Off-season Rule Change

TecnoGenius · January 24, 2025, 02:32:47 AM

Calling Mr. Rules Committee MOS!

I want to see the bizarre case of Kenny's GC non-catch be a completion. It shouldn't matter if your back heel comes down on the sideline as long as you get the normally-enough toe-tap down in-bounds.

Spot the outlier when it comes to sideline catches:

1. Tap your toe and then lift it up and body falls OOB: completion
2. Tap your toe and your heel comes down inbounds: completion
3. Drag your toe from inbounds to OOB and your body falls OOB: completion
4. Tap your toe and your heel comes down OOB: incomplete

It's frankly ridiculous, and the rule wording that causes it would be easily tweaked to make #4 a completion.

dd · January 24, 2025, 02:59:26 AM

cant recall lawlers catch but i believe the rule is your first foot has to come down in bounds, the next foot doesn't matter , at least that's the amateur rule. Makes no sense in the pros if your first foot comes down in bounds and your second foot out of bounds is incomplete, that's the NFL rule that requires both feet in bounds and CFL is only one, but its got to be your first foot touching the ground.

bluengold204 · January 24, 2025, 05:37:55 AM

Ugh is this guy seriously on this topic again

Stretch · January 25, 2025, 03:19:39 AM

Quote from: bluengold204 on January 24, 2025, 05:37:55 AMUgh is this guy seriously on this topic again

He's just getting warmed up.

Blue In BC · January 25, 2025, 01:32:07 PM

Quote from: Stretch on January 25, 2025, 03:19:39 AMHe's just getting warmed up.

New conspiracy and tin foil hats on order and arriving soon from Amazon.

Waffler · January 25, 2025, 03:44:19 PM

Speaking of new hats...

I present ... Guardian 2.0

https://x.com/UNISWAG/status/1879594677789438108

Pigskin · January 25, 2025, 03:54:42 PM

Quote from: Waffler on January 25, 2025, 03:44:19 PMSpeaking of new hats...

I present ... Guardian 2.0

https://x.com/UNISWAG/status/1879594677789438108

Looks like a nice upgrade. I am noticing more players in the NFL wearing the G-cap in games lately..

Blue In BC · January 25, 2025, 04:18:38 PM

Quote from: Pigskin on January 25, 2025, 03:54:42 PMLooks like a nice upgrade. I am noticing more players in the NFL wearing the G-cap in games lately..

It looks a lot better than the 1st one. I'm not fond of those so we'll see if these get more wide use. The bigger question is do they also improve the protection level from previous item?

Pete · January 25, 2025, 05:14:21 PM

best rule change i would like is to more heavily penalize teams that on third down try to draw the opposing team offside for the following reasons.
1. It's annoying and boring,
2 It rarely works
3. it slows down the game.
4. unsportsmanlike just like using voice inflections ie Either team shall be subject to penalty for attempting to draw an opponent offside if a player makes a motion or voices a signal that, in the judgment of the official, is intended to draw an opponent offside
Dickenson and Dinwiddie do this constantly and teams look foolish

dd · January 26, 2025, 10:36:35 PM

Quote from: Pete on January 25, 2025, 05:14:21 PMbest rule change i would like is to more heavily penalize teams that on third down try to draw the opposing team offside for the following reasons.
1. It's annoying and boring,
2 It rarely works
3. it slows down the game.
4. unsportsmanlike just like using voice inflections ie Either team shall be subject to penalty for attempting to draw an opponent offside if a player makes a motion or voices a signal that, in the judgment of the official, is intended to draw an opponent offside
Dickenson and Dinwiddie do this constantly and teams look foolish

Teams have to burn a timeout when they don't draw the other team offside, so there is a consequence to this high school move. Seriously, you don't think everyone on the defense knows not to jump offside on a 3rd down gamble!!

TecnoGenius · January 27, 2025, 08:30:10 AM

Quote from: dd on January 26, 2025, 10:36:35 PMTeams have to burn a timeout when they don't draw the other team offside, so there is a consequence to this high school move. Seriously, you don't think everyone on the defense knows not to jump offside on a 3rd down gamble!!

No they don't; they usually run the offside trick and take a timecount. In a kicking situation it has zero cost because they do it when the extra 5Y wouldn't matter. In some cases they'd rather take the 5Y because their K or P is too close for optimal performance! (like a FG try from the 3YL)

TecnoGenius · January 27, 2025, 08:31:25 AM

Quote from: dd on January 24, 2025, 02:59:26 AMcant recall lawlers catch but i believe the rule is your first foot has to come down in bounds, the next foot doesn't matter , at least that's the amateur rule.

I'm talking the same foot, not different feet.

In every single case except one you are in-bounds if you tap your toe in bounds. The one exception is this strange case where the same foot's heel hits the rail afterwards.

TecnoGenius · January 27, 2025, 08:41:48 AM

Quote from: Pete on January 25, 2025, 05:14:21 PMbest rule change i would like is to more heavily penalize teams that on third down try to draw the opposing team offside for the following reasons.

I agree, except it's very hard to police. How do we know they were faking? What if a team does its normal pre-snap motion and then halts and runs out of time when they were really going to run a play?

Ya, ok, so that's rare and you can usually tell the difference. For instance: an insane gamble on 3rd down (like 3rd & 4 in FG range) is almost always a fake (unless you're Dave Dickenson). But it could still happen.

Now if the O gets up and relaxed with 1s left on the clock, that's usually the tell they are faking. But teams could just learn to keep faking through the clock. Or you could look for the goofy smiles instead of the normal timecount frustration. But they could fake that too.

I guess you could try to find a way to punish it just on 3rd down (when it's most used), but unless it's LoD/ToD I don't see how you could punish so it hurts. Moving them back (or forward, with team B choice?) 5 or 10 or 15 isn't really a problem most times.

The only option I can think of is a team gets only so many (1? 2?) timecounts on 3rd down per game? After they go over a timecount on 3rd down is LoD/ToD, or maybe they are moved to the C YL. How many timecounts did WFC take on 3rd down last season? I bet zero. So limiting the clown HCs to 1 mulligan would mean we only suffer through 1 a game; and probably 0 because they'd want to keep a real mulligan in their pocket.

And yes, we all know which HCs are clowns that try this nonsense every game. However, I think it was TOR who managed to actually get one of our guys O/S on it in the last 2 years (Wilson??) -- I'm still miffed at that one.

Jesse · January 27, 2025, 11:02:38 AM

Quote from: Pete on January 25, 2025, 05:14:21 PMbest rule change i would like is to more heavily penalize teams that on third down try to draw the opposing team offside for the following reasons.
1. It's annoying and boring,
2 It rarely works
3. it slows down the game.
4. unsportsmanlike just like using voice inflections ie Either team shall be subject to penalty for attempting to draw an opponent offside if a player makes a motion or voices a signal that, in the judgment of the official, is intended to draw an opponent offside
Dickenson and Dinwiddie do this constantly and teams look foolish

I don't really see any reason to penalize this, tbh.

TecnoGenius · January 28, 2025, 03:31:07 AM

Quote from: Jesse on January 27, 2025, 11:02:38 AMI don't really see any reason to penalize this, tbh.

It does waste about 60 sec of TV time, and so "slows down the game" which is always the big complaint against the CFL/TSN, etc.

It also looks goofy and lame, with the O backing out of the fake with 3s left and everyone on O laughing, HC smirking, and the D pointing and yelling. It adds no value.