Jump to content

Offseason Rumor Thread

49erurtaza

By 49erurtaza
in NFL General

Recommended Posts

MWil23

MWil23

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Broncofan said:

Glad to hear this rule change isn’t being considered.   The number of take downs would go up considerably.  

 

If they're not going to look at this, then they need to get rid of the automatic first down provision in illegal contact and make it 5 yards and repeat down. I'm tired of seeing QB's/offenses getting completely bailed out on 3rd and long situations on a little bit of hand contact on the opposite side of the field that the QB was looking. 3rd and 12, 5 yard completion, tackle, 7 yard total gain...4th and 5. WAIT A MINUTE! FLAG! Here's your automatic first down.

It's a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broncofan

Broncofan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

If they're not going to look at this, then they need to get rid of the automatic first down provision in illegal contact and make it 5 yards and repeat down. I'm tired of seeing QB's/offenses getting completely bailed out on 3rd and long situations on a little bit of hand contact on the opposite side of the field that the QB was looking. 3rd and 12, 5 yard completion, tackle, 7 yard total gain...4th and 5. WAIT A MINUTE! FLAG! Here's your automatic first down.

It's a joke.

That's worth considering for sure.   It's just going from DPI to 15-yard penalties is a bridge too far.   Your point absolutely has merit to be considered purely from a gameplay perspective.  The penalty is way too harsh for the context of the infraction.  I thought for sure the 2Q hold by Jalen Mills was going to be the turning point to SB53 - instead of being up 21 after the tipped INT, or at least 14 and getting the ball back - suddenly the Pats stormed back with that drive kept alive, down 1 score.   Would have gone unnoticed, but those 3rd and forevers that get bailed out by hold calls, it's a crusher, especially when the call is very ticky-tack.

The problem is that it has to be seen as a problem by the league, and let's face it, higher-scoring games are better for viewership ratings as a whole, if not necessarily for determining the best team that day.   We'd probably see D's hold even more on 3rd and long, as the one direct consequence that's probably less than ideal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
navysaintsfan

navysaintsfan

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Glad to hear this rule change isn’t being considered.   The number of take downs would go up considerably.  

 

I keep seeing people say this, but looking at NCAA football...it just doesn't hold water. You'd figure all the big time, downfield throwing offenses would be thwarted by intentional PIs, but there hasn't been anything like that. I don't see why the NFL would be any different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broncofan

Broncofan

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, navysaintsfan said:

I keep seeing people say this, but looking at NCAA football...it just doesn't hold water. You'd figure all the big time, downfield throwing offenses would be thwarted by intentional PIs, but there hasn't been anything like that. I don't see why the NFL would be any different.

There's a huge talent differential between teams - you see gaps and wide open receivers a lot more in college.    

Now, I should say my reply was context specific - it's more likely late in the half and late in the game.   If your team is up 10 points, and a receiver beats you on a double move, you're going to take him down or try to tackle him if he's got 1-2 steps on you.   That's just smart football.     It's not the default mindset for the entire game, though.   But you know this would get coached up in prevent D mode.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Ramster

El Ramster

Posted
Posted

Baconrad is on crack. Now the eagles have this winning culture lol wtf.

This is like a nerd getting his first kiss then telling everyone he's a pimp...

Hell nah.. Suh to the Rams would make the Rams so potent it'll be terrifying. 

The talent on that team alone would make people change their huggies. Sean Mcababe that dude man.

He's that guy who you'll run thru a brick wall for.. THE PRINCE THAT WAS PROMISE! WITH THE BREAKER OF CHAINS. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forge

Forge

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Broncofan said:

There's a huge talent differential between teams - you see gaps and wide open receivers a lot more in college.    

Now, I should say my reply was context specific - it's more likely late in the half and late in the game.   If your team is up 10 points, and a receiver beats you on a double move, you're going to take him down or try to tackle him if he's got 1-2 steps on you.   That's just smart football.     It's not the default mindset for the entire game, though.   But you know this would get coached up in prevent D mode.   

Also a pretty big assumption to think that the corner has the wherewithal or the actual ability to do this. If he gets beat on a double move, how bad is he beaten? If he's beat too much, he's not going to be in close enough proximity to do this, if he's not beat by a ton, I think his first inclination and belief is that he can make up for it. I think it's a very small window of opportunities this would actually affect. If he decides to make that move too early, it's not really a super smart play. I also don't know how many corners are getting beat on double moves in prevent defense. Isn't the point of a prevent defense to kind of take that possibility away? I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I have to imagine that is crazy rare. 

The takedown argument doesn't hold water until they have actually tried it and we can view the results. It's just guess work. Personally, I hate that they are not at least considering it. I mean, this is a 60 yard penalty. 

dpi.0.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broncofan

Broncofan

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Forge said:

Also a pretty big assumption to think that the corner has the wherewithal or the actual ability to do this. If he gets beat on a double move, how bad is he beaten? If he's beat too much, he's not going to be in close enough proximity to do this, if he's not beat by a ton, I think his first inclination and belief is that he can make up for it. I think it's a very small window of opportunities this would actually affect. If he decides to make that move too early, it's not really a super smart play. I also don't know how many corners are getting beat on double moves in prevent defense. Isn't the point of a prevent defense to kind of take that possibility away? I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I have to imagine that is crazy rare. 

The takedown argument doesn't hold water until they have actually tried it and we can view the results. It's just guess work. Personally, I hate that they are not at least considering it. I mean, this is a 60 yard penalty. 

dpi.0.gif

 

That's the fair counter scenario.   To be clear though, that's also not supposed to be called DPI (foot tangling), but I get the reason why ppl are mad about it.  I don't think making it a 15 yard penalty solves the problem - you're arguing to mitigate the effect of a bad call.   Which is fine, it's then a matter of what you value more. 

I think if you end up with the 15-yard penalty, the takedown scenario now gets rewarded - and you will see an increase in D handsiness on players, with less disincentive to get called for DPI.    Again, that's a value judgment on which you prefer - but I think the NFL won't consider it for that 2nd reason - let's face it, they want fair play, but they also want to keep the game increasing in popularity...which is why the emphasis is so O-friendly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...