New Rule really unfair to the Colts and their tempo (1 Viewer)

[Hooper31]

I can't believe even one person hasn't mentioned the purpose for the change. Umpires have been getting knocked silly for years having to sit in the middle of the defense. Instead of whining about the change, how about a solid alternative? Otherwise, I'm good with the change knowing it will rarely (if ever) affect a game.

Player safety has been a big deal from the league in recent years. Is it really that surprising that the league would try to find a way to protect the umpires? Further, how often do we see one of them get in the way of a play with no chance of avoiding the action?

IMO this change is long overdue.

 

[Happy Ragnarok]

If the rule is going to work like this, teams will obviously have to adjust. But just because rule changes in the past have made teams have to adjust doesn't mean a particular adjustment is necessarily a positive thing for the game.

Nothing is "necessarily positive for the game." It's all subjective.I'll just say that I favor the slowdown, because I think that will place a greater premium on execution. A greater % of plays will have successful or unsuccessful outcomes based on fundamental physical/football skills like running, jumping, throwing accurately, route running, tackling, blocking, etc. A smaller % of plays will be resolved by catching opponents unready. This isn't fundamentally good or bad...fair or unfair. It does happen to suit my preferences better.It's not positive, it's not negative. It just is.

 

[Insein]

No team should be penalized for playing the game within the parameters.

When you say parameters, you mean rules that everybody has to play by?

I mean, if the ref sets the ball and the clock is running, it should be able to be snapped.

What's the objective reason for that? Because it seems right to you? The rules committee decided this was safer, or fairer, or some combination of the two. Should offensive linemen all be eligible to catch passes? Should the forward pass be legal at all? The rules of the game all exist because the people who make the rules think they improve the game. This one's no different, and nothing makes it inherently righter or wronger than the previous rule.The only "ought" is teams "ought" to play by the rules, and if they don't, then they "ought" to be penalized. The rules themselves are all pretty much arbitrary.

I like the quotes on "ought" except I didn't say "ought" at all. If the clock is running and the ball is placed, the game is live. Unless they change it to where the game pauses for those few seconds, then a team shouldn't be penalized for snapping it too earlier.

 

[Jolly Swagman]

No team should be penalized for playing the game within the parameters. The ball is placed, it should be live. They shouldn't have to wait for an umpire to run back behind the Offense. If they want to stop the clock until he gets back to his spot, then that would make more sense.

The parameters have been changed

 

[Jolly Swagman]

I can't believe even one person hasn't mentioned the purpose for the change. Umpires have been getting knocked silly for years having to sit in the middle of the defense. Instead of whining about the change, how about a solid alternative? Otherwise, I'm good with the change knowing it will rarely (if ever) affect a game.Player safety has been a big deal from the league in recent years. Is it really that surprising that the league would try to find a way to protect the umpires? Further, how often do we see one of them get in the way of a play with no chance of avoiding the action?IMO this change is long overdue.

THIS is why the rule is staying. They are not going to change a rule for the umps safety and then say "ya know what, never mind, screw safety"

 

[GregR_2]

A couple of effects that there is a fair possibility of resulting from the rule change.

Offensive holding calls may increase as there are now two officials instead of one in best position to see holding.

The amount of defensive holding that teams get away with will probably increase, and I'll be surprised if some teams (yes I'm talking to you Belichick) don't intentionally use it more as a part of their defensive strategy.

If offensive holding calls increase it could lead to more stalled drives, and then later in the season a few more sacks as the O-linemen have to play cleaner to avoid the holding calls. The D-line being able to hold more easily may also favor linebacker tackles on running plays as fewer O-line get to the next level to block them.

 

[GregR_2]

I can't believe even one person hasn't mentioned the purpose for the change. Umpires have been getting knocked silly for years having to sit in the middle of the defense. ...

It was mentioned in the very first post.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I can't believe even one person hasn't mentioned the purpose for the change. Umpires have been getting knocked silly for years having to sit in the middle of the defense. Instead of whining about the change, how about a solid alternative? Otherwise, I'm good with the change knowing it will rarely (if ever) affect a game.Player safety has been a big deal from the league in recent years. Is it really that surprising that the league would try to find a way to protect the umpires? Further, how often do we see one of them get in the way of a play with no chance of avoiding the action?IMO this change is long overdue.

THIS is why the rule is staying. They are not going to change a rule for the umps safety and then say "ya know what, never mind, screw safety"

which is also why I am surprised they are not doing it for the whole game......kind of like making drinking and driving illegal except for the last two miles of your trip home........then it's ok.......as was mentioned above my only concern is the 2 minute drills that happen with more than two minutes left.....this will affect the tempo and purpose of those drives.......and at all the people who think the offense should wait for the defense to get ready......

 

[Workhorse]

A couple of effects that there is a fair possibility of resulting from the rule change.Offensive holding calls may increase as there are now two officials instead of one in best position to see holding. The amount of defensive holding that teams get away with will probably increase, and I'll be surprised if some teams (yes I'm talking to you Belichick) don't intentionally use it more as a part of their defensive strategy.If offensive holding calls increase it could lead to more stalled drives, and then later in the season a few more sacks as the O-linemen have to play cleaner to avoid the holding calls. The D-line being able to hold more easily may also favor linebacker tackles on running plays as fewer O-line get to the next level to block them.

I would imagine that there will be even more BS roughing the QB penalties now as well. It sure looked like it last night in the Pats/Rams game.

 

[jurb26]

No team should be penalized for playing the game within the parameters. The ball is placed, it should be live. They shouldn't have to wait for an umpire to run back behind the Offense. If they want to stop the clock until he gets back to his spot, then that would make more sense.

The parameters have been changed

Exactly! The rules change all the time. The smart/good teams will adapt to it."The ball is placed, it should be live." Why exactly is that? Because you like it that way? Well I happen to value the safety of the officials more than this silly glitch offensive teams could utilize prior to the rule. The NFL clearly feels the same way. Hence they changed the rule.

I happen to think WR should all be fair game to be hit until the ball is in the air. That is no longer possible within the rules. Rules are going to change and you are not always going to like them.

 

[Happy Ragnarok]

No team should be penalized for playing the game within the parameters. The ball is placed, it should be live. They shouldn't have to wait for an umpire to run back behind the Offense. If they want to stop the clock until he gets back to his spot, then that would make more sense.

The parameters have been changed

Exactly! The rules change all the time. The smart/good teams will adapt to it."The ball is placed, it should be live." Why exactly is that? Because you like it that way? Well I happen to value the safety of the officials more than this silly glitch offensive teams could utilize prior to the rule. The NFL clearly feels the same way. Hence they changed the rule.

I happen to think WR should all be fair game to be hit until the ball is in the air. That is no longer possible within the rules. Rules are going to change and you are not always going to like them.

Somebody's on my page.

 

[GregR_2]

A couple of effects that there is a fair possibility of resulting from the rule change.Offensive holding calls may increase as there are now two officials instead of one in best position to see holding. The amount of defensive holding that teams get away with will probably increase, and I'll be surprised if some teams (yes I'm talking to you Belichick) don't intentionally use it more as a part of their defensive strategy.If offensive holding calls increase it could lead to more stalled drives, and then later in the season a few more sacks as the O-linemen have to play cleaner to avoid the holding calls. The D-line being able to hold more easily may also favor linebacker tackles on running plays as fewer O-line get to the next level to block them.

I would imagine that there will be even more BS roughing the QB penalties now as well. It sure looked like it last night in the Pats/Rams game.

True. Any call that was previously being made in the backfield we'll probably see a slight increase in. Though they might make fewer mistakes on intentional grounding as now each ref back there only has to be aware of where the tackle box ends on his side instead of one guy being aware of both sides.

 

[r3t2]

IN both case he was flagged, he was less then a second from NOT getting flagged. So the rule forces them to take 11 or 12 seconds between snaps instead of 10...THIS SHOULDN'T BE A BIG DEAL.

Um, that's a huge deal. On the Colts second offensive play of the game last night Manning turned a second of indecision by the Packers secondary into a TD strike.

the official that was the cause of the flags looked to be 20 lbs overweight and about 60+ years old IIRC. if they keep this rule, maybe they need the officials to be somewhat athletic and able to get out of the way.

 

[shamrock84]

kind of like making drinking and driving illegal except for the last two miles of your trip home........then it's ok.......

I would definitely be down for this law. Everyone could go to bars within two miles of your house with no worries.

 

[GregR_2]

From NFL.com:

NFL reportedly will adjust where umpire is stationedThe NFL will inform teams Tuesday about tweaks to where the umpire will be stationed in the offensive backfield, The New York Times reported.The adjustments are in response to a new rule that moved the umpire from the middle of the defense to 14 to 17 yards behind the offense for safety reasons. That was adjusted to 12 yards back after the Hall of Fame Game so the ball could be spotted quicker. Still, the rule drew criticism from Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning, whose team was penalized twice for snapping the ball before the umpire was in position during a preseason game Thursday.The latest tweaks, made after a conference call that included members of the league's competition committee, include requiring the umpire only to be standing behind the deepest member of the offense, and quarterbacks can look at officials near the sidelines to get the go-ahead to snap the ball, rather than turn around and look for a signal from the umpire.

In related discussion on NFL Network, the following comments were made about the effects of the rule change as it reads at the moment:Brian Billick on offensive and defensive holding: "I think you're going to see not only more offensive holding calls because you have an extra set of eyes back here, but [defensive holding] was a tough call to see anyway, now it's going to be darn near impossible."Warren Sapp: "Defensive linemen should be licking their chops."

 

[jon_mx]

not cool if you ask me. that play where they threw the flag for the ref not being past the last man in the backfield? seriously? now he has to wait for the ref to get far enough back. look to the sideline for the signal from the side judge. this needs to be changed before the season starts. what is going to happen when a team has no more time outs and has to spike the ball? are they going to have to wait for the ref to get far enough back. there is going to be serious backlash from this.

Very well said.

wow that sucks that a ref can flag a team for him being a slowass.

That's the real problem with the rule.