Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: A college rule the NFL should adopt.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default A college rule the NFL should adopt.

    I learned of a college rule today that I had no idea existed and that I'm pretty sure does not exist in the NFL.

    If something happens that is not reviewable, but the call was so blatantly missed that replay would easily prove it and it played a material role in the outcome of the game, the refs can at their discretion use replay to overturn it.

    The example was in the OU-OSU game today targeting was called on a late interception, and the ruling on the field was that it happened after the pick, which would keep the ball with the defense, ending the game.

    Replay CLEARLY showed that the targeting happened well before the pick, and even though it's not reviewable if a flag happened before or after a turnover, they were able to use that rule to overturn it anyway. I thought that was pretty cool, and would be a neat thing for the NFL to implement.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    6-3/215
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mighty Quinn
    Posts
    36,723

    Default

    Idk, I’d hate to see Bill Vinobitch with more authoritay.
    "Tuning ... into each other ... lift all higher”
    “I’m just different!”

    Sign Garbage Minshew.

    Draft
    1st round— Cooper Dejean CB
    2nd round— Jack Sawyer OLB
    3rd round— Will Shipley RB
    4th round— Ricky Pearsall WR
    5th round— Ladd McKonkey WR
    6th round— Cash Jones RB
    7th round— Carson Steele RB

  3. The Following User High Fived Simple Jaded For This Post:


  4. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Pat Bowlen
    Posts
    97,306

    Default

    It's only available for targeting.
    *The statements above are my opinions, unless they are links, because then they are links, which wouldn't make them my opinions, and I suppose stats aren't necessarily opinion, but they are certainly presented to support an opinion. Proceed accordingly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    What is this, amateur hour? It's TNF against the Jets and you didn't think you'd need extra booze?

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOtorboat View Post
    It's only available for targeting.
    That's not the way they were explaining it during the game. They were saying pretty much anything could be reviewed if it was just blatantly missed and would play a large role in deciding the game.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Pat Bowlen
    Posts
    97,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BroncoWave View Post
    That's not the way they were explaining it during the game. They were saying pretty much anything could be reviewed if it was just blatantly missed and would play a large role in deciding the game.
    Then I'm pretty sure they were explaining it wrong. Targeting is the only penalty they can review like that.
    *The statements above are my opinions, unless they are links, because then they are links, which wouldn't make them my opinions, and I suppose stats aren't necessarily opinion, but they are certainly presented to support an opinion. Proceed accordingly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    What is this, amateur hour? It's TNF against the Jets and you didn't think you'd need extra booze?

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOtorboat View Post
    Then I'm pretty sure they were explaining it wrong. Targeting is the only penalty they can review like that.
    They were reviewing the targeting, but the also changed the ruling on the field that the targeting happened after the turnover. They said it's typically not reviewable whether a penalty happened before or after a turnover, but because of this rule, it allowed them to overturn it.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Pat Bowlen
    Posts
    97,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BroncoWave View Post
    They were reviewing the targeting, but the also changed the ruling on the field that the targeting happened after the turnover. They said it's typically not reviewable whether a penalty happened before or after a turnover, but because of this rule, it allowed them to overturn it.
    I don't know why that matters. Targeting would have negated any turnover.
    *The statements above are my opinions, unless they are links, because then they are links, which wouldn't make them my opinions, and I suppose stats aren't necessarily opinion, but they are certainly presented to support an opinion. Proceed accordingly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    What is this, amateur hour? It's TNF against the Jets and you didn't think you'd need extra booze?

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOtorboat View Post
    I don't know why that matters. Targeting would have negated any turnover.
    No, it wouldn't have. They ruled originally the targeting happened after the ball was intercepted, which would keep the ball with the defense. No different than if they had committed holding after picking it off, they would have kept the ball, just lost the yards. Here is an article explaining what I'm talking about:

    https://www.si.com/college-football/...l-will-johnson

    Whether a foul occurred before or after a play is not directly reviewable, but according to Fox's referee expert Dean Blandino, referees do have the ability to overturn the call if an "egregious mistake" was made. The referees reviewed the targeting penalty, which was upheld, and determined that the initial call was egregious enough to change the call. The foul was then determined to have occurred before the interception, so Oklahoma State kept the ball and gained 15 yards with the penalty.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Here is the rule I'm talking about Mo:

    ARTICLE 7. No other plays or officiating decisions are reviewable. However,
    the replay official may correct egregious errors, including those involving the
    game clock, whether or not a play is reviewable.
    This excludes fouls that are
    not specifically reviewable (See Article 8, following).

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Pat Bowlen
    Posts
    97,306

    Default

    Fair enough. Didn't know that one.
    *The statements above are my opinions, unless they are links, because then they are links, which wouldn't make them my opinions, and I suppose stats aren't necessarily opinion, but they are certainly presented to support an opinion. Proceed accordingly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    What is this, amateur hour? It's TNF against the Jets and you didn't think you'd need extra booze?

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    While googling that rule, I came across another Oklahoma St game, the famous one last year where they were playing Central Michigan, committed intentional grounding as time expired in regulation, and the refs awarded CMU one untimed down in which they threw a hail mary and won. The Big 12 refs could and should have used that rule to overturn what was the incorrect decision to award an untimed down to CMU, but they didn't and the result stood.

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOtorboat View Post
    Fair enough. Didn't know that one.
    Yeah neither did I before last night, but I'm pretty glad that rule exists. It's frustrating when the refs just totally blow a call that isn't reviewable but anyone with two eyes and a brain can see on replay they made the wrong call.

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    18,735

    Default

    I also like that PI is just an automatic 15 yards... I don't like giving a team 70 yards on one penalty


    Quote Originally Posted by Timmy! View Post
    Effing school zones suck. It's only a matter of time before I get nailed in one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis View Post
    I take the fat out of the pan once no longer hot, smear it all over my genitals, then enter consenting people with my tumescent member.

  15. The Following User High Fived weazel For This Post:


  16. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mister Cobble
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by weazel View Post
    I also like that PI is just an automatic 15 yards... I don't like giving a team 70 yards on one penalty
    I think there needs to be a middle ground between the two honestly. With the college rule, you can just flat out tackle a guy who has you beat deep and only lose 15 yards. I would like the college rule with a "flagrant foul" type aspect to it that could still make it a spot foul if it's deemed to be egregious/intentional. But yeah, if two guys are just fighting for the ball and the DB gets his arm or grabs some jersey, that shouldn't be a spot foul.

  17. The Following 2 Users High Fived BroncoWave For This Post:


Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group