Replay/Challenges now made permanent

[DMD]

No big surprise that replay has become a fixture.

 

If they allow 47 players to suit up each week, it won't have a huge impact but it could make the coach-inspired guessing game on certain questionable players suiting up a shade worse to determine if the player will actually play.

 

Replay now permanent in NFL

 

PHOENIX (AP) - Coaches throwing challenge flags and referees sticking their heads in hoods will remain NFL fixtures. Forever.

 

On Tuesday, instant replay as an officiating tool became a permanent part of pro football.

"Instant replay is an accepted part of the game. It's what we are," said Atlanta Falcons general manager Rich McKay, co-chairman of the competition committee that recommended the change. "There was not really much discussion about it."

 

League owners voted 30-2, with Cincinnati and Arizona dissenting. All but three stadiums will be equipped with high-definition equipment and will be recabled before the upcoming season, at a cost of as much as $300,000 per club. The stadiums being replaced in Irving, Texas, Indianapolis and East Rutherford, N.J., will not get the updates.

 

McKay, once a staunch opponent of replay, has gone full circle, as have most owners.

 

"People like myself, I was an opponent of the old system, when the eye in the sky decided which play to review," he said. "As the system was enhanced, with a limited system of challenges, a lot more became comfortable with how it operates. It's not too obtrusive with our game and it does not slow down games.

 

"I think coaches are more comfortable with it. They were hesitant with the challenge system, and I think they've become more comfortable."

 

With replay out of the way, another controversial topic - overtime - will be addressed on Wednesday. In part, at least.

 

McKay was not optimistic that the recommendation to move the kickoff for overtime from the 30-yard line to the 35 would pass. He said some people were concerned about the effect on the return game, and that a group of owners would favor a mandatory two-possession overtime in which each team gets the ball once.

 

That has not been proposed, however. Nor has any system similar to the college overtimes, or a continuation of the game from where it ended after four quarters.

 

"I'm bothered by the stats with respect to overtime," McKay said, citing a significant spike since 1997 in how many teams won overtime games after also winning the coin toss. That percentage went from 55.9 from 1994-97 to 64.6 for the next four seasons. And after it dropped to 60 percent for 2002-05, it went up to 63.6 last season.

 

"We're a league that tries to balance the field and clearly the field is not balanced with respect to overtime with the kickoff."

 

On Tuesday, owners also voted unanimously to allow a second interviewing window for assistant coaches on Super Bowl teams who are in the running for other head coaching jobs. Previously, only during the week after the season ended could an interview be conducted.

 

The coach's current team would have to grant permission for the second interview, which would take place during the bye week after the conference title games.

 

"We wanted to make sure that coaches on Super Bowl teams didn't feel it was a disadvantage," McKay said.

 

One proposal was defeated. Defenses will not be allowed to have a coach-to-player communications device similar to what quarterbacks use. McKay said owners and coaches were concerned about who would be allowed to wear the device with defenses using multiple formations, and the possibility that more than one player could wind up on the field with such a device.

 

"Conceivably, we'll bring it up again," McKay said. "We haven't see its last discussion."

 

The owners also will vote on Tampa Bay's proposal to use instant replay for all penalties except holding; increasing the number of players suited up for games from 45 to 47; and instituting 5-yard penalties for players who spike the ball on the field of play. Spikes in the end zone after scores would be allowed.

 

San Francisco withdrew its proposal to make defensive pass interference either a 15-yard penalty or a spot foul, depending on the severity of the infraction.

 

 

 

[charty]

I know Belichick doesn't talk much, but when he does, he offers some interesting points.

This is on the rules topics from a couple days ago in the Boston Globe:

 

Thoughts on Overtime rules

"Football is a game that is played to the final gun," said Belichick. "There is a lot of strategy at the end of the game -- you're protecting a lead, conserving time to get the ball back, and that all gets eliminated from the game in overtime.

 

"The way it is now, you're playing for field position and the score, and you lose that end-of-game strategy. I think that strategy is part of the intrigue that football brings."

 

Belichick would favor an overtime of, say, 7 1/2 minutes that is played to completion, regardless of who scores. That would almost guarantee that both teams have a shot at possession, and the end-of-game strategy would remain. If the score is still tied after overtime, then perhaps the sudden-death element could be in play.

 

Belichick would strongly oppose a more radical change, such as the college style in which the teams alternate getting the ball at the 25-yard line.

 

On increasing the game-day roster from 45 players to 47

"I don't think changing would be good for the game, I think there is too much specialization as it is. With this, you might have guys like kickoff guys, long field goal guys, short field goal guys, long punters, short punters, some kind of specialty receiver. I think you'd lose the flow of the game.

 

"I also think fans want to see the same guys out there instead of situational guys -- a guy for this, a guy for that, or like 20 different relief pitchers, one for every inning, one for every batter. It's hard to keep track of all that.

 

"I came into the league back in the dark ages when you had 38 guys, and that was plenty. Now it's 45 and it's not enough.

 

"I think [this change] would increase the number of players on injured reserve. There are times you go into a game and if you have six, seven guys that are hurt, you still feel like you have 45-46 to play. But if you feel like the opponent has 47, you're probably going to put a guy on IR and try to get a healthier guy as you get closer to that 53 number."

 

On making pass interference a 15-yard penalty unless it is ruled a flagrant foul:

"Personally, I could live with it, but the problems I see is what is blatant, what isn't? I can see that getting into a difficult call to make.

 

"I don't think the rule needs to be changed, but I think the officials collectively could do a better job officiating it with consistency. It's the same type of thing we see in basketball with blocking and charging; every play is a little different.

 

"Consistency is what I think we need to have in that rule. You'll never have it perfect, but I think it could definitely be better. No matter what you do with that rule, it is still open to a lot of interpretation.

 

"It's something that gets talked about every year, and there is never enough support for it. I'd be surprised if there is enough league support for it this year."

 

On having communication with a defensive player through a helmet headset, like the quarterback:

"That was something brought up when the rule was initially proposed for the quarterback, giving the defense a way to communicate. The problem as I see it is that, on defense, it is an entirely different situation. When you have a backup quarterback, it's the same communication; fundamentally it's not going to change the way the game is played today.

 

"But defensively, if I'm a player and I have the headset, and now I'm out as part of a situational substitution or if I get hurt, what happens? We know that on offense, if the quarterback gets hurt, the backup QB comes in and will have that communication. But defensively, the team would then have no communication. And I think it's hard to have one guy in on every play.

 

"I wouldn't be in favor of this. There is an inequity in the rule and you don't know when that inequity will come. I also think we need to be careful about the concept of going to a 'Star Wars' mentality. I'm not so crazy about the coach-to-quarterback thing. Now this. That's why this wasn't passed in the first place, and was just an offensive thing, to help the offense get the play in, speed up the game, eliminate delay-of-game penalties, and make it easier for crowd noise. We've done that, but now this takes it to another level."

[The Wolf]

He really does make some interesting points. For all his grungy, secretive, nasty ways, he is a very smart man. It's a shame that we don't hear more of his opinion and experience coming out like this.

[Caveman_Nick]

He really does make some interesting points. For all his grungy, secretive, nasty ways, he is a very smart man. It's a shame that we don't hear more of his opinion and experience coming out like this.

 

 

 

listen on weei.com between 5 and 6 every monday after the game (or tuesday for a monday game). He is on for a half an hour or so. Sometimes it gets very interesting.

[The Wolf]

listen on weei.com between 5 and 6 every monday after the game (or tuesday for a monday game). He is on for a half an hour or so. Sometimes it gets very interesting.

 

 

Great...thanks Nick.