Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes

Monkeydad · 03-22-2012, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I could see a creative team cycling IR's like the Giants cycle their defensive linemen. (heck, maybe the giants would combine the fake fall with the IR cycling ... hmmm)

Yeah, they're blatant cheaters so I could see that.

Instead of a whole-season IR, I'd like to see a 4-game, an 8-game and an all-year IR choice.

Even just half and whole season would work.

los panda · 03-22-2012, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkeydad

Even just half and whole season would work.

i like it, pick 1 date during mid-season, if you place a player on ir before then, he's eligible on that date, if you place him on ir after that date, he's done for the season. limit the number of spots to 2 or something, the rest have to go on standard, season-long ir

Mattyk · 03-28-2012, 11:58 AM

Good change

NFL changes regular-season overtime to match postseason overtime | ProFootballTalk

Mattyk · 03-28-2012, 12:13 PM

NFL expands defenseless player rule to crackback blocks | ProFootballTalk

los panda · 03-28-2012, 12:33 PM

i don't like either of those 2 changes. i liked the real sudden death ot. i also don't think officials should compensate for an unaware player. i understand a receiver tracking the ball, but i don't see many other examples of players who should be excused as defenseless

skinsguy · 03-28-2012, 12:38 PM

I like the change in OT! As far as the crack back blocks on the defensive backs, might as well be consistent. Protect everybody from head shots. I think it's time the players all go back to learning how to tackle, textbook style, instead of relying on the highlight reel big hit.

Mattyk · 03-28-2012, 12:45 PM

I'd like to see them take away being able to blow up the QB after an INT.

los panda · 03-28-2012, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'd like to see them take away being able to blow up the QB after an INT.

if it's viewed as unnecessary, the official can call it w the current rules

Bubba305-ST21- · 03-28-2012, 01:02 PM

ok i like the OT change but whats up with the crack back block? how can you penalize someone for blocking someone that didnt see them? thats crazy, what if the guy sucks and doesnt have good awareness? this is just like the denfenseless receiver rule, is the defense just suppose to let a player catch it in front of him. He is defenseless because he is trying to catch the ball and score, i guess they jsut want the defender to let him do that and then catch him in their chest! i understand the speering at the head, thats understandable but head to head contact happens every play. come on man this is football

skinsguy · 03-28-2012, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by los panda

if it's viewed as unnecessary, the official can call it w the current rules

I agree. By that point, the QB becomes a defender and is open to getting blown up as much as the other defenders on the field. As long as they're not cutting him low or hitting in the head, then I see no problem with that.

GTripp0012 · 03-28-2012, 02:31 PM

I don't like the OT rule, but I like this adaptation of it. If you will have it at all, don't wait until the playoffs to use it.

Everything else seems like a step in the right direction.

PWNED · 03-28-2012, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't like the OT rule, but I like this adaptation of it. If you will have it at all, don't wait until the playoffs to use it.

Everything else seems like a step in the right direction.

:confused:

?

sportscurmudgeon · 03-29-2012, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Maybe they could add any face mask is a penalty. It's one thing to stiff arm a defensemen by using his body it's another to grab the CB's facemask and try to hold him off. If the defense can't do it neither should the offense.

I would like that rule change a lot...

sportscurmudgeon · 03-29-2012, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I never understood the point of having a player on IR being done for the season. Why don't they have an injury policy more like MLB with a 30-60-90-120 day injury list. That allows players hurt in preseason to contribute down the stretch. I guess stashing could be an issue but the way its done now is kinda dumb.

Actually, the IR rule as it stands comes from the days when "stashing" was very prevalent in the NFL. With a salary cap system in place, it becomes more difficult - - but not impossible - - to do any significant amount of "stashing".

The NFL actually does had a MLB-like system but without the duration designations. If a contributing player is hurt but it looks as if he will be OK to play again in whatever is left of the season at the time of the injury, he does not go on IR but does not dress for future games. He is one of the 53-man roster who is in street clothes until he is well...

A compromise rule that might demonstrate how all of this is beneficial to NFL teams would be to allow each team to designate ONE player a year for "Injured Reserve-Eligible For Reactivation". After that demonstrates that it is not Earth-shattering", they can increase the limit to TWO per year for each team. And then...

Ruhskins · 03-29-2012, 02:01 PM

Any word on whether they are moving the trade deadline? I always thought week 6 was wayyyy too early.

03-28-2012, 11:58 AM	#18
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,736	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes Good change NFL changes regular-season overtime to match postseason overtime \| ProFootballTalk __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

03-28-2012, 12:13 PM	#19
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,736	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes NFL expands defenseless player rule to crackback blocks \| ProFootballTalk __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

03-28-2012, 12:33 PM	#20
los panda Playmaker Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: los angeles, ca Age: 28 Posts: 3,852	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes i don't like either of those 2 changes. i liked the real sudden death ot. i also don't think officials should compensate for an unaware player. i understand a receiver tracking the ball, but i don't see many other examples of players who should be excused as defenseless __________________ 7 9 21 28 33 42 43 44 49 65 70 81

03-28-2012, 12:38 PM	#21
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,002	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes I like the change in OT! As far as the crack back blocks on the defensive backs, might as well be consistent. Protect everybody from head shots. I think it's time the players all go back to learning how to tackle, textbook style, instead of relying on the highlight reel big hit. __________________ Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.

03-28-2012, 12:45 PM	#22
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,736	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes I'd like to see them take away being able to blow up the QB after an INT. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

03-28-2012, 01:02 PM	#24
Bubba305-ST21- Impact Rookie Join Date: Apr 2008 Age: 25 Posts: 672	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes ok i like the OT change but whats up with the crack back block? how can you penalize someone for blocking someone that didnt see them? thats crazy, what if the guy sucks and doesnt have good awareness? this is just like the denfenseless receiver rule, is the defense just suppose to let a player catch it in front of him. He is defenseless because he is trying to catch the ball and score, i guess they jsut want the defender to let him do that and then catch him in their chest! i understand the speering at the head, thats understandable but head to head contact happens every play. come on man this is football __________________ never another.....R.I.P. Sean T #21

03-28-2012, 02:31 PM	#26
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes I don't like the OT rule, but I like this adaptation of it. If you will have it at all, don't wait until the playoffs to use it. Everything else seems like a step in the right direction. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

03-29-2012, 02:01 PM	#30
Ruhskins Gamebreaker Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Columbia, MD Age: 34 Posts: 14,593	Re: Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes Any word on whether they are moving the trade deadline? I always thought week 6 was wayyyy too early. __________________ R.I.P. #21 New words created on The Warpath: Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual Stroried Check out this cool local internet radio show Weds 7-9pm: The DC Sports Chat I sense an annoyance in the Force

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Proposed New Rule/Bylaw changes

Redskins Locker Room