Jackass Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 James Harrison will not be happy. Calvin Johnson's catch is still not a catch. The NFL will be more aggressive in suspending players next season for illegal hits, and also could make changes to instant replay and kickoffs. Clayton: Expect Kickoff Proposal To Pass Clayton The proposed rule changes may seriously impact return games, but ESPN.com's John Clayton still expects them to pass. Story • Blog: NFL Nation weighs in on changes Ray Anderson, the league's chief disciplinarian, said Wednesday in a conference call that repeat offenders or players committing flagrant illegal hits will have a much greater chance of being suspended during the 2011 season. No suspensions were handed down in 2010 even after the NFL's crackdown on such hits, in part because "we were operating under the principle unless you have given sufficient advance notice of what the results could be, you need to be more lenient," Anderson said. "Frankly, now that the notice has been given, players and coaches and clubs are very aware of what the emphasis is and we won't have that hesitation," Anderson said. "Everyone will be very clearly on notice now that a suspension is very viable for us and we will exercise it ... when it comes to illegal hits to the head and neck area and to defenseless players." The NFL increased the amount on its fines for such hits last year after a series of fouls on one October weekend. Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison was fined $75,000 for one such tackle, while Atlanta Falcons cornerback Dunta Robinson and New England Patriots safety Brandon Meriweather were docked $50,000 for hits to defenseless opponents that weekend. Highlights of NFL conference call NFL ILLEGAL HITS NFL to be more aggressive with suspensions for illegal hits next season. Rules defining defenseless players expanded to eight categories: • QB in act of throwing • Receiver trying to catch pass • Runner in grasp with forward progress stopped • Player fielding punt or kickoff • Kicker or punter during kick • QB after change of possession • Receiver who receives blind-side block • Player already on ground KICKOFF CHANGES? • Competition committee will propose moving kickoff to 35-yard line, and bringing touchback out to 25. No changes for touchbacks on any other plays, with ball coming out to 20. • No player other than kicker would be allowed to line up more than 5 yards behind ball. • Outlawing wedge on kickoffs; all blocking wedges were reduced to two players in 2009. REPLAY CHANGES? • Committee will propose making all scoring plays reviewable. Replay official would order replays on any touchdowns, field goals, safeties and extra points without the coaches needing to challenge. Similar to current system for final two minutes of each half and overtime. • Eliminating third coach's challenge if he is successful on first two. NFL SCHEDULE NFL plans to release regular-season schedule in mid-April, despite current work stoppage. NO-GO There will be no "Calvin Johnson rule" proposal on what is a catch. Many more fines were implemented throughout the remainder of last season but no player was suspended, even though suspensions were considered, Anderson said. "We want to be much more clear on what can be a suspendable incident," Anderson said. "The emphasis is on head and neck hits and what a defenseless player is. And we will work hard that people understand what is a repeat offender and what is a flagrant foul." The league looks at two years worth of plays to determined repeat offenders. Rules defining a defenseless player will be expanded and now will include eight categories: • A quarterback in the act of throwing; • A receiver trying to catch a pass; • A runner already in the grasp of tacklers and having his forward progress stopped; • A player fielding a punt or a kickoff; • A kicker or punter during the kick; • A quarterback at any time after change of possession; • A receiver who receives a blind-side block; • A player already on the ground. At next week's owners meetings in New Orleans, the competition committee will propose moving the kickoff up to the 35-yard line, and bringing a touchback out to the 25. There would be no changes for touchbacks on any other plays, with the ball coming out to the 20. No player other than the kicker would be allowed to line up more than 5 yards behind the ball, and the committee will suggest outlawing the wedge on kickoffs; all blocking wedges were reduced to two players in 2009. "The injury rate on kickoffs remains a real concern for us and the players and the coaches' subcommittee," said Falcons president Rich McKay, the chairman of the competition committee. "This is a pretty major change." So would be making all scoring plays reviewable, another proposal the committee will bring to the owners on Monday. This change would empower the replay official to order replays on any touchdowns, field goals, safeties and extra points without the coaches needing to challenge. It would be similar to the current system for the final two minutes of each half and for overtime. It also would mirror what colleges do on scoring plays for entire games. Eliminating a third coach's challenge if he is successful on the first two also will be proposed; McKay said the third challenge rarely was used. There will be no "Calvin Johnson rule" proposal on what is a catch. Johnson seemingly made a touchdown reception late in the Lions' season opener last September, but had it ruled incomplete because, with the ball still in his hand, it touched the ground as he raced off to celebrate. McKay's committee is only recommending a further clarification of the rules on such receptions. "We confirmed a rule that has been there for more than 70 years which basically says there are three elements to a catch," McKay said. "Secure the ball in your hands; maintain control when have you two feet down or any body part other than the hands [are down]; and we will write it into the rules that you must control the ball long enough after 'A' and 'B' [to] enable you to perform any act common to the game. That doesn't mean you have to perform the act, but must have the ability to. "Would Calvin Johnson's be a catch under 2011 rules? Our answer would be no." NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league plans to release the regular-season schedule in mid-April, despite the current work stoppage. "A specific date is not set," Aiello said. "We plan to do what we normally do." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 KICKOFF CHANGES?• Competition committee will propose moving kickoff to 35-yard line, and bringing touchback out to 25. No changes for touchbacks on any other plays, with ball coming out to 20. • No player other than kicker would be allowed to line up more than 5 yards behind ball. • Outlawing wedge on kickoffs; all blocking wedges were reduced to two players in 2009. Return yardage leagues won't like this at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) JNFL ILLEGAL HITS NFL to be more aggressive with suspensions for illegal hits next season. Rules defining defenseless players expanded to eight categories: • QB in act of throwing • Receiver trying to catch pass • Runner in grasp with forward progress stopped • Player fielding punt or kickoff • Kicker or punter during kick • QB after change of possession • Receiver who receives blind-side block • Player already on ground I think this is stupid. You can't hit a QB in the act of throwing? Seriously? There goes "rushing the passer" You can't hit a receiver catching the ball? Seriously? When does the "catching a pass" window close? Doest that mean any ball that hits the ground after a receiver is executing a catch and subsequently hit is a fumble or a 15 yard penalty? Runner in the grasp? Seriously? Blow the freaking whistle if you don't want the player to get hit, because otherwise it's a live ball. Player fielding a punt or a kickoff? Isn't that why they have a fair catch rule? Isn't Kicker or punter during a kick already covered? QB after change of possession? Then the QB should not be allowed to throw blocks, recover the ball, etc. He should just exit the field. Receiver who receives a blind side block is covered under defenseless receiver already Player on the ground? Again, blow the whistle. If he's on the ground and not touched, the ball is live. Edited March 17, 2011 by Caveman_Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) I think this is stupid. You can't hit a QB in the act of throwing? Seriously? There goes "rushing the passer" You can't hit a receiver catching the ball? Seriously? When does the "catching a pass" window close? Doest that mean any ball that hits the ground after a receiver is executing a catch is a fumble or a 15 yard penalty? Runner in the grasp? Seriously? Blow the freaking whistle if you don't want the player to get hit, because otherwise it's a live ball. Player fielding a punt or a kickoff? Isn't that why they have a fair catch rule? Isn't Kicker or punter during a kick already covered? QB after change of possession? Then the QB should not be allowed to throw blocks, recover the ball, etc. He should just exit the field. Receiver who receives a blind side block is covered under defenseless receiver already Player on the ground? Again, blow the whistle. If he's on the ground and not touched, the ball is live. Wow. If the current labor situation isn't going to wreck the NFL with that level of idocy, these kinds of changes very well could make the game literally unwatchable. A D player getting penalized and possibly suspended for hitting a QB while he is in the act of throwing? Seriously? The runner/forward progress I can see - but that can be stopped by the refs being in position on the play and then whistling the play dead as soon as progress is stopped instead of lettting other players either dogpile or try to strip the ball relentlessly. On the other hand, I'd like to see the NFL be a hell of a lot more aggressive in fining and suspending for things like hitting with the crown of the helmet (which places both the hitter and the hittee at a significantly greater risk of serious injury), intentionally attacking the head, and making the wearing of mouthpieces mandatory with punishment a 5 yd deadball penalty for being caught without one. Hitting with the crown of the helmet is not only chicken-#### in that it uses the helmet as a weapon and poor technique because it requires the player to put their head down, but it also puts the tackler in a position where his spine is not aligned correctly to absorb shocks (it straightens what should be a curved spine) and places them at risk for hyperflexation of the neck, which can sever the spinal cord in the cervical area. Intentionally attacking the head while tackling (and there is a difference between the tackled player moving into the hit and the tackler intentionally going headhunting, and it is pretty easy to distinguish between the two) is never acceptable. Mouthpieces have been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to significantly reduce concussions by buffering the shock to the skull and brain of being struck in the jaw - plus it saves damage to teeth. I wore one every single practice and game in high school for football and basketball, and also while playing college basketball.. These are things that we were required to watch films on by the state athletic associations when I coached high school football, then had to sign a form stating that we watched the film and would institute coaching policies compliant with it. In fact, I can not comprehend why the NFLPA on behalf of the players and with almost full support of the players, hasn't pressed ownership into integrating these kinds of measures into the rule book. It prevents serious injury and prolongs careers. Instead the players fight these measures vehemently and publicly protect pricks like Harrison who use spearing as a regular tackling procedure. Edited March 17, 2011 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Why mess with the kickoff? Was there an issue I wasn't aware of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Why mess with the kickoff? Was there an issue I wasn't aware of? My guess is moving the ball to the 35 is to create more touch backs, decreasing potential special team injuries. Moving the ball to the 25 in this proposal is a good compromise I suppose in that the rule change will greatly reduce return opportunities. But I gather there might be some fighting on this as teams have drafted/traded for special team return men. This rule change might very well be the end of Pacman's career Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 My guess is moving the ball to the 35 is to create more touch backs, decreasing potential special team injuries. Moving the ball to the 25 in this proposal is a good compromise I suppose in that the rule change will greatly reduce return opportunities. But I gather there might be some fighting on this as teams have drafted/traded for special team return men. This rule change might very well be the end of Pacman's career Moving the ball to the 35 on kickoffs would also mean that if a kick goes out of bounds, the receiving team gets the ball on its own 35 instead of the 40. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I don't understand why they would change the challenge rule, in the case that a team gets their first two challenges correct. If the officials are bad enough to let two slip through the cracks, isn't it pretty likely that they would allow a third? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Moving the ball to the 35 on kickoffs would also mean that if a kick goes out of bounds, the receiving team gets the ball on its own 35 instead of the 40. And a 15yard penalty gives the receiving team pretty damned good field position as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I think this is stupid. You can't hit a QB in the act of throwing? Seriously? There goes "rushing the passer" You can't hit a receiver catching the ball? Seriously? When does the "catching a pass" window close? Doest that mean any ball that hits the ground after a receiver is executing a catch and subsequently hit is a fumble or a 15 yard penalty? Runner in the grasp? Seriously? Blow the freaking whistle if you don't want the player to get hit, because otherwise it's a live ball. Player fielding a punt or a kickoff? Isn't that why they have a fair catch rule? Isn't Kicker or punter during a kick already covered? QB after change of possession? Then the QB should not be allowed to throw blocks, recover the ball, etc. He should just exit the field. Receiver who receives a blind side block is covered under defenseless receiver already Player on the ground? Again, blow the whistle. If he's on the ground and not touched, the ball is live. Agreed. I hope they are wrong about this and none of this chit actually ends up in the real game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) My guess is moving the ball to the 35 is to create more touch backs, decreasing potential special team injuries. Moving the ball to the 25 in this proposal is a good compromise I suppose in that the rule change will greatly reduce return opportunities. But I gather there might be some fighting on this as teams have drafted/traded for special team return men. This rule change might very well be the end of Pacman's career Impending free agent WR/KR Brad Smith could have the most to lose if the NFL follows through with the Competition Committee's suggestion to move kickoffs up to the 35-yard line. Depending on the CBA, Smith would have hit the open market as a valuable returner and gadget player. A good portion of that value goes out the window if the majority of kickoffs result in touchbacks. Teams will invest far less money in special teams, period. Source: NFL.com Mar 17, 3:52 PM And so it begins. Edited March 17, 2011 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeductiveNun Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 My guess is moving the ball to the 35 is to create more touch backs, decreasing potential special team injuries. This isn't a direct response to you Taz, but just in general. Didn't they move the kickoffs back not all that long ago so they could have more returns instead of having so many touchbacks? The reasoning I thought waa because the kickoff returns add a more exciting element to the game than taking a knee in the endzone after a kick. Now, because of potential injuries, they want to go back to touchbacks? Does anybody on the competition committee have their head outside of their anal cavity? Just make 'em all wear belts with flags on it and get it over with already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Just make 'em all wear belts with flags on it and get it over with already! Personal Foul - Unnecessary Roughness for pulling the flag too hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 This isn't a direct response to you Taz, but just in general. Didn't they move the kickoffs back not all that long ago so they could have more returns instead of having so many touchbacks? The reasoning I thought waa because the kickoff returns add a more exciting element to the game than taking a knee in the endzone after a kick. This is exactly as I remember it. Not only that, they made the ball more difficult to kick that far ('K' balls) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.