NFL: Possible rule changes??? - Printable Version
+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: NFL: Possible rule changes??? (/Thread-NFL-Possible-rule-changes)
Possible rule changes??? - papachaz - 03-23-2012 09:23 AM
i this copied from the article about workers comp that the falcoholic ran. some potential rule changes for teams in california, but actually it sounds kind of like what goodell would like to turn the whole league into. here goes:
"Any NFL games taking place in California will feature bubble-wrapped hamster balls surrounding players forbidden to touch each other, as touching can be a form of harassment or repression. Instead, teams of multiculturally quota’d gender, age and sexually oriented randomly selected citizens of all nations will discuss who has earned points through complex bureaucratic sessions designed to award those with the best-stated grievances the right to protest against any historically “unfair” cultural or sporting event. The winners will be obligated to devote no less than 70% of their speech extolling the merits of “the team who happened, through no deficiency, real or imagined, to have scored fewer points although their grievances were quite as significant and deserving of attention.”
just thought i'd share this for those who might not have read the article. good job to the original writer! i think his name was elroy.....
RE: Possible rule changes??? - evo - 03-23-2012 09:45 AM
RE: Possible rule changes??? - FormerKCfan - 03-23-2012 04:07 PM
Not to be a bore but here's what I've uncovered on this topic:
The NFL annual owner’s meeting will begin over the coming weekend in Palm Beach, Florida.
Along with enjoying the amenities of the classic Breakers resort, the league will be discussing business of all sorts. That includes possible changes in rules and procedures. Here are a few of the items that are being pushed into the voting session by the league’s Competition Committee. They are:
REPLAY – The Buffalo Bills have made a proposal that would eliminate the on-field referee as part of the decision making on instant replay. The Bills want the decisions to be made by the booth official. Also, there has been a suggestion that the booth official review all turnovers. Currently, the booth reviews all touchdown plays.
OVERTIME – On a suggestion by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the overtime rule for the playoffs would go into effect for regular season games as well.
INJURED-RESERVE LIST – A change has been suggested where the team can designate a player to go to the injured-reserve list at the start of the season and be able to restore him to the active roster for the eighth game of the regular season. Currently, a player that goes on IR in camp is done for the season.
TRADE DEADLINE – There’s a proposal to move the trading deadline from the sixth week of the regular season to the eighth week.
PRE-SEASON ROSTER SIZE – Currently its 80 players. This proposal would enlarge that to 90 players, counting unsigned draft choices.
HORSE COLLAR TACKLES – The Steelers proposal would penalize the defense for tackling the ball carrier inside the pocket. Right now, it’s not a penalty inside the pocket for a defensive player to pull down the quarterback by the back of his neck. Outside the pocket it’s a 15-yard fine.
MOVED FINAL CUTDOWN DATE – Because the season opening game this year was moved to Wednesday night from Thursday, the league wants to move up the final cutdown date to Friday, August 31.
INACTIVE SPOT FOR CONCUSSION – The proposal would allow teams the opportunity to designate one player each week that’s recovering from a diagnosed concussion as inactive for game participation. This would allow them to bring a player onto the regular roster.
Okay, now this might be a good place for a good discussion?
RE: Possible rule changes??? - AsylumGuido - 03-23-2012 07:24 PM
I really have no problem with any of those. They all seem positive. The horse collar rule makes sense. Why be different based on where it happens.
RE: Possible rule changes??? - Radical - 03-23-2012 07:37 PM
(03-23-2012 07:24 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: I really have no problem with any of those. They all seem positive. The horse collar rule makes sense. Why be different based on where it happens.
Never heard of anyone breaking their leg when yanked down that way in a standing position. It has always been from someone running when it happens to them.
RE: Possible rule changes??? - AsylumGuido - 03-23-2012 09:16 PM
(03-23-2012 07:37 PM)Radical Wrote: Never heard of anyone breaking their leg when yanked down that way in a standing position. It has always been from someone running when it happens to them.
Possibly true, not sure, but pulling down all weight backwards straight down can cause the same injury running or not. But, it is a new era, friend.
RE: Possible rule changes??? - Jesus - 03-23-2012 10:01 PM
(03-23-2012 09:16 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Possibly true, not sure, but pulling down all weight backwards straight down can cause the same injury running or not. But, it is a new era, friend.
It really depends on how much money is on the hit if there is going to be an injury or not.
RE: Possible rule changes??? - AsylumGuido - 03-23-2012 10:32 PM
(03-23-2012 10:01 PM)Jesus Wrote: It really depends on how much money is on the hit if there is going to be an injury or not.
If I didn't like you so much I might be inclined to call you a bad word for that low blow.