Dismiss Notice
Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us. SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon Thanks! Nip

2019 NFL Rule Changes

Discussion in 'Blinded by the Lombardis: Patriots Forum' started by tims4wins, Jan 30, 2019.

  1. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    Didn't want to bury this in the NFCCG game thread. BB has been advocating "make everything reviewable" for years.

    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...sider-judgment-challenge-penalty-disincentive

    As a possible solution to avoid the type of missed call from the NFC Championship Game, the NFL is expected to consider a plan that would allow limited coaches' challenges for incorrect judgment calls that also could include a penalty or time run off if the coach is wrong, per a league source.
     
  2. Van Everyman

    Van Everyman Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,077
    This is an abomination.

    By which I mean this sentence structure:

     
  3. DrewDawg

    DrewDawg Dorito Dink SoSH Member

    Messages:
    32,599
    So you could get 2 penalties on one play? Awesome.

    And the play that prompted this happened after 2 minute warning, so they'll be allowing coaches to challenge that late? But not other things?

    So next year we get a "If they can challenge PI call with 90 seconds left, why won't they let them challenge the spot? If you want to get the calls right, don't you want to get all of them right?"
     
  4. Ed Hillel

    Ed Hillel Wants to be startin somethin SoSH Member

    Messages:
    21,334
    Think of the drama when Andy Reid throws a flag for a bad roughing call, we get a five minute commercial break and overturn, then Belichick tosses a flag for holding or DPI for the same play, we get more commercials, and then an overturn again!

    The idea of getting every call right is nice, but this has potential to really suck for viewing. The controversy won’t be going away.
     
  5. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    You make two great points. Imagine a play where you complete a big play, maybe even for a TD, but you get called for offensive holding. So instead of the great play, maybe now you are facing 1st and 20, or 2nd and 15, or whatever. So you challenge... and you lose, and are penalized another 15 yards. Drive over.

    The two minute warning point is also very good. This is going to be very difficult for the NFL to manage. Let's just say my confidence in their ability to do this successful is... not high.
     
  6. CFB_Rules

    CFB_Rules Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    161
    I don't like it and I don't expect it to be approved. A few reasons why:

    It ruins flow even more than the current replay system, and flow is important to the watchability of a product. You know how on every tight touchdown or catch play you celebrate but in the back of your head you think "This might not count, it will go to review". Now expect that on every play. Wide open receiver for a TD? Wait, maybe the other team will challenge holding.

    There will be no such thing as a walk-off win in a world where fouls are challengable. Super Bowl XXXVI, Super Bowl LI, and last week's AFC title game would all have ended very differently, with a Referee looking into a tablet and then announcing to the world that the game was over several minutes after the play. The other team would have no incentive NOT to challenge a game-winning play for any foul they could imagine.

    Lots of other contingencies: What if there are multiple uncalled fouls on a play? Can a team challenge the same play twice for separate fouls? What if you have a play like the roughing call in KC? Would the Chiefs challenge the roughing foul, followed by the Patriots challenging for a DPI? Maybe followed by the Chiefs looking for a hold?
     
  7. PaulinMyrBch

    PaulinMyrBch Don't touch his dog food Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,221
    Booth in the Saints game should have just got in the ear of the referee and said "throw a flag and get the crew together and see if anybody saw what we're looking at up here". Let the on-field guys get together and see if any of the officials who aren't point person on that part of the field would have enough to say to make that play PI or targeting. I'm not a fan of making judgement calls reviewable. Dudes on the field just need to do their job better.
     
  8. j44thor

    j44thor Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,806
    I don't think they should be allowed to challenge say hand fighting and ask for it to be a PI call. I do think something like, did the DB make contact before the ball arrived and the only reason the ref didn't throw the flag was because he thought otherwise or did he make zero contact but was called for PI should be challengeable.

    I would hate to see holding challenges, not because I don't think there is some merit but because Joe Public would be calling for a challenge every time an OL has their hands outside the frame even though that isn't technically holding. The general public understanding of holding is not close to the actual rule book and the way the game is called.
     
  9. lexrageorge

    lexrageorge Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,098
    I would prefer that judgment calls be kept as they are. However, if they are going to do it, make it a "judgment challenge" rule:

    - Each team gets one judgment challenge per game. Doesn't matter if it's correct or not. Just one. No penalty or removed timeout.

    - Replay officials review the play at game speed. No super slo-mo that takes years to analyze with a million rules to parse to determine if the contact was allowable or not.

    - If there is conclusive proof that the judgment call (or non-call) on the field was wrong, then correct the call. If inconclusive in any way, the call stands.

    The "every call must be corrected by replay" purists will hate it, but that's a feature, not a bug.
     
  10. Saints Rest

    Saints Rest Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,996
    This is basically what I was thinking. Add an official in the booth, who can watch the game on TV (not necessarily broadcast view, but maybe he/she has access to a few cameras). Let this person be in live communication to the referees in real time. Let this person be able to throw a virtual flag in real time in the ear of the referee. No reviews.
    This basically gives a second ( or in some cases, third or 4th) set of eyes to a play. I would imagine that many penalties are missed simply due to the ref on the filed having his/her view blocked, impaired, or otherwise distracted (e.g. for the latter, imagine a catch on the sideline such that the ref on the field is concentrating on the catch or the feet, and thus totally misses a facemask).
     
  11. j44thor

    j44thor Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,806
    Definitely like the real time speed only for judgement calls. If it isn't obvious in real-time then let the play stand. This would also keep the review time to a very brief stoppage. Might even limit the # of times they can watch said play.
     
  12. Awesome Fossum

    Awesome Fossum Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,434
    I like the game speed suggestion. My vote is to drop challenges entirely and just put hook up the crew to referees in a booth who can correct obvious mistakes as they go. No running over to a monitor; if something needs to be changed, the refs can be told of the change to make. If the ref feels like they need help, they can make an initial call and then ask for it. Correcting the obvious calls correct and keeping the game moving should be the priorities, and I think the NFL is failing on both fronts to varying degrees.
     
  13. pappymojo

    pappymojo Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,687
    Leave it to the NFL to take a problem of their own creation, propose a complicated solution that has obvious problems, stand back as the proposal gets picked apart and then throw up their hands and say 'welp, we tried' without actually doing anything to fix the original problem. I guess it's better than actually making a bad situation worse. Still, not as good as fixing an obvious problem with a simple solution.
     
  14. Saints Rest

    Saints Rest Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,996
  15. j44thor

    j44thor Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,806
    You expect them to add more refs (costs) to every single game every week??? When the current solution is one person does the job for all the games.
     
  16. ifmanis5

    ifmanis5 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,375
    Roger says that expanding replay is an option.

    Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 25m25 minutes ago
    Roger Goodell, on the #Saints missed call: “We understand the frustration they feel. Whenever the officiating is part of a discussion, it’s not a good thing. But we also know our officials are human. ... We will look again at instant replay, should replay be expanded?”
     
  17. BigJimEd

    BigJimEd Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,526
    Next thing you know, they will be asking for full-time refs. Think this league is made of money?
     
  18. ifmanis5

    ifmanis5 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,375
    Are we human or are we dancer?

    CBS News‏Verified account @CBSNews 1m1 minute ago
    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell addresses the controversial no-call in NFC championship game: "Our officials are human...they are not going to get it right every time"
     
  19. NortheasternPJ

    NortheasternPJ Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,783
    I am 100% in on challenging penalties as i think that's not a major issue. I'm 100% against challenging non-calls to get a penalty flag, that's just opening up Pandora's Box. There's so many plays where there are non-called penalties, you'll enter a territory where huge plays at the end of the game will be challenged hoping to get a DPI or holding. The flow of the game already sucks, that'd make it worse.
     
  20. j44thor

    j44thor Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,806
    So your response to Sean Payton is LOL too bad so sad? I think any change to challenging penalties has to take that circumstance into consideration. If 65K people see a penalty that doesn't get called that is much worse than a maybe, maybe not penalty getting called.
     
  21. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,023
    If the NO/LAR play had happened in college it would have been called in from above as a penalty for helmet to helmet, correct? Or no?
     
  22. PedroKsBambino

    PedroKsBambino Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    21,461
    So in other words, Roger, Bill Belichick was right all along?
     
  23. Jed Zeppelin

    Jed Zeppelin Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,980
    Please just don’t change the rules during the Super Bowl.
     
  24. trs

    trs lurker

    Messages:
    74
    This is more or less similar to the VAR system used in some soccer leagues, including in Spain where I live. While the system is far from perfect, it is improving, and very rarely now does the ref on the field go racing off the field to check an off-side call, handball, goal at a monitor. For the most part he just pauses play at the next available break in action and listens for any potential change to the call made on the field.

    In most cases, this includes "judgement" calls such as when to assess a yellow/red card or even penalties, which as many of you know here are also judgement calls. Given that American football has natural breaks in the action anyway, it would seem like this would be rather easy to implement, just have the ref stand over the ball if they get buzzed (similar to what they do during substitutions) from upstairs that they need some time.

    Lastly, what about making a list of "judgment calls" that can be reviewed and rather than have a special "judgement challenge," just have the coach challenge the spot of the ball, which is already allowed. If the coach thinks a penalty should have been called, well then technically the spotting of the ball is incorrect, and of course vice-versa, if a penalty was called that perhaps should not have been, you can re-spot the ball after eliminating the penalty. It just seems odd that upon looking at a replay to see whether two feet were in-bounds or if a "football motion" was made (judgement call already), refs have to ignore the obvious face-mask or grab that occurred beforehand, essentially negating the importance of the actions taken afterwards.
     
  25. simplyeric

    simplyeric aggressively nonsensical SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,797
    Maybe there’s a way to limit it to ‘path of the ball’ penalties, called or left uncalled.
    That would exclude holding against the pass rush, it would including holding at run blocking (or that type of holding could be excluded too). It would only include downfield contact if the ball goes to that receiver later in that play, and of course it would include PI.
    Face masks maybe always on the table?
    Edit:
    I like making them ‘challenging the spot’ items. Also it should be clear that if a team challenges, the refs are allowed to look at other factors and potential other offsetting panelties, again within a ‘path of the ball’ stabdard.
     
    #25 simplyeric, Jan 31, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2019
  26. Awesome Fossum

    Awesome Fossum Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,434
    When the CFL made everything reviewable, this is exactly what happened. Teams would find an illegal contact or something on the backside of a play and were constantly challenging (and winning) non-calls. It was absolutely brutal to watch and the league had to make changes midseason.

    Exactly. And that Robert Woods catch in the Super Bowl is a perfect example. Rather than the Rams running to the ball and getting the snap off OR the Patriots challenging and us all spending five minutes of our lives watching the slow-motion replays, the ref could have stood over the ball for ten extra seconds, gotten a yes or no vote from the booth, and we could have played on.
     
  27. AB in DC

    AB in DC OG Football Writing Silver Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,476
    Another comp would be in baseball, where a manager can sort of ask the umpires to huddle together to make sure they all agree on the call. Add an option for the head ref to call upstairs on his own volition and I think this could work.
     
  28. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
  29. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,450
    I've admittedly never watched a CFL game. Do they have unlimited challenges?

    I don't see the issue on what's challenged if you still limit it to 2, 3 if you get the first two correct. If you want p risk it on a non-call, well, knock yourself out and roll the dice. I'm not sure how it adds delay.
     
  30. OurF'ingCity

    OurF'ingCity Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,687
    I think the simplest solution would be as follows:

    1) Coaches can challenge actually-called penalties like any other challenge. This would address the issue of terrible PI calls totally changing the outcome of a game. (In practice, I doubt more borderline calls like holding calls would be challenged very much since, like challenging the spot of the ball, it's generally going to be pretty hard to get one of those calls overturned.)

    2) For non-calls, or for penalties in the last two minutes, you have booth reviews no different than booth reviews currently operate, only now the booth operator is looking for obvious missed calls and obviously incorrect penalties as well. Will some calls still get missed or called incorrectly? Obviously. But this would prevent the NFCCG scenario where literally everyone other than the guy who didn't throw the flag knew the call was missed and nothing could be done about it.
     
  31. geoduck no quahog

    geoduck no quahog Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,732
    Got no dog in this fight...but wouldn't the booth still be in charge for last 2 minutes? Difference being in this case it would be the booth's call whether or not to review (for example) that PI/Head-to-Head.
     
  32. mwonow

    mwonow Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,810
    On reflection, I'd be okay with no expansion of coach-initiated or booth-initiated replay. Much of the energy behind the topic comes from a non-call in the NFC playoff game. But - there's already a rule (actually, two) to cover the situation; the ref just froze instead of throwing a flag.

    Better refs are clearly the #1 option. Failing that, as per baseball, if one ref misses a call and another sees it - or vice versa - why not let the refs huddle, and if warranted (as per AB in DC) call to the booth for an opinion? Getting the calls right is important, but not to the detriment of actually watching/playing/coaching the game.
     
  33. normstalls

    normstalls Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,209
    https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/1...rtime-rule-change-giving-each-team-possession

    This made me LOL. Pats are in everyone's head. I love it.
     
  34. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
  35. Al Zarilla

    Al Zarilla Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    48,392
  36. soxhop411

    soxhop411 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,785
    NFL going to look into using a sky judge.

    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/26112714/nfl-considers-adding-sky-judge-game-crews
     
  37. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    The Chiefs were clearly concerned about the OT rule since they proposed the change after Super Bowl LI... oh wait, they didn't propose shit then.
     
  38. Lose Remerswaal

    Lose Remerswaal Leaves after the 8th inning Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,355
    Don't they know there already is a "Sky Judge" watching us all, all the time?
     
  39. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,023
    What gets me is that Belichick has voiced that OT shouldn’t be sudden death, it should just be more football.


    Of course he doesn’t propose rule changes because everyone will think he’s trying to pull a fast one.
     
  40. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    The 3 guys who are mentioned in the same sentence as Brady for this era are Manning, Brees, and Rodgers, right? All 3 have lost playoff OT games after turning the ball over in OT (Brees and Manning by pick, Rodgers by a fumble by someone else). Brees and Manning both threw their picks at home.

    Meanwhile Tom Brady has played 3 OT playoff games ever, and has driven his team for 2 TDs and a field goal (and would have scored a TD if it was necessary vs. the Raiders in 2001).

    If it was so easy to score, maybe these other HoF QBs would have scored.
     
  41. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    I can't wait until the Pats are the first team to win in OT after the other team scores a TD on their first possession
     
  42. djbayko

    djbayko Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,153
    Jesus Christ. Maybe let someone else carry that torch for optics if nothing else? You can show these people stats all day that show the outcome is damn close to 50/50 and it won't matter. And it's completely lost on everyone that the rule book is exactly the same for both teams before they step onto the field.

    I kind of hope they do change the overtime rules. Then it will be something else next year. By the time Brady and Belichick retire, I want every rule in the book to be named after a Patriots player or widely known to be in place because of our team.
     
  43. BigJimEd

    BigJimEd Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,526
    Rewriting the record and rule books.
     
  44. Saints Rest

    Saints Rest Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,996
    The really ridiculous part to this debate is that the earlier game that day showed how the OT rules can be just as beneficial for the team who loses the toss.
     
  45. splendid splinter

    splendid splinter Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    947
    Yes, people would complain about how unfair it was that Brady and the Pats were in 4 down territory the entire drive. This proposal is basically the college rule, where the team winning the toss always chooses to defend because they get a chance to respond and they get a VERY important thing - information about what they need to do to win or extend OT. Pro OTs are won by the team winning the toss and going first about 53% of the time. College OTs are won by the team winning the toss and going second about 55% of the time. The Chiefs proposal would further tilt the odds in favor of the team winning the toss, it would just change the order of possessions.
     
  46. Bowhemian

    Bowhemian Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,125
    Isn’t there a rule requiring NFL teams to put players on the field to try to stop the other team from advancing the ball? I think it’s callled a “defense” or something like that.
    So you lost the OT coin toss and don’t want to lose? Play some fucking defense
     
  47. Al Zarilla

    Al Zarilla Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    48,392
    I know. The Patriots couldn’t do shit on first and second down in OT against the Chiefs. Maybe in overtime, you only get three downs. The ball should get into the hands of each team at least once or twice that way. Works in Canada. Oops, just read the CFL has an equal number of possessions rule for overtime. Got a feeling the NFL may not be done changing the overtime protocol.

    It was kind of, or very apropos that the Chiefs with their shitty defense couldn’t stop us in overtime.
     
  48. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,583
    The real rule change should just be that whoever is playing the Patriots gets the ball first. Whatever.
     
  49. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,023
    I seriously don't know why this is so hard. Play. Ten. Minutes. Of. Football. In the playoffs the second OT can be sudden death.
     
  50. axx

    axx lurker

    Messages:
    6,077
    TV wants the game to end.
     

Share This Page