Thread: What Are Your Most and Least Favorite NFL Rules Changes Ever?

Absolutely the worst rule is the "hitting the defenseless receiver" penalty and it's close cousins. 95% of the time, it is total bullshit. They could have just left it at "personal foul - unnecessary roughness" if they believed it was a cheap shot but this business of hititng the receiver while he's trying to catch the ball and then throwing a flag because he got hurt or landed funny. I'm sorry. THAT'S FOOTBALL.

Sucks to be a defensive back nowadays.

Best rule change was making it legal to strip the football in 2002. The worst is hard to decide since there are so many.

I just want to point out that it's not illegal to hit a defenseless player. It's illegal to hit a defenseless player in the head or neck area. I know I'll be ignored, but you can unload on a receiver trying to catch the ball... just don't do it up high. It's a good rule, imo.

Originally Posted by spikerman

I just want to point out that it's not illegal to hit a defenseless player. It's illegal to hit a defenseless player in the head or neck area. I know I'll be ignored, but you can unload on a receiver trying to catch the ball... just don't do it up high. It's a good rule, imo.

Did you watch the SF-Seattle game last week? A bang-bang play where the Seatlle receiver gets turned sideways while flying for the ball and the defender comes in low but because the receiver was flipping the shoulder tackle hit the receiver in the head/neck area. Out comes the flag. What the hell was the defensive back supposed to do? He's already launched himself, the receiver's head is already lower than normal and is coming right at him. The defender has no way to stop and no way to predict where the receiver's head will be. It's a bullshit rule. Protect the player? Fine in theory. If the guy make a running leap for the receiver and targets the head? I'm okay with that type of penalty. But too often the receiver has ducked or lowered their head which is the main reason the defender hit him high. You can't ask the receiver not to duck and you shouldn't ask the defender to change his trajectory after he has launched himself. The rule is contrary to the laws of physics.

Make those "Defenseless Receiver" penalties reviewable and watch it drop down the list of BS calls, give these guys the chance to see it in slowmo with multiple angles and they'll get it right. You'd hope, anyway.

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

Did you watch the SF-Seattle game last week? A bang-bang play where the Seatlle receiver gets turned sideways while flying for the ball and the defender comes in low but because the receiver was flipping the shoulder tackle hit the receiver in the head/neck area. Out comes the flag. What the hell was the defensive back supposed to do? He's already launched himself, the receiver's head is already lower than normal and is coming right at him. The defender has no way to stop and no way to predict where the receiver's head will be. It's a bullshit rule. Protect the player? Fine in theory. If the guy make a running leap for the receiver and targets the head? I'm okay with that type of penalty. But too often the receiver has ducked or lowered their head which is the main reason the defender hit him high. You can't ask the receiver not to duck and you shouldn't ask the defender to change his trajectory after he has launched himself. The rule is contrary to the laws of physics.

I was driving back from the Broncos game so I didn't see the game. I don't want to comment on a play I didn't see. I will say that as the rule is written, regardless of the circumstances, a hit to the head and neck area of a defenseless player is a foul. The defender needs to see what he's hitting. Unfair? Maybe, but the officials really don't have a lot of choice.

Originally Posted by Jaded

Make those "Defenseless Receiver" penalties reviewable and watch it drop down the list of BS calls, give these guys the chance to see it in slowmo with multiple angles and they'll get it right. You'd hope, anyway.

I agree with this. In real speed it is so damn tough to call and officials are told to flag it if there is doubt.

Whatever happened to the facemask design rule? I see some guys wearing the alternative masks. I hope they abolished that stupid rule.

Best rule - Unsportsmanlike conduct for excessive/choreographed celebrations, with taunting a close second. I love watching some posturing douchebag get zapped for 15 for acting like a damned WWF rassler. There is no place for that shit in the greatest sport on Earth.

Worst is the kickoff from the 35.

Originally Posted by Dzone

Whatever happened to the facemask design rule? I see some guys wearing the alternative masks. I hope they abolished that stupid rule.

It is still there, but players can apply for exceptions.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

Best rule - Unsportsmanlike conduct for excessive/choreographed celebrations, with taunting a close second. I love watching some posturing douchebag get zapped for 15 for acting like a damned WWF rassler. There is no place for that shit in the greatest sport on Earth.

I think this is the worst change. People seem to forget that at it's absolute core, football is a game and it's entertainment. Touchdown celebrations are entertaining to many, many people. If the other team doesn't want to get taunted or see a guy celebrate a TD, don't let them score. I don't think that's something that needs policing by the refs/league.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

I think this is the worst change. People seem to forget that at it's absolute core, football is a game and it's entertainment. Touchdown celebrations are entertaining to many, many people. If the other team doesn't want to get taunted or see a guy celebrate a TD, don't let them score. I don't think that's something that needs policing by the refs/league.

That's a great steaming diaper load. There is NO PLACE for bad sportsmanship like that, not in the NFL, not video games, not boxing, not anywhere PERIOD. Act like you've been there before. I wish coaches had the balls to bench those A-holes. I do not respect their manhood.

IMO, something should only be a penalty if it gives you an unfair advantage, (such as holding, jumping offside, pass interference) or puts another player at an unnecessary risk for injury (roughing the passer/kicker, leading with helmet). Celebrating falls under neither of those. I miss the days of waiting to see what TO or Ochocinco's next celebration would be. The NFL wants the players to be robots now.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't care for showboating and the "Fun Bunch" thing (the whole offense does a choreographed boogey in the end zone) was too much but I don't see anything wrong with a brief spontaneous celebration.

The NFL also seemed intent to eliminate religious gestures such as going down to one knee or genuflecting.

I'd draw the line at 10 seconds from the moment the TD is scored, the scorer and only the scorer can do their own thing whatever it is but there's a penalty if you exceed 10 seconds and the celebration length can be reviewable if a coach wants to challenge it. This gives NFL players free speech (we're not judging on content) and keeps the flow of the game intact. Of course, now that all TDs are reviewable, perhaps more time can be given.

I like celebrations, but the taunting thing is BS. I get that the young kids think the taunting and flaunting and show-boating is cool, because thats everything to them. Ever listen to the a-holes on xbox or playstation? They can't stop the bs bragging, boasting, and smack. No one learns sportmanship anymore.

The gmae is entertainment, but needs to have sportsmanship in mind. There is a line, which MANy cross many times. It's why the NFL had to go to such drastic rules because if they didn't make one BLANKET rule, then there would have to be too much 'interpretation' for the refs. Some had to take it too far, and eventually that continued to grow as players kept working to "out-do" everyone else.

Emmit Smith felt he had to take off his helmet so that everyone could "see his face" after he scored a TD. Jerry Jones, himself, brought forth the rule that helmets had to stay one to eliminate that BS showboating.