penalty of 5 yards accessed to the offense if they retain the ball, for fumbling. Fumble out of the endzone, ball should go to the team that had last clear possession with a clear attempt to move the ball. Out of the endzone? Defense last touched, but did not gain control. You should have got the ball.