jrry32 Posted October 20, 2019 Share Posted October 20, 2019 I think we found the secret to onsides kicks. Count on the Saints to do something stupid. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Small Town Values Posted October 20, 2019 Share Posted October 20, 2019 1 minute ago, ReadyToThump said: The Bears are taking timeouts with 30 seconds left LOL. What an embarrassment. Icing the kneeldown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Ugh I know it probably didn't matter in the Oak game, but I HATE that fumble out the end zone is a turnover rule with a great passion. Why are we still doing this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVRamsFan Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: Ugh I know it probably didn't matter in the Oak game, but I HATE that fumble out the end zone is a turnover rule with a great passion. Why are we still doing this? While I agree what should be the ruling? Should we reward the offense for fumbling? As it is we reward the defense for not recovering a fumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, NVRamsFan said: While I agree what should be the ruling? Should we reward the offense for fumbling? As it is we reward the defense for not recovering a fumble. It's really easy. Give the ball back to the offense at the spot they fumbled. They already do that for forward fumbles on 4th down or <2 minutes. No one earned a TO, no one earned a score, so it's basically a dead ball where the ball was fumbled. A purely better solution, IMO. Edited October 21, 2019 by wackywabbit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVRamsFan Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, wackywabbit said: It's really easy. Give the ball back to the offense at the spot they fumbled. They already do that for forward fumbles on 4th down or <2 minutes. No one earned a TO, no one earned a score, so it's basically a dead ball where the ball was fumbled. A purely better solution, IMO. While no one earned a TO the offense didn't earn keeping the ball. I honestly don't think there's a solution that will make anybody happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: Ugh I know it probably didn't matter in the Oak game, but I HATE that fumble out the end zone is a turnover rule with a great passion. Why are we still doing this? Personally I've never understood the outrage over the rule. It makes sense to me. Edit - I think it did matter as Oakland would have gone up 3 with a TD Edited October 21, 2019 by LeotheLion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, NVRamsFan said: While no one earned a TO the offense didn't earn keeping the ball. I honestly don't think there's a solution that will make anybody happy. The offense keeps the ball if it goes out of bounds. Did they earn keeping the ball then? Keeping the ball (with the down ending) should be the default. A change of possession should be earned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyB Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 7 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: Ugh I know it probably didn't matter in the Oak game, but I HATE that fumble out the end zone is a turnover rule with a great passion. Why are we still doing this? It's literally the worst rule in the game, and completely inexplicable to be honest. To this day, nobody has been able to explain to me why the offense shouldn't just maintain possession at the spot of the fumble, just like if it went out of bounds at the 1 inch line. Yes, I know the ballcarrier shouldn't fumble. But they aren't penalized in any way when it goes out of bounds anywhere else, why should that suddenly come into play just because it goes through the endzone. Makes no sense. I've heard people say the offense should maintain possession, but the ball should be placed at the 5, or the 20, or the 2 or something. Fine, I guess, as long as there isn't a change in possession, but I still don't get why it shouldn't just be at the spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, DannyB said: It's literally the worst rule in the game, and completely inexplicable to be honest. To this day, nobody has been able to explain to me why the offense shouldn't just maintain possession at the spot of the fumble, just like if it went out of bounds at the 1 inch line. Yes, I know the ballcarrier shouldn't fumble. But they aren't penalized in any way when it goes out of bounds anywhere else, why should that suddenly come into play just because it goes through the endzone. Makes no sense. I've heard people say the offense should maintain possession, but the ball should be placed at the 5, or the 20, or the 2 or something. Fine, I guess, as long as there isn't a change in possession, but I still don't get why it shouldn't just be at the spot. Playing devil's advocate. Couldn't you argue if you fumble on your own 2 and it bounces out of the endzone it shouldn't then be a safety based on the same principal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, LeotheLion said: Playing devil's advocate. Couldn't you argue if you fumble on your own 2 and it bounces out of the endzone it shouldn't then be a safety based on the same principal? Edit: misread your post. No, that makes sense because a safety is a result that is dependent on possession staying the same. The issue is that possession shoudn't change if the defense doesn't get the ball. If we were applying the logic from the terrible rule it should be a touchdown, not a safety. Edited October 21, 2019 by wackywabbit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, wackywabbit said: ... it is Correct it is a safety. But why wouldn't it be ruled that offense keeps possession at their 2. The defense didn't earn a turnover based on the same logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, LeotheLion said: Correct it is a safety. But why wouldn't it be ruled that offense keeps possession at their 2. The defense didn't earn a turnover based on the same logic. 2 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: Edit: misread your post. No, that makes sense because a safety is a result that is dependent on possession staying the same. The issue is that possession shoudn't change if the defense doesn't get the ball. If we were applying the logic from the terrible rule it should be a touchdown, not a safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyB Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, LeotheLion said: Playing devil's advocate. Couldn't you argue if you fumble on your own 2 and it bounces out of the endzone it shouldn't then be a safety based on the same principal? I actually don't know what the real ruling is there, but I don't see how that follows the same principle I put forth. If you fumble on your own 2 and it goes out of bounds between the endzones, you maintain possession like normal, right? So why should that change if it goes out of bounds in the endzone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyB Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, DannyB said: I actually don't know what the real ruling is there, but I don't see how that follows the same principle I put forth. If you fumble on your own 2 and it goes out of bounds between the endzones, you maintain possession like normal, right? So why should that change if it goes out of bounds in the endzone? I see this was already discussed. But yes I at least understand the safety, because possession doesn't change. If it did, it would be a touchdown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.