5 biggest rule change proposals for 2019

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,152
Name
Burger man
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...now-about-nfl-rule-changes-proposed-for-2019/

Eliminate the onside kick? Revamp overtime? Five things to know about NFL rule changes proposed for 2019
There could be some major rule changes coming in 2019

Chiefs coach Andy Reid wasn't willing to admit it after his team's playoff loss to the Patriots in January, but it seems that he'd definitely like to see the NFL change its overtime rules for 2019.

The Chiefs proposal to revamp overtime was among the nine proposed rule changes that the NFL announced on Friday. Every year, the league allows each team to submit any rule proposal that they see fit. The rule is then vetted by the competition committee in mid-March and if the committee endorses the proposal, then the NFL's 32 owners will vote on it at their annual league meeting at the end of the month.

This year's league meeting will be held from March 24-27 in Phoenix.

With that in mind, let's take a look at the five biggest proposals.

1. Chiefs want to revamp overtime.
Apparently, the Chiefs have some pent up frustration with overtime, because they proposed three different changes on Friday. The first change is the most obvious: The Chiefs want to see overtime changed so that both teams get the opportunity to possess the ball at least one time in overtime, even if the first team to possess the ball in overtime scores a touchdown.

If you watched the AFC Championship game, you may realize why the Chiefs feel so strongly about this rule. The Patriots beat the Chiefs 37-31 in overtime in a game where Kansas City's offense didn't get to touch the ball in overtime. Under this rule proposal, the Chiefs would have gotten a chance to respond to New England's touchdown.

The second part of Kansas City's overtime proposal involves the coin toss. The Chiefs want to eliminate the OT coin toss and set things up so that the winner of the initial coin toss to start the game would get to decide whether to kick or receive in overtime, or which goal to defend.

The final part of the Chiefs proposal is more simple: They want to eliminate overtime in the preseason. There is literally no reason for a preseason game to go into overtime, so you'd think that most teams would want to get behind this proposal.

2. The Broncos want to dump the onside kick
Someone in the Broncos front office must have been watching the AAF this year, because Denver has proposed a rule that's eerily similar to the onside kick rule that's used in that league. Under the Broncos' proposal, instead of an onside kick after a team scores, they would have the option of taking possession of the ball at their own 35-yard line to try and convert a fourth-and-15. If they get the 15 yards, they get a first down and keep possession of the ball. If they don't get the 15 yards, the other team takes over on downs wherever the possession ended.

In the AAF, instead of an onside kick, teams are allowed to try and convert a fourth-and-12 play from their own 28 in certain situations (The onside kick is only allowed if a team is trailing by 17 or more points or if they're trailing with under five minutes left in the game).

3. The Redskins want to make everything reviewable
It seems the Redskins have a simple solution to the ugly problem the NFL ran into in the NFC Championship game and that solution is: Make everything reviewable.

Under the Redskins proposal, all plays that occur during a game could potentially be subjected to a coaches' challenge or review by the officiating department in the instant replay system.

The proposal doesn't say that a penalty necessarily has to be called, so if this rule would have been in place last year, officials would have been able to review the pass interference no-call that took place late in the fourth quarter of the Rams 26-23 win over the Saints in the NFC title game.

The Redskins have also proposed a second rule change that would make personal fouls reviewable plays. The Chiefs have proposed a similar rule that would allow coaches to challenge personal foul calls whether they were called on the field or not. The Panthers, Rams, Eagles and Seahawks want to see the league allow coaches to challenge designated player safety-related fouls whether they were called on the field or not.

4. Eagles want to see a few more things subject to replay
Unlike the Redskins, the Eagles don't want to see everything subject to replay, but they are proposing a minor change. Philadelphia would like to see scoring plays and turnovers negated by a foul to be subject to automatic instant replay review. This one is pretty simple: If a touchdown or turnover is called back by a penalty, the play would be subject to review to make sure the officials got the call right.

5. Broncos offer more replay proposals
Not only do the Broncos want to see the onside kick changed, but they'd also like to see a few changes made to the NFL's replay system. Under the Broncos' proposal, all fourth down or goal line plays that are spotted short of the line to gain would be subject to automatic review. The Broncos are also proposing that all extra point and two-point conversion attempts be subject to review.

Basically, it seems that there are a lot of teams in the NFL that would like to see the replay system expanded. The competition committee will now take these proposals into consideration and will likely endorse them or take a pass on them at some point over the next two weeks.
 

SteezyEndo

The Immaculate Exception
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
7,109
From what I know... Play good so you never have to get to the point where you are playing in overtime... Refs on the field should be removed, a steady eye on the game from sky cam can view almost more than a crew of refs on the field... Yeah I am ready for the upcoming season.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,100
Most the rule changes over the years have not improved the game.
Return onside kicks to the old rules.
Return OT to 15 minutes. Moving it to 10 minutes was pointless and stupid.
The same thing should happen to the NFL as the tax code....throw half the rule book out and enforce it as written.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,612
2. The Broncos want to dump the onside kick
Someone in the Broncos front office must have been watching the AAF this year, because Denver has proposed a rule that's eerily similar to the onside kick rule that's used in that league. Under the Broncos' proposal, instead of an onside kick after a team scores, they would have the option of taking possession of the ball at their own 35-yard line to try and convert a fourth-and-15. If they get the 15 yards, they get a first down and keep possession of the ball. If they don't get the 15 yards, the other team takes over on downs wherever the possession ended.

In the AAF, instead of an onside kick, teams are allowed to try and convert a fourth-and-12 play from their own 28 in certain situations (The onside kick is only allowed if a team is trailing by 17 or more points or if they're trailing with under five minutes left in the game).

Why not go back to the old kickoff rules with 5 minutes remaining in the game. The onside kick use to be exciting.
 

FrantikRam

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
4,730
That Eagles proposal is a great idea. Never thought of it but really good idea.

Don't think anything needs to change with OT.

Even if the Chiefs got the ball and scored, the Patriots just would have scored on their 2nd possession to win
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,043
Most the rule changes over the years have not improved the game.
Return onside kicks to the old rules.
Return OT to 15 minutes. Moving it to 10 minutes was pointless and stupid.
The same thing should happen to the NFL as the tax code....throw half the rule book out and enforce it as written.
Well, the kickoff rules weren’t changed to improve the game, they were changed to improve player safety. Can’t see them going back to the old rules because on side kick conversions are down...

I think that if coaches get 2 or 3 challenges, they should get to use them on whatever they want. And with OT I think each team should get a possesion, it’s a team game so if the offense can score, secure the win with defense
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,100
Well, the kickoff rules weren’t changed to improve the game, they were changed to improve player safety. Can’t see them going back to the old rules because on side kick conversions are down...

I think that if coaches get 2 or 3 challenges, they should get to use them on whatever they want. And with OT I think each team should get a possesion, it’s a team game so if the offense can score, secure the win with defense
I know why they changed the onside kick rule. It's still terrible.
I agree with the rest. Ten minutes is too short for OT, esp if both teams are assured a possession.
 

WarnerToBruce

Gridiron Sage
Rams On Demand Sponsor
SportsBook Bookie
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
1,929
Name
Phil
That Eagles proposal is a great idea. Never thought of it but really good idea.

I disagree.

So next Super Bowl, a team at their own 1 yd line runs on off tackle play for 98 yds to the other team’s 1 yd line.

Called back by a bogus holding call.

Are you telling me they can’t review it because he didn’t get 1 more yard?

This is the problem with the NFL. They overcomplicate things. Ever hear K-I-S-S? Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Just make all plays reviewable and they have to manage the 2 (3 at most) challenges they get.

Done.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,906
Name
mojo
1. Chiefs want to revamp overtime.
The first change is the most obvious: The Chiefs want to see overtime changed so that both teams get the opportunity to possess the ball at least one time in overtime, even if the first team to possess the ball in overtime scores a touchdown.
YES

The second part of Kansas City's overtime proposal involves the coin toss. The Chiefs want to eliminate the OT coin toss and set things up so that the winner of the initial coin toss to start the game would get to decide whether to kick or receive in overtime, or which goal to defend.
NO

The final part of the Chiefs proposal is more simple: They want to eliminate overtime in the preseason. There is literally no reason for a preseason game to go into overtime, so you'd think that most teams would want to get behind this proposal.
YES
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,906
Name
mojo
2. The Broncos want to dump the onside kick
Someone in the Broncos front office must have been watching the AAF this year, because Denver has proposed a rule that's eerily similar to the onside kick rule that's used in that league. Under the Broncos' proposal, instead of an onside kick after a team scores, they would have the option of taking possession of the ball at their own 35-yard line to try and convert a fourth-and-15. If they get the 15 yards, they get a first down and keep possession of the ball. If they don't get the 15 yards, the other team takes over on downs wherever the possession ended.
NO
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,906
Name
mojo
3. The Redskins want to make everything reviewable
It seems the Redskins have a simple solution to the ugly problem the NFL ran into in the NFC Championship game and that solution is: Make everything reviewable.

Under the Redskins proposal, all plays that occur during a game could potentially be subjected to a coaches' challenge or review by the officiating department in the instant replay system.
YES*
Coaches get one universal challenge per game(a striped flag,lol) in addition to the already existing red flag challenges.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,906
Name
mojo
4. Eagles want to see a few more things subject to replay
Unlike the Redskins, the Eagles don't want to see everything subject to replay, but they are proposing a minor change. Philadelphia would like to see scoring plays and turnovers negated by a foul to be subject to automatic instant replay review. This one is pretty simple: If a touchdown or turnover is called back by a penalty, the play would be subject to review to make sure the officials got the call right.
YES
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,043
The AAF rule for 4th down play in lieu of insides kick at least makes a little sense because they don’t have kickoffs. I can’t see how the NFL can adapt any sort of philosophy like that since it doesn’t resemble anything like the game being played.
I still think it’s goofy that the line of scrimmage is different for an XP than it is for a 2 PT conversion, so maybe they can come up with an allowable formation if a team announces its running an on sides kick.
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
We should take a vote like the committee would, I'm curious how it would turn out.

Can someone set that up?
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,279
No. More. Replay. Just stop with trying to get everything effing perfect. Stop it.

Less BS for refs to watch for. Simplify things for them and make sure you have an eye on the viewability of the product, i.e. more stoppages and face time for refs is a bad thing for the league.
 
Last edited:

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,279
Oh and it's hard to believe the Saints aren't whining and crying about things still soooo...

6. Saints still need sand removed from their collective vaginal tract.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,906
Name
mojo
No. More. Replay. Just stop with trying to get everything effing perfect. Stop it.

Less BS for refs to watch for. Simply things for them and make sure you have an eye on the viewability of the product, i.e. more stoppages and face time for refs is a bad thing for the league.
Being honest, i agree with you. Less analysis paralysis and let the game flow like it used to is ideal. At this point when i look at new rule proposals i'm only trying to put a bandaid on the existing wounds.